Discussion:
The official PC Liberal Victim guide = how to tell who's right or wrong in any confrontation...
(too old to reply)
Stan de SD
2009-01-01 22:12:21 UTC
Permalink
I have long pointed to the philosophical inconsistencies of liberalism
that have turned the American left into a collection of intellectually
and morally challenged, babbling totalitarian psychotics. The world
view of liberals build on the following flaws: the diea that people
are individuals with free will, but members of groups and constricted
to groupthink and group behavior; an economic model that views all
activity as zero-sum transactions between different groups; and that
idea that societal mores and values are arbitrarily imposed as opposed
to developed and evolved through human experience, and that societal
wrongs can simply be rightened by placing the right group of people
(in particular, themselves) in charge of everything. One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
where social status and moral authority are conferred upon people NOT
be their individual actions, but by the status of victimhood for their
particular subgroup, or their Liberal Victimology Rating (LVR). In any
conflict between two people, good liberals must evaluate the LVR
rating of all people involved to determine. who's "right" and who's
"wrong". Here are some examples to illustrate such a point, based on
the

Example #1: White american male wearing brown shirt with swastika,
shouting "Kill the Jews" vs. poor old Jewish woman surviving
holocaust: No points for being white,. male, or shouting racist
slogans. No points for being Jewish, 1 for being female, 1 for being a
war refugee, 1 for being poor. Jewish lady beats white Neo-Nazi 3-0,
meaning good liberals must rally and demand an "end to white racism".

Example #2: Palestinian woman flying Hamas Flag, wearing burka,
shouting "Kill the Jews", vs same poor old Jewish lady. Both get 1
point each for being poor and female. 1 point for being Palestinian, 1
for Hamas flag (third-world terrorists are all victims of US
imperialism), and 1 point for the burka (oppressed woman in a male-
dominated society). Pallie beats Jew lady 5-3, so good liberals must
rally and demand "freedom for the oppresed Palestinan peoples and
death to the Zionist Jews!"

Example #3: Duke Lacrosse rape accusations: accuser gets 1 point each
for being black, female, and a sex worker (again, oppressed woman in a
male-dominated society). Lacross players are SOL: white boys who play
a sport that doesn't have jerseys popular with rappers. 3-0 blowout
for rape accuser. All good liberals demand "justice now", don't bother
with a trial. Get 88 college professors to sign petition and smear
students for life.

Example #4: Blacks fighting Mexicans in California prisons: This is a
tough one. Both get 1 point each for being minorities and poor, blacks
get 1 point for slavery back in the day, 1 point for listening to rap
music (art form of oppressed people). Mexicans get 1 point each for
being illegal and not speaking English. 3-3 tie, blacks need to
convince liberals that Ebonics is a separate language to score a 1
point lead.

Example #5: Blacks who voted Yes on Propostion 8 vs.Gays: Blacks get 1
point. Gays get 1 point for being gay, and 1 point for agreeing with
liberals. Gays win this one 2-1.

Get the idea???
Timothy Crowley
2009-01-02 14:27:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Get the idea???
Oh yeah. Thanks for sharing.


hint: you lost.
Stan de SD
2009-01-02 18:02:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Get the idea???
Oh yeah.   Thanks for sharing.
hint: you lost.
Timmy, thanks for letting me know I was right on target. :O)
kujebak
2009-01-03 02:46:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Get the idea???
Oh yeah. � Thanks for sharing.
hint: you lost.
Timmy, thanks for letting me know I was right on target. :O)
I can't believe it. Here is a brilliant epistemological reduction
of one of the key symptoms of the psychological affliction of
the American political left, which now makes it makes it pos-
sible and easy to instantly predict the liberal government/media
establishment's treatment of any situation involving two oppo-
sing political interests. What a powerful tool in the hands of a
resourceful businessman, or politician. Not a glint of acknowl-
edgment in any of these responses. Why do you bother,
Stanley?
Stan de SD
2009-01-03 03:56:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by kujebak
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Stan de SD
Get the idea???
Oh yeah. Thanks for sharing.
hint: you lost.
Timmy, thanks for letting me know I was right on target. :O)
I can't believe it. Here is a brilliant epistemological reduction
of one of the key symptoms of the psychological affliction of
the American political left, which now makes it makes it pos-
sible and easy to instantly predict the liberal government/media
establishment's treatment of any situation involving two oppo-
sing political interests. What a powerful tool in the hands of a
resourceful businessman, or politician. Not a glint of acknowl-
edgment in any of these responses. Why do you bother,
Stanley?
It's sort of like throwing stuff at the monkeys in the cage. Nothing
useful gets accomplished, but it's cheap entertainment to watch the
monkeys howl... :Oo
zzpat
2009-01-03 05:47:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.

Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life. Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.

Even back in the good ol' days of the Reagan tax cuts and "deficits for
as far as the eye can see," Reagan asked his budget director to find a
way to blame President Carter.

When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong? Was it the debt causing tax cuts, the collapse of the World
Trade Center, the collapse of the US economy, the failure to recognize
global warming? the failure to help the victims of Katrina?

Conservatives have become the party of professional whiners. Always
being wrong, never taking responsibility and always blaming Carter,
Clinton, Obama or liberals.
--
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/

Impeach Search Engine:
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=012146513885108216046:rzesyut3kmm
Stan de SD
2009-01-02 18:07:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong?  Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the World Trade Center,
Lemme guess - you're one of the 9/11 conspiro-kooks, right? Well, that
would be consistent with you calling the Jews "murderers" because they
dare defend themselves.
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the US economy,
Sources? Cites?
Post by zzpat
the failure to recognize global warming?  
To recognize what? That man-made global warming is a hoax?
Post by zzpat
the failure to help the victims of Katrina?
IIRC the mayor of N'awlins and the Governor of Louisiana were
Democrats. What ws the problem, that Bush didn't declare martial law,
take over operations of the state, and relieve those two incompetents
of command?
zzpat
2009-01-03 07:12:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life. Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq. Global Warming is real. Tax cuts create mountains of
debt. Deregulation didn't work. Iraq had nothing to do with the war on
terror. The Bush presidency gave us nearly $5 trillion of debt....more
than 3x more debt than Reagan.

Now back at you. When was Limbaugh right about a substantive issue?
--
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/

Impeach Search Engine:
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=012146513885108216046:rzesyut3kmm
Stan de SD
2009-01-02 23:28:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
Post by zzpat
Global Warming is real.
It is? Proof it's caused by man-made CO2? Can you explain the
mechanism?
Post by zzpat
 Tax cuts create mountains of debt.
Proof? Sources? Cites?
Bill Z.
2009-01-03 01:01:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
Nonesense. They found nothing that would qualify. There were a few
press releases that they had finally found a WMD, only to have those
less noisily retracted the next day. They did find some shells that
could have been used to deliver chemical weapons, but no chemicals to
go with them.

A chemical weapon shell (the type used in artillery) is not a weapon
of mass destruction, but simply an illegal weapon. To qualify as a
weapon of mass destruction it has to be capable of mass destruction.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Global Warming is real.
It is? Proof it's caused by man-made CO2? Can you explain the
mechanism?
Read up on blackbody radiation. And it is not just CO2 that is the
problem. In any case, it would take far too long to explain to you.
We'd have to review the work on blackbody radiation and atomic physics
from the late 1800s through the early part of the 20th century to
explain it in detail. I'm sure you would get lost pretty quickly.

The short version is that a substance that is a good absorber of
electromagnetic radition is a good emitter and a poor absorber is a
poor emitter. Sunlight is at a temperature of roughly 5000 K, with
much of it at frequencies where the atmosphere is transparent. The
earth's surface is roughly 300K (actually a bit lower), so the
radiation cooling the earth is at a much lower frequency. The gases
in question are good absorbers at those lower frequencies and
re-radiate the electromagnetic radiation they absorb in all
directions, including downwards. Since less radiation goes out, the
temperature rises (generating more radiation, so we eventually reach
an equilibrium but at a higher temperature).
Timothy Crowley
2009-01-03 17:10:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
You lie.
Stan de SD
2009-01-03 18:06:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
You lie
Some WMD's were found in Iraq, and the foaming, frothing liberals
decided that "they didn't count."

Blather all you want, buy you're wrong on just about everything you
post.
Bill Z.
2009-01-03 21:30:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
You lie
Some WMD's were found in Iraq, and the foaming, frothing liberals
decided that "they didn't count."
Blather all you want, buy you're wrong on just about everything you
post.
What they found (ignoring some false reports that were later corrected)
were at most a handful of artillery shells that could be used with
chemical weapons, or maybe some very old weapons that had degraded.
It was more or less in the "lost inventory" category. These were
not "weapons of mass destruction" as they were incapable of causing
any mass destruction.

Nobody was claiming that Saddam didn't want weapons of mass destruction.
It was simply a case of the sanctions working - he didn't have any
because he lacked the capability to make them.

Basically, the U.S. beat the bushes after we took over Iraq and
found nothing worth mentioning. No amount of right-wing spin
will change that fact.
Stan de SD
2009-01-04 19:39:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
You lie
Some WMD's were found in Iraq, and the foaming, frothing liberals
decided that "they didn't count."
Blather all you want, buy you're wrong on just about everything you
post.
What they found (ignoring some false reports that were later corrected)
were at most a handful of artillery shells that could be used with
chemical weapons, or maybe some very old weapons that had degraded.
But "degraded" chemical munitions are still classified as WMD's -
Saddam was obligated to turn them over, and systematically failed to
do so.
Bill Z.
2009-01-04 20:09:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
You lie
Some WMD's were found in Iraq, and the foaming, frothing liberals
decided that "they didn't count."
Blather all you want, buy you're wrong on just about everything you
post.
What they found (ignoring some false reports that were later corrected)
were at most a handful of artillery shells that could be used with
chemical weapons, or maybe some very old weapons that had degraded.
But "degraded" chemical munitions are still classified as WMD's -
Saddam was obligated to turn them over, and systematically failed to
do so.
ROTFLMAO. They are not weapons of mass destruction no matter how
you try to spin it due to the inability of degraded chemical munitions
or empty shells to do much damage. As to Saddam's "obligation", what
was found was in such small quantities as to fall in the "lost inventory"
catagory - hardly surprising that there might be some given how we
bombed the hell out of them in the early 1990s during the first war.

While Saddam was not to be trusted, you can't really blame for not
"turning over" something he didn't know he had, and he wasn't expected
to hand whatever he had over to somone - deactivating whatever weapons
he had and ending a WMD program was what was demanded of him, as described
in <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War#1991.E2.80.932000:_U.N._inspectors.2C_no-fly_zones.2C_and_Iraqi_opposition_groups>:

Following the 1991 Gulf War, the United Nations Security Council
Resolution 687 mandated that Iraqi chemical, biological, nuclear,
and long range missile programs be halted and all such weapons
destroyed under United Nations Special Commission control. U.N.
weapons inspectors inside Iraq were able to verify the destruction
of a large amount of WMD-material, but substantial issues remained
unresolved in 1998 when the inspectors left Iraq due to then
current UNSCOM head Richard Butler's belief that U.S. and UK
military action was imminent.

Basically your post is factually wrong. If you want to read up on it,
try <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War>:

Prior to the war, the U.S. and U.K. claimed that Iraq's alleged
possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed a serious
and imminent threat to their security and that of their coalition
allies.[35][36][37] United Nations weapons inspectors found no
evidence of WMD, giving support to earlier criticism of poor
intelligence on the subject.[38][39][40][41][42] After the
invasion, the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group concluded that Iraq had
ended its WMD programs in 1991 and had no active programs at the
time of the invasion, but that they intended to resume production
if the Iraq sanctions were lifted.[43] Although some degraded
remnants of misplaced or abandoned chemical weapons from before
1991 were found, they were not the weapons for which the coalition
invaded.

So, it was just what I said.
China Blue
2009-01-07 02:34:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
But "degraded" chemical munitions are still classified as WMD's -
Saddam was obligated to turn them over, and systematically failed to
do so.
What about nuclear weapons at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean?
--
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to be,
Silver silverware - Where is the love? Reverend.
Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? At least I can stay in character.
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. mmmm lemon yogurt
China Blue
2009-01-07 02:34:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
What they found (ignoring some false reports that were later corrected)
were at most a handful of artillery shells that could be used with
chemical weapons, or maybe some very old weapons that had degraded.
It was more or less in the "lost inventory" category. These were
not "weapons of mass destruction" as they were incapable of causing
any mass destruction.
Thank goodness the USA has never lost WMD nor NBC weapons. That's because we are
so good and moral and beloved by God and all that shit.
--
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to be,
Silver silverware - Where is the love? Reverend.
Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? At least I can stay in character.
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. mmmm lemon yogurt
Bill Z.
2009-01-07 05:48:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by China Blue
Post by Bill Z.
What they found (ignoring some false reports that were later corrected)
were at most a handful of artillery shells that could be used with
chemical weapons, or maybe some very old weapons that had degraded.
It was more or less in the "lost inventory" category. These were
not "weapons of mass destruction" as they were incapable of causing
any mass destruction.
Thank goodness the USA has never lost WMD nor NBC weapons. That's
because we are so good and moral and beloved by God and all that
shit.
Plus we never lost a war (one of the American myths). As a wiseass
historian pointed out, during the War of 1812, we lost every battle
except the last, the battle of New Orleans that was fought a couple of
weeks after the war formally ended, but that was enough to placate the
American psyche and gave us a fig leaf that enabled us to claim
victory. The British no doubt laughed all the way back across the
Atlantic.
kujebak
2009-01-07 15:35:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by China Blue
Post by Bill Z.
What they found (ignoring some false reports that were later corrected)
were at most a handful of artillery shells that could be used with
chemical weapons, or maybe some very old weapons that had degraded.
It was more or less in the "lost inventory" category. These were
not "weapons of mass destruction" as they were incapable of causing
any mass destruction.
Thank goodness the USA has never lost WMD nor NBC weapons. That's
because we are so good and moral and beloved by God and all that
shit.
Plus we never lost a war (one of the American myths). As a wiseass
historian pointed out, during the War of 1812, we lost every battle
except the last, the battle of New Orleans that was fought a couple of
weeks after the war formally ended, but that was enough to placate the
American psyche and gave us a fig leaf that enabled us to claim
victory. The British no doubt laughed all the way back across the
Atlantic.
In light of the fact the U.S. had no regular defense force to op-
pose the British in the War of 1812 (it is no myth that in those
days most Americans thought a lot like you lefties do nowadays
- that this country should have a regular military only at times
when it was actually needed), and that the Brits weren't able to
make any permanent territorial gains, despite their military and
economic superiority, the overall outcome of that war does con-
stitute a victory of sorts, wouldn't you say? So the question
remains: Why was England so spectacularly unsuccessful in
its effort to regain control over this continent?

What other historical "myth" would you care to dispel?
Bill Z.
2009-01-07 22:57:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by kujebak
Post by Bill Z.
Post by China Blue
Post by Bill Z.
What they found (ignoring some false reports that were later corrected)
were at most a handful of artillery shells that could be used with
chemical weapons, or maybe some very old weapons that had degraded.
It was more or less in the "lost inventory" category. These were
not "weapons of mass destruction" as they were incapable of causing
any mass destruction.
Thank goodness the USA has never lost WMD nor NBC weapons. That's
because we are so good and moral and beloved by God and all that
shit.
Plus we never lost a war (one of the American myths). As a wiseass
historian pointed out, during the War of 1812, we lost every battle
except the last, the battle of New Orleans that was fought a couple of
weeks after the war formally ended, but that was enough to placate the
American psyche and gave us a fig leaf that enabled us to claim
victory. The British no doubt laughed all the way back across the
Atlantic.
In light of the fact the U.S. had no regular defense force to op-
pose the British in the War of 1812 (it is no myth that in those
days most Americans thought a lot like you lefties do nowadays
- that this country should have a regular military only at times
when it was actually needed), and that the Brits weren't able to
make any permanent territorial gains, despite their military and
economic superiority, the overall outcome of that war does con-
stitute a victory of sorts, wouldn't you say?
Exactly why do you conservative idiots blame liberals for the U.S.
having what you claim is an inadequate military when it was the
U.S. that started the war in the first place?

<http://www.galafilm.com/1812/e/intro/index.html>:

On June 18, 1812, the United States stunned the world by
declaring war on Great Britain.

and

The ostensible reasons for the war seemed to have been
forgotten once the opening shots were sounded. The United
States was upset at the British navy’s arrogance on the high
seas. Desperate to find sailors for a fleet of over one
thousand ships, Great Britain didn’t hesitate to stop and
search American ships in the hopes of recovering seaman who
deserted the draconian existence of the British navy for the
easier life aboard U.S. vessels. British captains were not
above press-ganging the odd American while they were at
it. England had also begun to seize Yankee ships trading with
Napoleonic France. These tactics caused a huge controversy in
the American Congress. Eventually, the United States cut off
all trade with the continent.

As the record reveals, the Americans wanted more than just
maritime rights. What they also wanted was the other half of
the North American continent still in the hands of the King of
England. In 1778, during the American Revolution, the Yankees
tried to seize Canada, and actually captured Montreal. The
expedition however, under Generals Richard Montgomery and
Benedict Arnold, perished in the sub-zero cold beneath the
towering walls of the fortress at Quebec.

In 1812, Americans were determined to make another attempt at
eradicating the British presence in North America, and settle
"the Indian question" once and for all. Such a campaign,
promised Thomas Jefferson, would be a matter of mere
marching. In Congress, the War Hawks took up this position and
demanded the United States finalize the independence from
Britain they had fought so hard to win. Many Americans came to
see the 1812 conflict as the second Revolutionary War.

When Great Britain finally realized that the Americans would
go to war on the impressment issue, it revoked the
Orders-in-Council which authorized the seizures. In the final
analysis, these causes bore so little weight, that they were
not even mentioned in the peace treaty which, eventually ended
the war. But in early 1812, it was too late. War was imminent,
and could not be stopped.
Post by kujebak
So the question remains: Why was England so spectacularly
unsuccessful in its effort to regain control over this continent?
Because England wasn't trying to regain control over our part of this
continent. The U.S., meanwhile did not achieve any of the goals it
set out to achieve when war was declared - and we declared the war,
not England.
Post by kujebak
What other historical "myth" would you care to dispel?
He's trying to declare victory when he don't know what he is talking
about. What a loon.
kujebak
2009-01-08 01:34:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by kujebak
Post by Bill Z.
Post by China Blue
Post by Bill Z.
What they found (ignoring some false reports that were later corrected)
were at most a handful of artillery shells that could be used with
chemical weapons, or maybe some very old weapons that had degraded.
It was more or less in the "lost inventory" category. These were
not "weapons of mass destruction" as they were incapable of causing
any mass destruction.
Thank goodness the USA has never lost WMD nor NBC weapons. That's
because we are so good and moral and beloved by God and all that
shit.
Plus we never lost a war (one of the American myths). As a wiseass
historian pointed out, during the War of 1812, we lost every battle
except the last, the battle of New Orleans that was fought a couple of
weeks after the war formally ended, but that was enough to placate the
American psyche and gave us a fig leaf that enabled us to claim
victory. The British no doubt laughed all the way back across the
Atlantic.
In light of the fact the U.S. had no regular defense force to op-
pose the British in the War of 1812 (it is no myth that in those
days most Americans thought a lot like you lefties do nowadays
- that this country should have a regular military only at times
when it was actually needed), and that the Brits weren't able to
make any permanent territorial gains, despite their military and
economic superiority, the overall outcome of that war does con-
stitute a victory of sorts, wouldn't you say?
Exactly why do you conservative idiots blame liberals for the U.S.
having what you claim is an inadequate military when it was the
U.S. that started the war in the first place?
In response to British naval and economic aggression!!!!!
Post by Bill Z.
On June 18, 1812, the United States stunned the world by
declaring war on Great Britain.
and
The ostensible reasons for the war seemed to have been
forgotten once the opening shots were sounded. The United
States was upset at the British navy’s arrogance on the high
seas. Desperate to find sailors for a fleet of over one
thousand ships, Great Britain didn’t hesitate to stop and
search American ships in the hopes of recovering seaman who
deserted the draconian existence of the British navy for the
easier life aboard U.S. vessels. British captains were not
above press-ganging the odd American while they were at
it. England had also begun to seize Yankee ships trading with
Napoleonic France. These tactics caused a huge controversy in
the American Congress. Eventually, the United States cut off
all trade with the continent.
As the record reveals, the Americans wanted more than just
maritime rights. What they also wanted was the other half of
the North American continent still in the hands of the King of
England. In 1778, during the American Revolution, the Yankees
tried to seize Canada, and actually captured Montreal. The
expedition however, under Generals Richard Montgomery and
Benedict Arnold, perished in the sub-zero cold beneath the
towering walls of the fortress at Quebec.
In 1812, Americans were determined to make another attempt at
eradicating the British presence in North America, and settle
"the Indian question" once and for all. Such a campaign,
promised Thomas Jefferson, would be a matter of mere
marching. In Congress, the War Hawks took up this position and
demanded the United States finalize the independence from
Britain they had fought so hard to win. Many Americans came to
see the 1812 conflict as the second Revolutionary War.
When Great Britain finally realized that the Americans would
go to war on the impressment issue, it revoked the
Orders-in-Council which authorized the seizures. In the final
analysis, these causes bore so little weight, that they were
not even mentioned in the peace treaty which, eventually ended
the war. But in early 1812, it was too late. War was imminent,
and could not be stopped.
Post by kujebak
So the question remains: Why was England so spectacularly
unsuccessful in its effort to regain control over this continent?
Because England wasn't trying to regain control over our part of this
continent.
Sure. It's true, they had their hands full already with France ;-)
Post by Bill Z.
The U.S., meanwhile did not achieve any of the goals it
set out to achieve when war was declared - and we declared the war,
not England.
Because of idiots like you, who didn't believe in professional
military.
Post by Bill Z.
Post by kujebak
What other historical "myth" would you care to dispel?
He's trying to declare victory when he don't know what he is talking
about. What a loon.
I'm not trying to declare victory here, just set the story straight.
Bill Z.
2009-01-08 02:55:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by kujebak
Post by Bill Z.
Post by kujebak
In light of the fact the U.S. had no regular defense force to op-
pose the British in the War of 1812 (it is no myth that in those
days most Americans thought a lot like you lefties do nowadays
- that this country should have a regular military only at times
when it was actually needed), and that the Brits weren't able to
make any permanent territorial gains, despite their military and
economic superiority, the overall outcome of that war does con-
stitute a victory of sorts, wouldn't you say?
Exactly why do you conservative idiots blame liberals for the U.S.
having what you claim is an inadequate military when it was the
U.S. that started the war in the first place?
In response to British naval and economic aggression!!!!!
Let's see. They were stopping U.S. ships to look for British
citizens to put into their navy and sometimes took some hapless
American. The U.S. was naturally pissed off, but the British
*stopped* it before we declared war, and neither was ever mentioned
in the peace treaty ending the war. So we got nothing in that
regard.

Futhermore, the U.S. wanted to take over Canada. I'm sure its
current residents are overjoyed that this attempt failed. :-)
Post by kujebak
Post by Bill Z.
On June 18, 1812, the United States stunned the world by
declaring war on Great Britain.
and
The ostensible reasons for the war seemed to have been
forgotten once the opening shots were sounded. The United
States was upset at the British navy’s arrogance on the high
seas. Desperate to find sailors for a fleet of over one
thousand ships, Great Britain didn’t hesitate to stop and
search American ships in the hopes of recovering seaman who
deserted the draconian existence of the British navy for the
easier life aboard U.S. vessels. British captains were not
above press-ganging the odd American while they were at
it. England had also begun to seize Yankee ships trading with
Napoleonic France. These tactics caused a huge controversy in
the American Congress. Eventually, the United States cut off
all trade with the continent.
As the record reveals, the Americans wanted more than just
maritime rights. What they also wanted was the other half of
the North American continent still in the hands of the King of
England. In 1778, during the American Revolution, the Yankees
tried to seize Canada, and actually captured Montreal. The
expedition however, under Generals Richard Montgomery and
Benedict Arnold, perished in the sub-zero cold beneath the
towering walls of the fortress at Quebec.
In 1812, Americans were determined to make another attempt at
eradicating the British presence in North America, and settle
"the Indian question" once and for all. Such a campaign,
promised Thomas Jefferson, would be a matter of mere
marching. In Congress, the War Hawks took up this position and
demanded the United States finalize the independence from
Britain they had fought so hard to win. Many Americans came to
see the 1812 conflict as the second Revolutionary War.
When Great Britain finally realized that the Americans would
go to war on the impressment issue, it revoked the
Orders-in-Council which authorized the seizures. In the final
analysis, these causes bore so little weight, that they were
not even mentioned in the peace treaty which, eventually ended
the war. But in early 1812, it was too late. War was imminent,
and could not be stopped.
Post by kujebak
So the question remains: Why was England so spectacularly
unsuccessful in its effort to regain control over this continent?
Because England wasn't trying to regain control over our part of this
continent.
Sure. It's true, they had their hands full already with France ;-)
In other words, you didn't know what you were talking about.
Post by kujebak
Post by Bill Z.
The U.S., meanwhile did not achieve any of the goals it
set out to achieve when war was declared - and we declared the war,
not England.
Because of idiots like you, who didn't believe in professional
military.
ROTFMAO. This was in 1812. Your "idiots" were our "founding fathers".
It's not like there was some sneak attack. They knew exactly what
sort of military they had before war was declared.

And furthermore, I didn't say one friggin word about whether we
should have a professional military or not - you simply made it up,
which makes you a liar.
Post by kujebak
Post by Bill Z.
Post by kujebak
What other historical "myth" would you care to dispel?
He's trying to declare victory when he don't know what he is talking
about. What a loon.
I'm not trying to declare victory here, just set the story straight.
You failed miserably as you don't know what the story is. You couldn't
even read up on it when I gave you a link.
Timothy Crowley
2009-01-03 22:06:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
You lie
Some WMD's were found in Iraq, and the foaming, frothing liberals
decided that "they didn't count."
Blather all you want, buy you're wrong on just about everything you
post.
you lie.

why lie, stan
kujebak
2009-01-04 02:14:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
�One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that. �
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life. �Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
You lie
Some WMD's were found in Iraq, and the foaming, frothing liberals
decided that "they didn't count."
Blather all you want, buy you're wrong on just about everything you
post.
you lie.
why lie, stan
Timmy, how old are you? Do your parents know you confabulate
with strangers on the internet? It is a dangerous world out there,
you know, but it could also teach you something. If you let it ;-)
Timothy Crowley
2009-01-04 02:48:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by kujebak
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life. Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
You lie
Some WMD's were found in Iraq, and the foaming, frothing liberals
decided that "they didn't count."
Blather all you want, buy you're wrong on just about everything you
post.
you lie.
why lie, stan
Timmy, how old are you? Do your parents know you confabulate
with strangers on the internet? It is a dangerous world out there,
you know, but it could also teach you something. If you let it ;-)
so speaks, "kujebak" In the meantime, the facts don't change. We
failed to find WMD in Iraq and StanDeNazi knows this. When you say
things that are not true, we call it a lie. HTH "kujebak ?
hahahahahahahahahahaha
Stan de SD
2009-01-04 19:41:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by kujebak
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life. Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
You lie
Some WMD's were found in Iraq, and the foaming, frothing liberals
decided that "they didn't count."
Blather all you want, buy you're wrong on just about everything you
post.
you lie.
why lie, stan
Timmy, how old are you? Do your parents know you confabulate
with strangers on the internet? It is a dangerous world out there,
you know, but it could also teach you something. If you let it ;-)
so speaks, "kujebak"  In the meantime, the facts don't change.  We
failed to find WMD in Iraq and  StanDeNazi knows this.  
Godwin's Law invoked by Timmy. I win - end of discussion...
zzpat
2009-01-05 01:23:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life. Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
OIC, so you think the US government lied when it said it couldn't find
any WMD in Iraq?

Better yet...did you know the US military used chemical weapons in Iraq,
a WMD? So, here we are...claiming WMD are so bad that we had to go to
war to stop their use, but then we turned around and used them.

This war is for dumb people.
--
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/

Impeach Search Engine:
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=012146513885108216046:rzesyut3kmm
Timothy Crowley
2009-01-04 17:01:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
OIC, so you think the US government lied when it said it couldn't find
any WMD in Iraq?
Naw, Stan knows he's a lying nazi. He knows it is all he will ever
be. He just hopes to find one or two more as dumb as he to join his
hate KKKult.
Stan de SD
2009-01-04 19:43:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
OIC, so you think the US government lied when it said it couldn't find
any WMD in Iraq?
Naw, Stan knows he's a lying nazi. He knows it is all he will ever
be.   He just hopes to find one or two more as dumb as he to join his
hate KKKult.- Hide quoted text -
Of course, Timmy can offer no proof that I am either a Nazi or KKK
member of sympathizer. But than again, how else is a brainless liberal
going to continue the discussion?
Timothy Crowley
2009-01-04 21:29:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Timothy Crowley
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.  
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life.  Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
No WMD in Iraq.
Some WMDs were found, liberals decided those ones "didn't count"...
OIC, so you think the US government lied when it said it couldn't find
any WMD in Iraq?
Naw, Stan knows he's a lying nazi. He knows it is all he will ever
be.   He just hopes to find one or two more as dumb as he to join his
hate KKKult.- Hide quoted text -
Of course, Timmy can offer no proof that I am either a Nazi or KKK
member of sympathizer.
Of course I can. Your postings make it clear. hint: even George
Bush admits no WMD were found. you are a lying nazi bitch.
zzpat
2009-01-05 22:55:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Tax cuts create mountains of debt.
Proof? Sources? Cites?
The Reagan debt was higher than all the presidents before Reagan
combined. The Bush debt is more than 3x higher than the Reagan debt.
There is no evidence whatsoever that tax cuts work. I know everyone is
told to believe this piece of tripe but I bet you can't prove it.

Under Bush for example, the economy lay in ruin after the largest tax
cut in US history. We never came anywhere close to $5 trillion of new
growth (but we have $5 trillion of new debt).

Put another way then, the US has nearly 11 trillion dollars of debt and
almost all of it was created by tax cutting conservatives presidents
during the past 30 years.
--
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/

Articles of Impeachment
Center for Constitutional Rights
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/april_2006/articles_of_impeachment.html
kujebak
2009-01-06 08:16:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Tax cuts create mountains of debt.
Proof? Sources? Cites?
The Reagan debt was higher than all the presidents before Reagan
combined. The Bush debt is more than 3x higher than the Reagan debt.
There is no evidence whatsoever that tax cuts work. I know everyone is
told to believe this piece of tripe but I bet you can't prove it.
Under Bush for example, the economy lay in ruin after the largest tax
cut in US history. We never came anywhere close to $5 trillion of new
growth (but we have $5 trillion of new debt).
Put another way then, the US has nearly 11 trillion dollars of debt and
almost all of it was created by tax cutting conservatives presidents
during the past 30 years.
Government debt and deficit spending does not drive
down the economy. What matters is who you lend the
money to, and for what purpose. Millions upon millions
of Eastern Europeans will be forever grateful for this
country's economic sacrifice in the 80's. I know that
for someone like yourself, who strives for the same sort
of economic utopia those people had to shoulder for over
four decades, that, by itself, doesn't mean anything ;-)
Post by zzpat
--
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/
Articles of Impeachment
Center for Constitutional Rights
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/april_2006/articles_of_impeachment.html
zzpat
2009-01-07 02:54:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by kujebak
Government debt and deficit spending does not drive
down the economy. What matters is who you lend the
money to, and for what purpose. Millions upon millions
of Eastern Europeans will be forever grateful for this
country's economic sacrifice in the 80's. I know that
for someone like yourself, who strives for the same sort
of economic utopia those people had to shoulder for over
four decades, that, by itself, doesn't mean anything ;-)
Government debt drives down the economy. There's only so much money to
be had so when the government is using up that money ($5 trillion of new
debt under Bush), there's less money for the rest of the economy to use,
to grow, to borrow (credit crisis). The Reagan debt was more than all
previous generations combined. The Bush debt is more than 3x larger than
the Reagan debt. Where is the sacrifice?

We could talk about sacrifice if Reagan and/or Bush had increased our
taxes to pay for what they was doing, but they didn't. They cut taxes
and now future generations have to pay the bill. Needless to say,
passing all this debt to the next generation is unconscionable and
immoral, but most of all it's bad economic policy.

Debt = future taxes plus interest.
--
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/

Impeach Search Engine:
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=012146513885108216046:rzesyut3kmm
Bill Z.
2009-01-06 15:09:09 UTC
Permalink
The Reagan debt was more than all previous generations combined. The
Bush debt is more than 3x larger than the Reagan debt. Where is the
sacrifice?
Posterity. As some political boss once said, "Why should we do
anything for posterity? What has posterity done for us?"
That seems to be the attitude that got us into this mess, coupled
with a "take the money and run" mentality.
China Blue
2009-01-07 02:44:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by kujebak
Government debt and deficit spending does not drive
down the economy. What matters is who you lend the
Then why is Boehner doing his weeping routine over the upcoming stimulus
package? Why would Republicans prefer to shed 3 million jobs instead of adding
$25 billion to the debt?
--
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to be,
Silver silverware - Where is the love? Reverend.
Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? At least I can stay in character.
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. mmmm lemon yogurt
zzpat
2009-01-03 07:16:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
Post by Stan de SD
One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column. Nearly every column this conservative writes
portrays him and his party as victims to liberal this or liberal that.
Will hates liberal teachers but chooses not to become a teacher.
Turn on Rush Limbaugh. If you can listen to a half hour of that man
whining about how bad liberals are you need to get a life. Limbaugh has
never been right about anything and his supporters can never prove
otherwise.
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong? Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
In the real world Reagan's policies, that is what he signed into law
created more debt than all previous presidents in history combined. Did
Reagan want more spending? Yes. Did you pay for it? No. Did tax revenue
increase enough to pay for Reagan's tax cut or military spending? No.
Did Reagan ever propose or sign a balanced budget? No, not even close.
His best budget was his last, which had a deficit that was more than
twice as big as his first.

Talk is cheap.
--
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/

Impeach Search Engine:
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=012146513885108216046:rzesyut3kmm
Bill Z.
2009-01-02 20:22:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
ROTFLMAO.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong?  Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
(Note how he ignores 2000--2008). But for the 80s even the conservatives
blame Reagan - <http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa013.html>:

Soaring military spending for overseas commitments and the
refusal to make significant cuts in most major domestic programs
have created the worst deficits in American history.

It goes on about how conservatives lost their adversion to deficits.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the World Trade Center,
Lemme guess - you're one of the 9/11 conspiro-kooks, right? Well, that
would be consistent with you calling the Jews "murderers" because they
dare defend themselves.
<http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames/1594>,
<http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=4532>,
and <http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0408-04.htm>,
and <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/09/september11.alqaida>.
From the Guardian web page:

President Bush was given an intelligence briefing, entitled Bin
Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States just weeks
before the September 11 attacks, it emerged yesterday.

Details of the August 6 briefing in 2001, which warned of
terrorist preparations being made for hijackings on American
soil, surfaced in testimony given by the US national security
adviser, Condoleezza Rice, to a commission of inquiry studying
the September 11 attacks.

Let's see. Bush ignored the Gore Commission report. There was enough
"chatter" to suspect something was up. Then there was Zacarias Moussaoui,
arrested on August 16, 2001 - a dubious character trying to learn to
fly a 747.

Now, finding the culprits at this point was probably like finding a
needle in a haystack. But what about some simple measure like simply
reinforcing cockpit doors and keeping them locked? If they couldn't
get into the cockpit, they wouldn't have been able to fly a plane into
a building.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the US economy,
Sources? Cites?
ROTFLMAO!
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the failure to recognize global warming?  
To recognize what? That man-made global warming is a hoax?
Post by zzpat
the failure to help the victims of Katrina?
IIRC the mayor of N'awlins and the Governor of Louisiana were
Democrats. What ws the problem, that Bush didn't declare martial law,
take over operations of the state, and relieve those two incompetents
of command?
You can't be serious.
Spartakus
2009-01-02 21:53:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong?  Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
(Note how he ignores 2000--2008).  But for the 80s even the conservatives
      Soaring military spending for overseas commitments and the
      refusal to make significant cuts in most major domestic programs
      have created the worst deficits in American history.
It goes on about how conservatives lost their adversion to deficits.
Aw, who listens to those wackaloon libberuls at the Cato Institute? /
sarcasm

The current national debt is about $9 trillion. ***$8 trillion*** of
that debt was incurred during the administrations of 3 Republican
presidents - Reagan, Bush I and Bush 2.
Bill Z.
2009-01-02 22:42:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Spartakus
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong?  Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
(Note how he ignores 2000--2008).  But for the 80s even the conservatives
      Soaring military spending for overseas commitments and the
      refusal to make significant cuts in most major domestic programs
      have created the worst deficits in American history.
It goes on about how conservatives lost their adversion to deficits.
Aw, who listens to those wackaloon libberuls at the Cato Institute? /
sarcasm
The current national debt is about $9 trillion. ***$8 trillion*** of
that debt was incurred during the administrations of 3 Republican
presidents - Reagan, Bush I and Bush 2.
And each was less fiscally responsible than the last! Curiously Reagan's
campaign lambasted Carter for deficits, only to turn around and spend like
there was no tomorrow.
zzpat
2009-01-05 02:18:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
And each was less fiscally responsible than the last! Curiously Reagan's
campaign lambasted Carter for deficits, only to turn around and spend like
there was no tomorrow.
Republicans don't expect their president to tell the truth so they don't
either.

Reagan was an idiot. He thought we had to catch up with the Soviet
Union, then after it collapsed they said he was trying to bankrupt them.
Either he lied while in office or they're lying. Either way, they look
like idiots.
--
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/

Impeach Search Engine:
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=012146513885108216046:rzesyut3kmm
Stan de SD
2009-01-02 22:42:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
ROTFLMAO.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong?  Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
(Note how he ignores 2000--2008).  But for the 80s even the conservatives
      Soaring military spending for overseas commitments and the
      refusal to make significant cuts in most major domestic programs
      have created the worst deficits in American history.
It goes on about how conservatives lost their adversion to deficits.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the World Trade Center,
Lemme guess - you're one of the 9/11 conspiro-kooks, right? Well, that
would be consistent with you calling the Jews "murderers" because they
dare defend themselves.
<http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames/1594>,
<http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=4532>,
and <http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0408-04.htm>,
and <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/09/september11.alqaida>.
     President Bush was given an intelligence briefing, entitled Bin
     Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States just weeks
     before the September 11 attacks, it emerged yesterday.
     Details of the August 6 briefing in 2001, which warned of
     terrorist preparations being made for hijackings on American
     soil, surfaced in testimony given by the US national security
     adviser, Condoleezza Rice, to a commission of inquiry studying
     the September 11 attacks.
Let's see.  Bush ignored the Gore Commission report. There was enough
"chatter" to suspect something was up. Then there was Zacarias Moussaoui,
arrested on August 16, 2001 - a dubious character trying to learn to
fly a 747.
Now, finding the culprits at this point was probably like finding a
needle in a haystack.  But what about some simple measure like simply
reinforcing cockpit doors and keeping them locked?  If they couldn't
get into the cockpit, they wouldn't have been able to fly a plane into
a building.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the US economy,
Sources? Cites?
ROTFLMAO!
In other words, no reply...
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the failure to recognize global warming?  
To recognize what? That man-made global warming is a hoax?
Post by zzpat
the failure to help the victims of Katrina?
IIRC the mayor of N'awlins and the Governor of Louisiana were
Democrats. What ws the problem, that Bush didn't declare martial law,
take over operations of the state, and relieve those two incompetents
of command?
You can't be serious.
Silly Billy, who was the mayor of New Orleans, and what was his
party's affiliation?

Who was the governor of Louisiansa at the time? Party affiliation?

I know this is an EXTREMELY difficult concept for liberals to
understand, but when a US city is struck with an emergency, the
individual MOST responsible for implementing and emergency plan is the
elected Mayor of the city. Now I realize that the liberal view of
things is that a mayor's primary duty is to get himself re-elected by
spending taxpayer money to buy votes, but when the shit hits the fan,
the mayor is the one who is supposed to take charge and execute a
plan. As another mayor named Sarah Palin once put it, "it's like being
a community organizer, except you have real responsibilities".

The mayor is the first line of defense in an emergency. If the mayor
needs assistance, he or she can then conect the state governor, who is
authorized to call up the state National Guard as needed. The Feds are
the last ones in line.
Bill Z.
2009-01-02 22:56:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
ROTFLMAO.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong?  Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
(Note how he ignores 2000--2008).  But for the 80s even the conservatives
      Soaring military spending for overseas commitments and the
      refusal to make significant cuts in most major domestic programs
      have created the worst deficits in American history.
It goes on about how conservatives lost their adversion to deficits.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the World Trade Center,
Lemme guess - you're one of the 9/11 conspiro-kooks, right? Well, that
would be consistent with you calling the Jews "murderers" because they
dare defend themselves.
<http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames/1594>,
<http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=4532>,
and <http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0408-04.htm>,
and <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/09/september11.alqaida>.
     President Bush was given an intelligence briefing, entitled Bin
     Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States just weeks
     before the September 11 attacks, it emerged yesterday.
     Details of the August 6 briefing in 2001, which warned of
     terrorist preparations being made for hijackings on American
     soil, surfaced in testimony given by the US national security
     adviser, Condoleezza Rice, to a commission of inquiry studying
     the September 11 attacks.
Let's see.  Bush ignored the Gore Commission report. There was enough
"chatter" to suspect something was up. Then there was Zacarias Moussaoui,
arrested on August 16, 2001 - a dubious character trying to learn to
fly a 747.
Now, finding the culprits at this point was probably like finding a
needle in a haystack.  But what about some simple measure like simply
reinforcing cockpit doors and keeping them locked?  If they couldn't
get into the cockpit, they wouldn't have been able to fly a plane into
a building.
(Note how Stan de SD had no answer for that.)
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the US economy,
Sources? Cites?
ROTFLMAO!
In other words, no reply...
In other words, you apparently don't read newspapers or watch the
evening news. And it is not up to be to reply anyway - someone
else posted the statement about the economy.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the failure to recognize global warming?  
To recognize what? That man-made global warming is a hoax?
Post by zzpat
the failure to help the victims of Katrina?
IIRC the mayor of N'awlins and the Governor of Louisiana were
Democrats. What ws the problem, that Bush didn't declare martial law,
take over operations of the state, and relieve those two incompetents
of command?
You can't be serious.
Silly Billy, who was the mayor of New Orleans, and what was his
party's affiliation?
More infantile name calling?
Post by Stan de SD
Who was the governor of Louisiansa at the time? Party affiliation?
Doesn't matter - it is well documented that FEMA dropped the ball.
Post by Stan de SD
I know this is an EXTREMELY difficult concept for liberals to
understand, but when a US city is struck with an emergency, the
individual MOST responsible for implementing and emergency plan is the
elected Mayor of the city.
When an emergency is a major disaster beyond the capabilities of any
city, it is the responsibility of the state and federal governments
to help, and FEMA dropped the ball - that's why Michael Brown had
to resign.

<http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hurricane_Katrina:_FEMA>
<http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hurricane_Katrina:_FEMA#Michael_D._Brown_Resigned>
Stan de SD
2009-01-02 23:05:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
ROTFLMAO.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong?  Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
(Note how he ignores 2000--2008).  But for the 80s even the conservatives
      Soaring military spending for overseas commitments and the
      refusal to make significant cuts in most major domestic programs
      have created the worst deficits in American history.
It goes on about how conservatives lost their adversion to deficits.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the World Trade Center,
Lemme guess - you're one of the 9/11 conspiro-kooks, right? Well, that
would be consistent with you calling the Jews "murderers" because they
dare defend themselves.
<http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames/1594>,
<http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=4532>,
and <http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0408-04.htm>,
and <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/09/september11.alqaida>.
     President Bush was given an intelligence briefing, entitled Bin
     Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States just weeks
     before the September 11 attacks, it emerged yesterday.
     Details of the August 6 briefing in 2001, which warned of
     terrorist preparations being made for hijackings on American
     soil, surfaced in testimony given by the US national security
     adviser, Condoleezza Rice, to a commission of inquiry studying
     the September 11 attacks.
Let's see.  Bush ignored the Gore Commission report. There was enough
"chatter" to suspect something was up. Then there was Zacarias Moussaoui,
arrested on August 16, 2001 - a dubious character trying to learn to
fly a 747.
Now, finding the culprits at this point was probably like finding a
needle in a haystack.  But what about some simple measure like simply
reinforcing cockpit doors and keeping them locked?  If they couldn't
get into the cockpit, they wouldn't have been able to fly a plane into
a building.
(Note how Stan de SD had no answer for that.)
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the US economy,
Sources? Cites?
ROTFLMAO!
In other words, no reply...
In other words, you apparently don't read newspapers or watch the
evening news.  And it is not up to be to reply anyway - someone
else posted the statement about the economy.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the failure to recognize global warming?  
To recognize what? That man-made global warming is a hoax?
Post by zzpat
the failure to help the victims of Katrina?
IIRC the mayor of N'awlins and the Governor of Louisiana were
Democrats. What ws the problem, that Bush didn't declare martial law,
take over operations of the state, and relieve those two incompetents
of command?
You can't be serious.
Silly Billy, who was the mayor of New Orleans, and what was his
party's affiliation?
More infantile name calling?
Answer the question: who was mayor of New Orleans in 2005? What was
his party affiliation?
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Who was the governor of Louisiansa at the time? Party affiliation?
Doesn't matter - it is well documented that FEMA dropped the ball.
Does matter. Who was the governor? Party?
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
I know this is an EXTREMELY difficult concept for liberals to
understand, but when a US city is struck with an emergency, the
individual MOST responsible for implementing and emergency plan is the
elected Mayor of the city.
When an emergency is a major disaster beyond the capabilities of any
city,
Why weren't there as many problems in Mississippi?
Bill Z.
2009-01-03 00:12:28 UTC
Permalink
<quoted text about 9/11 snipped>
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
(Note how Stan de SD had no answer for that.)
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the US economy,
Sources? Cites?
ROTFLMAO!
In other words, no reply...
In other words, you apparently don't read newspapers or watch the
evening news.  And it is not up to be to reply anyway - someone
else posted the statement about the economy.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the failure to recognize global warming?  
To recognize what? That man-made global warming is a hoax?
Post by zzpat
the failure to help the victims of Katrina?
IIRC the mayor of N'awlins and the Governor of Louisiana were
Democrats. What ws the problem, that Bush didn't declare martial law,
take over operations of the state, and relieve those two incompetents
of command?
You can't be serious.
Silly Billy, who was the mayor of New Orleans, and what was his
party's affiliation?
More infantile name calling?
Answer the question: who was mayor of New Orleans in 2005? What was
his party affiliation?
Why should I bother? Look it up on Google if you don't know. This
isn't a high school class.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Who was the governor of Louisiansa at the time? Party affiliation?
Doesn't matter - it is well documented that FEMA dropped the ball.
Does matter. Who was the governor? Party?
Nope - won't change the fact that FEMA screwed up to the point that
Bush's appointee had to resign, and as I said, you can easily look
it up on Google if you really don't know. I don't accept homework
assignments from you.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
I know this is an EXTREMELY difficult concept for liberals to
understand, but when a US city is struck with an emergency, the
individual MOST responsible for implementing and emergency plan is the
elected Mayor of the city.
When an emergency is a major disaster beyond the capabilities of any
city,
Why weren't there as many problems in Mississippi?
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4220000/newsid_4222400/4222436.stm>
for one. It shows the path Katrina followed, and Katrina was centered
on New Orleans when it reached land. And that is without factoring in
where various cities are located - how far from the coast and what the
risk of flooding is in each one.

Now, why don't you try to have a sensible discussion?
Go Away, Bush
2009-01-03 01:41:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
ROTFLMAO.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong? Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
(Note how he ignores 2000--2008). But for the 80s even the conservatives
Soaring military spending for overseas commitments and the
refusal to make significant cuts in most major domestic programs
have created the worst deficits in American history.
It goes on about how conservatives lost their adversion to deficits.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the World Trade Center,
Lemme guess - you're one of the 9/11 conspiro-kooks, right? Well, that
would be consistent with you calling the Jews "murderers" because they
dare defend themselves.
<http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames/1594>,
<http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=4532>,
and <http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0408-04.htm>,
and <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/09/september11.alqaida>.
President Bush was given an intelligence briefing, entitled Bin
Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States just weeks
before the September 11 attacks, it emerged yesterday.
Details of the August 6 briefing in 2001, which warned of
terrorist preparations being made for hijackings on American
soil, surfaced in testimony given by the US national security
adviser, Condoleezza Rice, to a commission of inquiry studying
the September 11 attacks.
Let's see. Bush ignored the Gore Commission report. There was enough
"chatter" to suspect something was up. Then there was Zacarias Moussaoui,
arrested on August 16, 2001 - a dubious character trying to learn to
fly a 747.
Now, finding the culprits at this point was probably like finding a
needle in a haystack. But what about some simple measure like simply
reinforcing cockpit doors and keeping them locked? If they couldn't
get into the cockpit, they wouldn't have been able to fly a plane into
a building.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the US economy,
Sources? Cites?
ROTFLMAO!
In other words, no reply...
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the failure to recognize global warming?
To recognize what? That man-made global warming is a hoax?
Post by zzpat
the failure to help the victims of Katrina?
IIRC the mayor of N'awlins and the Governor of Louisiana were
Democrats. What ws the problem, that Bush didn't declare martial law,
take over operations of the state, and relieve those two incompetents
of command?
You can't be serious.
Silly Billy, who was the mayor of New Orleans, and what was his
party's affiliation?

Who was the governor of Louisiansa at the time? Party affiliation?

I know this is an EXTREMELY difficult concept for liberals to
understand, but when a US city is struck with an emergency, the
individual MOST responsible for implementing and emergency plan is the
elected Mayor of the city. Now I realize that the liberal view of
things is that a mayor's primary duty is to get himself re-elected by
spending taxpayer money to buy votes, but when the shit hits the fan,
the mayor is the one who is supposed to take charge and execute a
plan. As another mayor named Sarah Palin once put it, "it's like being
a community organizer, except you have real responsibilities".

The mayor is the first line of defense in an emergency. If the mayor
needs assistance, he or she can then conect the state governor, who is
authorized to call up the state National Guard as needed. The Feds are
the last ones in line.
=============

Bush was warned by every scientist and Army officer in the Engineers NOT to
cut off funding for the levees, there was even articles in magazines
concerning N.O. being below sea level but Bush doesn't read nor take advice
and yet you turn it into a political spectacle to 'save' your rediculously
stupid leader? Shame on you because YOU enable stupidity.
Stan de SD
2009-01-03 03:54:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
OK, tell me where Limbaugh had been wrong..
ROTFLMAO.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
When was the last time a republican took responsibility for being
wrong? Was it the debt causing tax cuts,
Tax cuts in the 80's did NOT cause debts, as revenue actually
increased by 45% during the Reagan years. Increases in spending
(primarily social spending) were the problem.
(Note how he ignores 2000--2008). But for the 80s even the conservatives
Soaring military spending for overseas commitments and the
refusal to make significant cuts in most major domestic programs
have created the worst deficits in American history.
It goes on about how conservatives lost their adversion to deficits.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the World Trade Center,
Lemme guess - you're one of the 9/11 conspiro-kooks, right? Well, that
would be consistent with you calling the Jews "murderers" because they
dare defend themselves.
<http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames/1594>,
<http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=4532>,
and <http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0408-04.htm>,
and <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/apr/09/september11.alqaida>.
President Bush was given an intelligence briefing, entitled Bin
Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States just weeks
before the September 11 attacks, it emerged yesterday.
Details of the August 6 briefing in 2001, which warned of
terrorist preparations being made for hijackings on American
soil, surfaced in testimony given by the US national security
adviser, Condoleezza Rice, to a commission of inquiry studying
the September 11 attacks.
Let's see. Bush ignored the Gore Commission report. There was enough
"chatter" to suspect something was up. Then there was Zacarias Moussaoui,
arrested on August 16, 2001 - a dubious character trying to learn to
fly a 747.
Now, finding the culprits at this point was probably like finding a
needle in a haystack. But what about some simple measure like simply
reinforcing cockpit doors and keeping them locked? If they couldn't
get into the cockpit, they wouldn't have been able to fly a plane into
a building.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the collapse of the US economy,
Sources? Cites?
ROTFLMAO!
In other words, no reply...
Post by Bill Z.
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
the failure to recognize global warming?
To recognize what? That man-made global warming is a hoax?
Post by zzpat
the failure to help the victims of Katrina?
IIRC the mayor of N'awlins and the Governor of Louisiana were
Democrats. What ws the problem, that Bush didn't declare martial law,
take over operations of the state, and relieve those two incompetents
of command?
You can't be serious.
Silly Billy, who was the mayor of New Orleans, and what was his
party's affiliation?
Who was the governor of Louisiansa at the time? Party affiliation?
I know this is an EXTREMELY difficult concept for liberals to
understand, but when a US city is struck with an emergency, the
individual MOST responsible for implementing and emergency plan is the
elected Mayor of the city. Now I realize that the liberal view of
things is that a mayor's primary duty is to get himself re-elected by
spending taxpayer money to buy votes, but when the shit hits the fan,
the mayor is the one who is supposed to take charge and execute a
plan. As another mayor named Sarah Palin once put it, "it's like being
a community organizer, except you have real responsibilities".
The mayor is the first line of defense in an emergency. If the mayor
needs assistance, he or she can then conect the state governor, who is
authorized to call up the state National Guard as needed. The Feds are
the last ones in line.
=============
Bush was warned by every scientist and Army officer in the Engineers NOT to
cut off funding for the levees,
Sources? Cites?
China Blue
2009-01-07 02:34:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by Go Away, Bush
Bush was warned by every scientist and Army officer in the Engineers NOT to
cut off funding for the levees,
Sources? Cites?
You're an idiot.

Just in case you didn't realize that on your own.
--
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to be,
Silver silverware - Where is the love? Reverend.
Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? At least I can stay in character.
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. mmmm lemon yogurt
Timothy Crowley
2009-01-03 17:12:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column.
Stan De Nazi does not read. He copies and pastes what his masters
tell him to copy and paste. He has no understanding of the issues.
He's an ignorant, racist tool.
HTH.
Stan de SD
2009-01-03 18:08:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column.
Stan De Nazi does not read.   He copies and pastes what his masters
tell him to copy and paste.
Timothy, stop projecting your issues on others.

You are the one who is highly uninformed.
Timothy Crowley
2009-01-03 22:06:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
Post by zzpat
 One of the
peculiar attributes has been the development of the "victim culture",
Read a George Will column.
Stan De Nazi does not read.   He copies and pastes what his masters
tell him to copy and paste.
Timothy, stop projecting your issues on others.
You are the one who is highly uninformed.
You lie.
China Blue
2009-01-06 04:13:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
I have long pointed to the philosophical inconsistencies of liberalism
that have turned the American left into a collection of intellectually
and morally challenged, babbling totalitarian psychotics. The world
You do realize your examples have nothing to do with your grand principles?
Post by Stan de SD
Example #1: White american male wearing brown shirt with swastika,
Example #2: Palestinian woman flying Hamas Flag, wearing burka,
Example #3: Duke Lacrosse rape accusations: accuser gets 1 point each
Example #4: Blacks fighting Mexicans in California prisons: This is a
Example #5: Blacks who voted Yes on Propostion 8 vs.Gays: Blacks get 1
Get the idea???
I got ideas. You're just pathetic.
--
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to be,
Silver silverware - Where is the love? Reverend.
Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? At least I can stay in character.
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. mmmm lemon yogurt
Stan de SD
2009-01-08 16:51:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by China Blue
Post by Stan de SD
I have long pointed to the philosophical inconsistencies of liberalism
that have turned the American left into a collection of intellectually
and morally challenged, babbling totalitarian psychotics. The world
You do realize your examples have nothing to do with your grand principles?
Post by Stan de SD
Example #1: White american male wearing brown shirt with swastika,
Example #2: Palestinian woman flying Hamas Flag, wearing burka,
Example #3: Duke Lacrosse rape accusations: accuser gets 1 point each
Example #4: Blacks fighting Mexicans in California prisons: This is a
Example #5: Blacks who voted Yes on Propostion 8 vs.Gays: Blacks get 1
Get the idea???
I got ideas. You're just pathetic.
Let me guess that you couldn't actually refute anything I said...
People's Republic of China Blue
2009-01-09 01:41:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stan de SD
In article
Post by Stan de SD
I have long pointed to the philosophical inconsistencies of liberalism
that have turned the American left into a collection of intellectually
and morally challenged, babbling totalitarian psychotics. The world
You do realize your examples have nothing to do with your grand principles?
Post by Stan de SD
Example #1: White american male wearing brown shirt with swastika,
Example #2: Palestinian woman flying Hamas Flag, wearing burka,
Example #3: Duke Lacrosse rape accusations: accuser gets 1 point each
Example #4: Blacks fighting Mexicans in California prisons: This is a
Example #5: Blacks who voted Yes on Propostion 8 vs.Gays: Blacks get 1
Get the idea???
I got ideas. You're just pathetic.
Let me guess that you couldn't actually refute anything I said...
How do you refute a non sequitur?
--
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. I'm whoever you want me to be,
Silver silverware - Where is the love? Reverend.
Oval swimming pool - Where is the love? At least I can stay in character.
Damn the living - It's a lovely life. mmmm lemon yogurt
Loading...