For your little GOP toddler who has everything...

[SirBruce]

That really didn't clarify anything.

First, it's a statement from the biographer, not from Kerry or the campaign.  In other words, he's telling what he thinks happens based on his earlier investigations of events, not based on what Kerry is saying right now.

Second, he admits Kerry lied about being there in December and he was really there in January or February, so he made a simple mistake.  Except for the fact Kerry claimed the memory was SEARED - SEARED - into his memory, that it was Christmas.  While it is certainly possible to make such a mistake, it is also very possible to have deliberately mislead in order to make the story better.  Heck, the author pretty much says he believes this, and yet it doesn't make any difference to him.  Ironic, since he probably blames Bush and company for doing the same thing; i.e. "tarting up" intelligence to go to war in Iraq.

I don't expect Kerry to say he intentionally lied, even if he did.  But he should at least admit he was mistaken.  So far, he hasn't done that.

Bruce

[Boogaleeboo]

I don't really need to tell you how a Neighborhood watch works, and why it's advantagous for the police to have them, do I?

Yes. You do. Right now in fact.

Show me where this happened. I bet I could find a counterexample for each time.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/07/11/MNGB57ILU41.DTL

The state of California decided to keep them under watch after they had served their time. Why?

Because you'd be amazed how hard it is to stop a sexual predator. I like the part where the courts order the release of someone when the head of the Department of Mental Health says "Not a good idea".

Ok, now tell me this case didn't happen. Of a real state, a real place, flat out instituting a program to monitor sexual predators because of the risk they pose.

And that's what I'M talking about. The serious risks to society that commit the worst crimes.

It shows a certain lack of understanding.

They aren't broken. That often implies they can be fixed. They just don't work like you, at all. You don't "fix" a dog for being a dog, do you? Much the same. They aren't human.

Stop thinking of them like they are.

I'm sure a little girl would like to hear that if she's the least bit broken she needs to die.

Yeah, only we won't ever know will we?

Because she got raped and murdered because nobody was doing anything to watch her.

Of course lets keep asking ourselves what a dead little girl would think in this hypothetical world where a monster didn't kill her.

Because it'd be too fascist to do things like monitor sexual predators, and put up more cameras on stop lights, and you know. Actually try and get a handle on things.

Lets try psychiatry! That must work!

Why?

We don't understand sleep, you think sexually deviance is something we are close to solving? Throw money at it?

You sure are heavy on that, "lets turn this abstract argument into a particular problem with one of the arguers" angle.

Everything is personal. YOUR thoughts and YOUR ideas are based on you, the person.

Often the flaw with a person's argument IS a flaw with them. You are naive and uninformed, your flaw leads to dumb hope solutions that lack understanding of how the world and humanity work.

Governments don't really need money. They do everything through their people's overwhelming love for them.

And a lack of reading comprehension.

Ok, now where's the other trillion dollars? Any private company with the funding of the US government would get a lot more done. But the Senate votes itself a pay increase, key groups get kick backs, contracts for this and that shoot up in cost. Budget overrun this, unexpected funding problem that.

And your money is gone without doing ANYTHING.

The goverment doesn't need as much of your money as it takes. IF it was managed properly. Of course nearly 300 million people to keep track of, problems happen. What'll you do?

It comes down to this: Increased spending does not neccessarily mean increased federal debt.

You really are stupid, aren't you?

To which I say

YOU CAN ONLY DO IT WITHOUT CUTTING SPENDING BY RAISING TAXES!

Guess what?

John Kerry has promised to RAISE spending in all the major areas that suck up money.

So it's pretty much a mathmatical impossibility for the debt to get lower in this case. And hey, we'll still be in Iraq.

Deploying troops is like, super cheap!

So you're attempting to establish that things could, just maybe, stay the same under Kerry and Edwards as they would Bush and Cheney. I fail to see how they makes them a worse choice.

Oh no, that'd be fine. See, it's "He'll do everything Bush did" and THEN "He'll increase social spending by leaps and bounds".

Which leaves us with more money being spent.....and nothing being cut.

Which leads to debt. Or it leads to greatly increased taxes.

You don't have money, I could see how this won't matter to you.....

.....only wait, stupid, everywhere you buy things?

They've raised the price because now that they are paying more taxes, they need to charge a little more to get as much back as they used to.

Yeah.

I don't know, Boog. Maybe two thirds? No, wait, perhaps less than half has to vote in favor for something to pass. Yes, majority does not actually establish itself! Now I see your point.

Oh, let me make it simple.

The Democrats have to vote for some things for them to pass. Especially tiny things like "War".

Meaning that there is no such thing as the Republicans forcing a war through. The Democrats could have stood strong and it wouldn't have passed.

Only the people wanted it, so it went through.

Guess what? Support for the war hasn't dropped off that much.

Why, because you said so? If the worst skeleton you can find in Kerry's closet is that it's hard to verify some of his claims, I'm not impressed.

John Kerry flat out called the soldiers he served with rapists and murders and in his four months dicking around in his boat saw rapes and murders than any given big city detective will in his entire life.

John Kerry said this under oath, before congress.

John Kerry threw someone elses medals away in a protest against the war.

John Kerry doesn't talk about these things anymore, because NOTHING John Kerry talked about has ever been verified. Ever. By anyone.

Beyond voting for war in Iraq to find WMDs and talking about the intelligence failure of Bush for thinking their were WMDs in Iraq, beyond cutting spending for troops after voting for a war, beyond any of the tiny shit?

John Kerry lying under oath to congress about war crimes the United States Armed Forces committed and having the gaul to call himself a vet friendly canidate is the worst skeleton in his closet.

But shit, you can't even read.

Why am I bothering with you?

[geldonyetich]

Yes. You do. Right now in fact.

Since when was it my job to educate you?

Oh sorry, that's your line.  

Here.
Or, I know, I'll make it even easier for you and post up a single image from that site.

Now then, Boog, because we're both such skilled debaters could you tell me how it is that the Police would be AGAINST community involvement?

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/07/11/MNGB57ILU41.DTL

3 Graduates released
- Brian DeVries, Aug. 2003
- Cary Verse, Feb. 2004
- Patrick Ghilotti, May 2004
Supervised release from state hospital treatment program
34 Released after two-year commitment as sexually violent predators - most without treatment
12 because one or more mental health experts found they were no longer likely to reoffend.
11 because the district attorney did not file a petition to keep them in the program.
7 because a jury did not find they should be recommitted.
4 because of a court ruling rejecting their confinement.

The state of California decided to keep them under watch after they had served their time. Why?

Because you'd be amazed how hard it is to stop a sexual predator. I like the part where the courts order the release of someone when the head of the Department of Mental Health says "Not a good idea".

Your interpretation of that article is wrong.  The push is for better methods of assuring treatment is actually done, not saying that we should stop treating them altogether.

They aren't broken. That often implies they can be fixed. They just don't work like you, at all. You don't "fix" a dog for being a dog, do you? Much the same. They aren't human.

Again, we're going to have to agree to disagree on this point.

Often the flaw with a person's argument IS a flaw with them. You are naive and uninformed, your flaw leads to dumb hope solutions that lack understanding of how the world and humanity work.

Coming from a man who believes those with flaws are beyond rehabilitation, this is damning testimony indeed.

In my opinion, you have proven yourself as an example of those who are naive where it matters the most.   You could pile up all the knowledge of that world in that cranium of yours, and it won't matter because you regard all that is flawed as beyond rehibilitation.   I promise you, you will find everything to be flawed if you look at it in a certain way.   You're very easily the most dangerous man I know.   A mugger may murder me in an alley to steal my money, but he wouldn't because he believes all with flaws needs instant eradication.    

Substitute Sex Addict with Jew, and you would make Adolf Hitler very happy.   Granted, the first is a mental illness and the second is a choice of religion.

Unlike you, I don't believe you're beyond rehibilitation.

John Kerry has promised to RAISE spending in all the major areas that suck up money.

So it's pretty much a mathmatical impossibility for the debt to get lower in this case. And hey, we'll still be in Iraq.

I've already indicated my stance on this.  If you're not going to read what I have to say, there's little need to repeat myself.

Deploying troops is like, super cheap!

Yeah, particularly when you start skimping on their supplies.

However, Bush would disagree.   70,000 boys coming home.   I wager that cost cutting had nothing to do with it?

Would Kerry have pulled back those troops?  I guess we'll never know.  [edit: unless perhaps I were to scroll down to the part of the article that read, "Democrat John Kerry has said he would try to begin withdrawing some troops from Iraq within his first six months in office."]

But shit, you can't even read.

Why am I bothering with you?

The feeling is mutual.   I sure hope all your arguments aren't so based on pointless accusation, inability to find the value in what the other person is saying, and otherwise empty sentiment.   It's sort of difficult to formulate a good reply when all you can give me is things I've already addressed one or two times before.

[Boogaleeboo]

Since when was it my job to educate you?

When you want something. Same as the canidates. They want to be elected, they have to state what they believe and why. They don't, they may not get support.

You said "I don't have to tell you why neighborhood watches are a good idea, do I" and I'm saying you do.

It seems like giving salt pills in medical trials. It may show improvements for some people, but it's mostly in their heads.

The push is for better methods of assuring treatment is actually done, not saying that we should stop treating them altogether.

And I'm not talking about not treating them. I'm fine with it when it involves keeping them under watch. Constantly.

And a not inconsiderate number of people in that small, specially picked group of people relapsed.

Coming from a man who believes those with flaws are beyond rehabilitation, this is damning testimony indeed.

Some flaws, yes. Reading comprehension can be fixed. Brain damage leading to mental retardation?

Probably not.

I'm not making a comment about anyone here.

Because you keep putting words in my mouth.

Because you are naive, and stupid, and can't look at the world as it is. I decry some people as broken, I must think all flaws are permanent and not want programs to help people.

Why?

I don't put words in your mouth to make you look stupid, you do that yourself.

Sexual predators, violent offenders, they don't fix. The best you get is a drugged monkey that goes around knowing he raped a 68 year old woman for the rest of his life. You can't fix that. It's a logical impossiblity. You are trying to reconcile two things:

A horrible act.

A sane mind.

The best case is that you create a person understanding just how wrong what they did was.

Then you ask them to live with it.

Brilliant.

I've already indicated my stance on this. If you're not going to read what I have to say, there's little need to repeat myself.

Like most things, it doesn't matter what the fuck you say. You don't know what you are talking about.

You are unemployed, so you should have to count your money more. Do you understand how YOUR budget works?

The federal government, although more complex, is basically the same.

Money doesn't come from nowhere. If you are raising spending, you need more money. If you are RAISING it, period, you also have to raise taxes to bring in more money. John Kerry has yet to talk about cutting ANYTHING. So John Kerry is raising taxes. This comes from people like me and yo....people like me, that work jobs to pay taxes. John Kerry will be taking money from me to give to a bunch of shit I don't want.

I don't like this.

Yeah, particularly when you start skimping on their supplies.

70k?

Good, that's only thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands more to go.

Democrat John Kerry has said he would try to begin withdrawing some troops from Iraq within his first six months in office

Six months....that's about a fourth of the time they'll have been in Iraq total by then. Yeah, cheap.

Here, let me give you a tip as to how this works.

things I've already addressed

Just because you say something doesn't make it true.

Now you can say "Right back at you" but it doesn't change the fact nothing you've said is true, or based on fact. You don't even understand YOUR points, and you've flat out had to invent mine to argue with.

You should just kill yourself and save the trouble of understanding how the world works.

[Margalis]

Is this some sort of contest about who can make the longest posts that say the least? Is that why the smartest comments in the last 10 posts or so are whitespace? You know, you guys don't HAVE to hit enter twice after every single period.

Why do people still talk to Boog anyway? Haven't you guys figured out he's a dumbass troll? May I remind you of the Martin Luther King Jr. thread, where Boog put words in his mouth, and then when given direct quotes to the contrary just kept on blathering without acknowledging that everything he said was 100% fabricated? There is no point in arguing with people who will just make shit up and when called on it just hope you have a short memory or can't read.

[Abagadro]

/golf clap for Margalis

[Boogaleeboo]

There is no point in arguing with people who will just make shit up and when called on it just hope you have a short memory or can't read.

But then you did it anyway.

Which of course is why I don't stop.

[Arcadian Del Sol]

[personman]

Other than the allegedly witty title, and the comment that the two reviews for it seem to imply that it is directed at kids, do we have anything to ACTUALLY SUGGEST that this is a children's book? Did I miss something? I don't see any sample pages.

She's touring the talk radio circuit promoting the book to parents.  I simply searched on the pen name "Katharine Debrecht" and found several hits.  Possibly it was written as a tongue in cheek adult humor but it does seem to be taken seriously as lessons for children.  Imagine that.

[Ironwood]

My Goodness.  The original topic.

I wondered where that went to.

[Zaphkiel]

Why do people still talk to Boog anyway?

    Actually, back when Boog only did one or two line smart ass responses, I found him slightly amusing.  And when he wasn't, at least it was short.  Recently, he's been going on way too long about how he doesn't care about shit.

[HaemishM]

I seem to recall there being a thread about "W" ketchup a few weeks ago.

It's a couple idiots with some ketchup, and a way to hock it as a novelty product. It's a symbolic gesture to basically give John Kerry and his wife the proverbial middle finger. It's on a level equivalent to the folks that started boycotting french wine and using the term "freedom fries".

Please, oh please, don't make it out to be anything other than "heh, that's kind of funny", because I don't think even the people selling it or buying it take it any more seriously than that.

Enough people took the Freedom fries shit seriously that it was no longer funny, other than pointing at the terminally fucking retarded and laughing.

This book makes Baby Jesus weep from stupidity.

EDIT: I knew I should have read this thread before replying. Now I remember why political threads on Waterthread always went to FUCKING HELL.

[geldonyetich]

That's warning enough for me.  I'm outta this thread.   If Boog was hoping to be the winner by pure tenacity, I give it to him willingly.

[ArtificialKid]

I got my kid an Ugly Doll.  He absolutely loves it.  That's all I wish to contribute at this time.

[daveNYC]

I got my kid an Ugly Doll.  He absolutely loves it.  That's all I wish to contribute at this time.

You better have a good reason why you got him one of those instead of one of these.

[Hanzii]

I got my kid an Ugly Doll.  He absolutely loves it.  That's all I wish to contribute at this time.

Man, they're cool. Thanks for making this thread worth it.
To further the derailment, this is my 3 year old daughters favourite toy right now. Daddys little geek... makes me proud.

[Dark Vengeance]

Well, I'll change my opinion about the GOP when I see some evidence to the contrary.

Are you listening to yourself? Do you read the page before you hit submit?

You're arguing that the right is evil incarnate.

Blind hate backed up by facts != logical, rational thinking.

Y'know, Bush Jr. decided to appoint an Republican sided Ex-Spy as head of the CIA lately.     If his intent was innocent, it was because CIA must be inadequette to the task if they couldn't stop something like 9/11 from happening, and so major changes must be neccessary.   However, this appointee   is by his own admission badly qualified.   I'm left wondering what motivation Bush Jr's administration would have behind putting a badly qualified new head of the CIA in place.    Since the new CIA head is a staunch Republican supporter, I can't help but think it's to cover their own tracks.

You do realize that his predecessor, George Tenet (the guy who was in charge up to and beyond 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq) was appointed by Clinton, right?

And I take it you read at least SOME of the 9/11 commission report, yes?

And then, there's the main focus behind Republican philosophy itself.   "Hey! The country needs to funnel power to the already powerful folks who know how to run it.  Everybody will benefit from the resulting trickle-down from rich folks who know how to manage these assets best."

Here you don't know wtf you're talking about. The American Dream(TM) in the minds of some folks is being able to "build the better mousetrap". The notion that ideas, inventions, and the entrepreneurial spirit are a big part of what makes America great, and among one of the strongest economic forces in the world.

Those people tend to get a bit pissed off when they improve their gross earnings, but end up with less net income after taxes. It's not just the "uber-rich" either.

My dad ran his own company for aout 15 years. At one point, he was bringing in about $200,000 a year trying to support a family of 4. By many accounts, he is among the "rich" that Kerry would just as soon tax into oblivion. Nevermind that we had 2 mortgages and a federal government loan to repay, which we had used to start the business.....and that we had trouble making ends meet for most of my life, just so my sister and I would have the opportunity to go to college (which my dad never did).

The problem I have with this is that it doesn't seem to work.   Over the last four years, hundreds of thousands of jobs have been deported simply because those same rich folks are hoping to save money.

Those same rich folks are trying to keep their companies afloat in the middle of a historic economic crisis. 9/11, accounting scandals, and the dotcom implosion all contributed to the economic climate that CAUSED this problem.

Newsflash: If the company has to outsource 1 of 5 jobs overseas to preserve the company, they are still providing 4 jobs. If the company doesn't have a viable alternative, they either downsize 1 job and work the fuck out of the other 4, or they go out of business, and provide ZERO jobs.

4>0

Insurance plans have been scrapped, and so people are being forced (on penalty of being fired) to work double shifts because it's cheaper than hiring two people to work a normal shift.

Excrement....you're using FUD to a large extent here.

It is cheaper to pay one person overtime than it is to pay two employees. Perhaps you've heard of Ford, GM, and Daimler-Chrysler? Here in Detroit, they are big time job providers. The UAW has laid-off employees making over 90% of their standard pay rates FOR NOT WORKING. Many of these folks not only take the overtime gladly, THEY PLAN ON IT AS A PART OF THEIR ANNUAL INCOME.

Taxes have been refunded to american tax payers everywhere, but in the same refund where your average joe made $300, somebody a few tax brackets up made millions, at the cost of a national surplus that could have been used for the good of the country.

This is where we play the little game of "no fair, millionaires got a bigger refund". I see you're joining the discussion a bit late.....MILLIONAIRES PAY A HIGHER TAX RATE THAN YOU DO, AND THEY PAY IT ON A MUCH HIGHER DOLLAR FIGURE. The folks who paid the most, got the biggest refund....those who paid the least, got the least. Explain to me again how that's unfair?

The rich get richer, and they don't feel particularly motivated to help out the little guy.  The upper crust is demonstrating absolutely no interest in helping anyone but themselves.

This isn't Unicef, motherfucker. The upper class don't HAVE to dole out handouts to "the little guy". Some of them USED TO BE the little guy, and managed to get along just fine without begging for scraps like some whiny pussy.

The GOP's very focus seems to backfire into an obvious falsity where all they really want to do is exploit government proceedings to make money.    Is this really a way to run a country?

There are two things you understand about the GOP....Jack and SHIT. A very large part of what the GOP wants is to prevent the government from exploiting them to fund a bunch of programs that are exploited by the underclass.

So, while perhaps you feel you would respect my opinions a bit more if I weren't so obviously biased, I find my bias appears to be justified.

You're biased because you got yourself fired from a crappy job, and can't find a new one. Everything since then has been attempts at justifying your position.

I try to see the good in everything, but I'm having a very hard time seeing anything good about the GoP.   So please, enlighten me, and don't just tell me how their theories on how to improve the country is supposed to work: show me results.

Are you fucking retarded? Compare America 1979 to America 1988, see if you can find a fucking difference.

By the way, moron, you're lambasting the GOP based on your misinformed interpretation of what they stand for IN THEORETICAL TERMS, and then asking for a response that doesn't involve theory.

I see you haven't run out of your boundless supply of LOGICAL INCONSISTENCY yet.

Show me results besides that which anyone running the country wouldn't have done anyway, such as retaliating for the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and enforcing better security.   Show me how they do anything productive for this country besides ask the best military in the world, wether it's under Republican or Democratic rule, to go kill some dangerous foreigners for them.

Show me results besides that which anyone running the country wouldn't have done anyway, such as dodging scandal after scandal while the economy sits on cruise control, thanks to the internet boom.

Show me how they do anything productive for this country besides fucking up Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Iraq....not to mention effectively gutting the intelligence community and the armed forces, while simultaneously committing perjury about committing adultery.

Or we can refer to Mr Kerry, who returned from his stint as "war hero" only to denounce the war, and testify that he and his fellow soldiers committed WAR CRIMES. This same Mr Kerry, whose foreign policy plan is "like Bush, but better"....whose economic plan is "like Bush, but better", and whose social programs read like a Xmas list for liberal special interest groups....al supposedly funded by repealing Bush's tax cuts, and simultaneously cutting taxes for everyone else.

But you won't do that, you'll drone on and on about how much Bush sucks, the GOP is evil, and you'll spout more rhetoric you've gleaned from reading moveon.org and thumbing through a Michael Moore book.

Again...blind hatred of something you do not understand, and consequently fear. Why am I not surprised?

Bring the noise.
Cheers.............

[naum]

Are you fucking retarded? Compare America 1979 to America 1988, see if you can find a fucking difference.

By the way, moron, you're lambasting the GOP based on your misinformed interpretation of what they stand for IN THEORETICAL TERMS, and then asking for a response that doesn't involve theory.

Actually, for historical reference, for the lower 80% of folks, taxes went up 1979-1988 (FICA taxes and state taxes rose significantly and the brunt of which is borne by working Americans), and standard of living declined. For the hard numbers, see Kevin Phillips Wealth and Democray or past volumes of The State of Working America.

And the historical record has illustrated that the U.S. economy performs better under Democrat control, or at least when counting GDP growth, unemployment and inflation, and allotting for any "time lag" after administration turnover.  

Job growth/decline statistics are even more lopsided

And as far as government expansion/spending goes, the biggest spending orgies have occurred under Republican watch - Reagan/Bush in the 80s and now GW Bush who's steward of a deficit mushrooming that may soon dwarf even that of Reagan's.

[Dark Vengeance]

Substitute Sex Addict with Jew, and you would make Adolf Hitler very happy. Granted, the first is a mental illness and the second is a choice of religion.

Christ all fucking mighty. The man doesn't even grasp why the Holocaust happened. Here's a hint, dipshit.....go look up the word GENOCIDE. Then ask yourself why Hitler is so commonly associated with White Power and the Aryans.

When you're done, consider retracting that idiotic statement I've quote above.

Bring the noise.
Cheers.............

[daveNYC]

From a percentage point of view, wouldn't the largest spending increases have occured under FDR?

My problem with both parties is that they have no sense of limits.  As some Democrats believe that government should do everything, there are members of the GOP who believe that government should to (next to) nothing.  Unfortunately it is that wing of the GOP that is in the White House at the moment.

I can appreciate the ideas behind a smaller government even though I don't agree with them; however I am dumbfounded by those who want to shrink government's influence back to what it was the 1800s.

[Arcadian Del Sol]

[geldonyetich]

Hardly surprising, Arc.  This thread should have been locked at post 1.   Fearing Liberals under a bed, indeed.

Christ all fucking mighty. The man doesn't even grasp why the Holocaust happened. Here's a hint, dipshit

Die in a Holocaust fire.

As for the rest of your commentary, thanks.   Unlike Boog, you back up your arguments with something other than insults or violence.  (Not that you're without insults insults entirely, you twat, which is why I've not even the spirit to read what you bothered to write on this occation).   As I said before, I'm done with this thread.   Note to you immature cockmongers amongst the readership, that does not mean I'm going to sit back and endure insults I find worthy of retort, so long as I still care.

When you're done, consider retracting that idiotic statement I've quote above.

Hint: I wasn't referring to the Republicans when I made that comment.

Reading comprehension is important.   I'll retract that comment when Boog shows me any color other than total bad ass.   Seriously, the same spirit in which he just finished arguing is one in which I halfway expect him to try to pass a bill to have all the kids in orphanages euthanized in the spirit of removing a burden from society.   If I cared a whit about my own miserable existance at this point, I'd probably be too busy cowering in fear of his logically induced homocidal nature to mention it.   I'd be willing to say his intelligence score is high enough, but he clearly flubbed his wisdom roll.

Actually, I like the Republicans on the grounds that they keep the Democrats honest in the exact same way the Democrats keep the Republicans honest.   Screw around too much, and the other guys end up in the oval office for the next term.   However, aside from these insane financial theories that don't seem to work (unless by "work" you mean "give you lots of money if you're in a very high tax bracket"), I don't see how the Republicans are getting much done this term aside from a lot of embezzling and killing.   Evil incarnate?  As close to it as politics allow, perhaps.    

Wake up DV, whatever the Republicans may have accomplished in the past, the ones in office right now are just greedy bastards, plain and simple.   One major catastrophe isn't enough - there would have to be twenty 9/11 disasters to explain all the crap they've been pulling.   They've funneled enough money to rebuild the world trade center hundreds of times over.   They've funneled enough money to OWN a significient portion of the world stock market.

[Lum]

Wow, this thread is still going? How many times did geldon say he was done, 2 or 3? It's hard to tell. At any rate, it's good to see quality political discourse is alive and well on message boards.

To continue: SPACE ELF NAZIS!

http://www.brokentoys.org/images/reman_nazi.jpg" height=240 width=360>

There, I won the Internet.

[geldonyetich]

Wow, this thread is still going? How many times did geldon say he was done, 2 or 3?

Thread was done prior to it being posted, IMHO.   As for the number of times I said, I was done: Just twice, but on the second time I qualified it with "But don't think I'm going to ignore insults."   Seriously, exactly when was it considered kosher to throw in a bunch of glib remarks hoping the other guy wouldn't come back and refute them?

There, I won the Internet.

Seconded.   Space Elf Nazis 4 teh win.

[schild]

Holy shit, all this time I forgot the internet was a contest. I know I had the rules written down somewhere....

[SurfD]

[sarcasm]
Fucking Americans and your incestuous little two party system.  I am so glad I live in Canada. At least you provide some amusing politics.
[/sarcasm

[schild]

Lum,

The only assistance I need from you which i believe you would do for me are the following:

1. Assist me invest this money in your country
2. Assure me that you will not sit on my share when this fund gets to your country.

You will have 15% of the money for yourself as you guide me further to invest the remaining 80% in any valueble business venture while 5% is earmarked to cover expenses contingencies.
Most importantly, i will like to buy a personal house where i and my mother will reside.

Upon confirmation of your interest to help me as my foreign partner to invest this money, i will link you the details of this transaction to be scheduled in your favour by the security company. While thanking you for your anticipated understanding and cooperation, I look forward to your urgent response. please note that this transaction is strictly confidential and must be treated with utmost secrecy.

Best regards,
Mr Mbombo A. Fl.....errrr Schild

[Lum]

As for the number of times I said, I was done: Just twice, but on the second time I qualified it with "But don't think I'm going
to ignore insults."

Then you're not done. Saying "I wash my hands of this thread" doesn't actually mean "I take the moral high ground and grandly announce I am too good to participate, but reserve the right to refute anything I see as an attack on my character in mind numbing detail".

[Lum]

Lum,

The only assistance I need from you which i believe you would do for me are the following:

1. Assist me invest this money in your country

Are you offering me C1al.is? Because, you know, I've been looking for some.

[Margalis]

My problem with both parties is that they have no sense of limits.  As some Democrats believe that government should do everything, there are members of the GOP who believe that government should to (next to) nothing.  Unfortunately it is that wing of the GOP that is in the White House at the moment.

I have to respectfully disagree. (No, that is not sarcasm)

I don't believe that the current white house is in favor of smaller government. Where is the evidence of that? I don't think anyone in government really wants smaller government. They want it smaller in some places, but bigger in others.

The GOP will say they don't want cops in the bedroom, then LITERALLY argue a case in front of the Supreme Court involving cops in a bedroom. They deregulate some things, and regulate other things more. Just look at the FCC - they want to deregulate media ownership, but want to regulate media content further than it is now. The GOP is against things like the equal rights amendment, but for amendments against flag burning, gay marriages, etc. They want to regulate scientific research more, pollution less, etc etc etc.

I don't think they want smaller government, just different government. Under Bush the government hasn't shrunk at all. The government is as intrusive now as it ever has been, costs as much, etc etc. Generally speaking the President and other residing powers don't do much to change the size of government at all.

It's just a convenient fable. There is a lot to be gained by advocating smaller government, but not much to be gained by doing it. (Same for compaign finance reform) Smaller government, state's rights, etc, are just convenient excuses that can be deployed in select situations.

[Dark Vengeance]

Die in a Holocaust fire.

I have family members who did, you fucktard. That's why I felt the need to chastise you for not knowing what the Holocaust was really about.

Hint: I wasn't referring to the Republicans when I made that comment.

Neither was I....I was referring to the item I quoted, where you made an ignorant statement about Jews, Hitler and religion. The Holocaust was GENOCIDE. Go look up the words Holocaust and genocide....seriously, I'll wait.

When you get done, retract your fucking statement.

*snipped because it was irrelevant*

Actually, I like the Republicans on the grounds that they keep the Democrats honest in the exact same way the Democrats keep the Republicans honest.   Screw around too much, and the other guys end up in the oval office for the next term.

Yeah, you like the guys that "make your skin crawl". Right.

However, aside from these insane financial theories that don't seem to work (unless by "work" you mean "give you lots of money if you're in a very high tax bracket"), I don't see how the Republicans are getting much done this term aside from a lot of embezzling and killing.   Evil incarnate?  As close to it as politics allow, perhaps.

   

Wake up DV, whatever the Republicans may have accomplished in the past, the ones in office right now are just greedy bastards, plain and simple.

Here you go again....blind hatred. Your entire premise is that every thing they do is motivated by greed for money and power, and placing personal gain above the good of the country. THAT IS PRECISELY THE FLAWED THINKING I WAS TALKING ABOUT.

One major catastrophe isn't enough - there would have to be twenty 9/11 disasters to explain all the crap they've been pulling.

How about 3? The dotcom bubble put us into a recession, followed by 9/11 (which shut down Wall Street for a ***WEEK***), and then the corporate accounting scandals of Enron and Worldcom which sent stocks tumbling, and decimated investor confidence....oh yeah, and the aftermath of 9/11 had us sending troops into Afghanistan.

Three castastrophes combined to make for an UNPRECEDENTED period of uncertainty and economic difficulties. Explain to me how further taxing people would have helped, or even NOT HURT.

They've funneled enough money to rebuild the world trade center hundreds of times over.   They've funneled enough money to OWN a significient portion of the world stock market.

Care to back this up with some facts? Are you referring to the deficit? If so, you're talking out of both sides of your ass.

You can't decry the administration for leaving our boys poorly equipped, and simultaneously chastise them for running deficits. War is expensive, genius....and even the 87 billion that your wonderboy voted AGAINST isn't going to cover everything.

Or perhaps you're referring to the stock options owned by Cheney? Stock options that had a value of $0, even before 9/11. Take a look at this 5-year chart for Halliburton stock. Look at where the price was when Bush was elected....look where it is today. It is worth less today than it was at the election in 2000. Oh wait...you don't grasp how OPTIONS work, do you? Well then let's look at where the stock was prior to his joining the Bush campaign. Let's consider the following statement from this article, and bear in mind that HAL is currently at $27.95 per share.

Lautenberg said Halliburton stock options held by Cheney were 100,000 shares at $54.50 per share, 33,333 shares at $28.125 and 300,000 shares at $39.50 per share.

This means that he has the option to buy up to 100,000 shares for $54.50 each, 33,333 shares for $28.125 each, and 300,000 shares at $39.50 each. In other words, by using his stock options to purchase HAL stock, he'd be paying more than the current stock value....this means they are currently worth NOTHING.

So where are they funnelling money, geld? I'm just kind of curious on that one.

Bring the noise.
Cheers.............

[Paelos]

[Aslan]

This message edited at the request of the original poster, because he is a lame-ass who can't read.

[geldonyetich]

to chastise you for not knowing what the Holocaust was really about.

Yeah, I had family members who died in WW-II as well.   Granted, mine at least had the oppertunity to have a rifle in his hands when taking nazi lead.

I'll retract my earlier Hitler related commentary on the grounds that WW-II was a fucked up event for everybody.   That, and I didn't really mean to imply racial genocide so much as reasoned extermination of a certain group of disadvantaged individuals.

Anyone have a good spokesman for logically induced mass homocide that does not rub Dark Vengence the wrong way?

Yeah, you like the guys that "make your skin crawl". Right.

Politicians.   What can I say?

Three castastrophes combined to make for an UNPRECEDENTED period of uncertainty and economic difficulties. Explain to me how further taxing people would have helped, or even NOT HURT.

Okay: Social Security, Medicare, Government provided insurance, Government employment, ect.

What would all this cost each one of us?  Apparently only the $300.00 we had recieved in our tax rebate.   No, it looks like Your Man Cheney was the one of the few who benefitted from these so called "tax cuts".  

In return, they've apparently moved a great deal of jobs overseas and performed a plethora of other cost-cutting measures which screwed the working man.   If the Republicans cared, they didn't do anything about it.

So where are they funnelling money, geld? I'm just kind of curious on that one.

Yeah, those are some real cute tricks with the stock portfolio manipulation, but do you want to tell me how one man's stock investments are supposed to redeem a whole party's treatment of the working man these last four years?

You mentioned the 87 billion for the Afghanistan war effort.   We're down about 14 trillion dollars in the federal treasury alone.   Point to me on the number line where 1 billion is.

$1 Dollar <----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> $1 Trillion Dollars

(If you guessed correctly, the 1 billion is on the far left side about where the first dash is.   87 billion would be before the 10th dash from the left.)

[Paelos]