Re: Slick Willie: Never Again!

On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 19:08:35 GMT, Greek Shipping Magnets <an.ass.is@xxx> wrote:

>On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 03:12:28 -0500, Ben Kaufman
><spaXm-mXe-anXd-paXy-5000-dollars@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>Could you please clarify this?
>
>Sure thing. Liberals are anti-Christian. For example, I was watching
>the Met's production of Faust whilst a bunch of queens were sitting in
>front of me. We were all enjoying the show up until the end where they
>made it a point to guffaw loudly because in the end supposedly Faust
>rots in hell whilst his erstwhile love ascends to heaven.
>
>Because they have a problem with the Catholic church, they will have a
>problem with allowing all forms of Christianity when in the voting
>booth. And while they're sitting in front of you in $300 seats.
>

Perhaps you were not eavesdroppping sufficiently on these alleged queens. But
regardless of what they were critiquing your characterization of it is an
excellent example of taking one's personal experience and assuming it is a
generally held principle of nature.


>>But that's clearly not everyone and when you burn the bridge on 48% of
>>Americans you are burning some pretty major bridges.
>
>You lefties would know about all of that wouldn't ya?
>
>For how many years did we have to listen why our tax dollars need to
>be spent on feeding the lazy? On enacting gun bans? On why we need to
>reform murderous offendors and ensure they have rights?
>

Just a few para's up you're accusing the liberals of being anti-christian and
here you criticize them for showing one of the most important judeo-christian
tenets of charity.

>Face it.. from 1960 'til the Republican backlash of the early 90s
>violent crime and all assorted social maladies went through the roof.
>Teen pregnancy, robbery, assault, rape, poverty, you name it. That was
>the period of anything goes leftyism.

Overall, teenage pregnancy has been going down since the late '70s. It is only
in places where Bush's "ignorance is the right approach to sex education"
policy that pregnancy rates have risen.
>

>It took the GOP to put everything back on track. And now even in
>limousine liberal NYC they can't bring themselves to usher in another
>Democarp like Koch and Dinkins who sit idly by while everything rots
>to pieces. Limolibs vote Republican when it comes to looking out for
>their OWN interests.
>

Koch was good, Dinkins was not.

>Just like Babs pretends she hates guns and wants to ban them all the
>while protecting herself with armed bodyguards.
>
I don't know why you are so concerned with guns. Do you use them? If so, why do
you need an automatic machine gun?

>>A U.S. president wins an election with electorial votes. Perot got none of them.
>
>Which meant the GOP won fewer states since the Dems surged ahead
>thanks to all those lost Perot votes.
>
>Seriously are you libs this clueless or is it mere underhandedness
>when discussing facts?
>

Maybe I'm checking facts before I speak?
http://uselectionatlas.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/leip/ikonboard/post.cgi?action=replyquote&forum=1&topic=56&postno=5


>>Since it can't be George, Jr. it remains to be seen who the GOP candidate will
>>be and if the GOP does some house cleaning it may be moot as far as I'm
>>concerned.
>
>Nonsense. The Dems have who exactly as their front runner? Hillary! A
>woman whose repuatation preceeds her! Or better yet you guys can run
>Dean again. Please do!
>
>I say McCain should win handily. And what with all the Vietnam
>references you boys keep making, who better to get us out of Iraq and
>declare victory?
>

Yet again you try to pigeon hole me as a democrat. I've lost track of the
number of times I said that I am not affiliated with the Democratic party. I
tend to side with many of their issues but I have no grudge against a good GOP
politician such as McCain.

My prediction is that McCain will sooner become a Democrat than Hillary will be
the Democratic nominee for president.

>>There are many different polls Please cite what you are referring to.
>
>Just as soon as you cough up a source that sayz 10% of the American
>population is gay. Dang, we got almost as many poofs as African
>Americans!

Lashing out again? Did you forget my cite from Gallup?
>
>>One does not have to drive in order to be killed in an auto accident.
>
>Right then. So please tell me where exactly we found another 25
>million citizens.
>
>And how exactly is it that all of them find themselves piled into a
>car at any given moment.

Is this another example of sarcasm? No one does anything continuously.

>
>>statistics are in the vicinity of 4 to 6X more likely to get killed on an MC
>>than a car, not 20x.
>
>You're not going by miles traveled. That's 20X more fatal natch.
>Total vehicle registrations or fatalities are worthless. Because you
>can let your Harlie sit idle and only ride it 500 miles per year.

It is also far more dangerous to be walking down a mined road and exposed to
snipers than filing papers in the general's office but we were looking at all
troops stationed in iraq. If you want to compare apples to apples then miles
driven is equivalent to time spent on patrol, not time spent in Iraq.

>
>>That;s backwards. The Bush Administration didn't want to deal with any of the
>>terrorist information that was made available to them by the outgoing Clinton
>>administration.
>
>I wasn't aware presidents kept their own notes separate from the CIA.
>You'd figure the US makes that kind of stuff available to all
>administrations.

Good one. I said "administration".
>
>>The real puke part is how the GOP, having come up empty handed after wasting 60
>>million dollars investigating the Clintons took it really personal and snagged
>>him on his affair.
>
>Not really. Questionable deals in Whitewater and pork bellies,
>confidants that suddenly "commit suicide" mid-investigation and
>bombing aspirin factories with $200 million worth of Tomahawks to
>divert attention from your domestic squabbles. All kindsa shady ***
>around the Clintons. Just none of it provable beyond a reasonable
>doubt.

Next thing you'll be accusing Clinton of driving the boat that attacked the USS
Cole.
>
>Al Capone got nailed for tax evasion. You gonna tell me they fucked
>over an innocent person? Don't like special prosecutors breathing down
>your neck? Don't play smart with the law!
>

Lol. You mean like what Delay has been indicted for?


>>Sez the world.
>
>Which world is that? The one that lobs allegations of imperialism
>after destorying the entire 3rd world with their colonialism? The
>nations who up until yesterday were mired in totalitarianism and
>communism? Who still have yet to end their tribal bloodsheds and
>desecrations of human rights?

Is this more sarcasm? Name a few countries that don't think harshly of the US
for invading Iraq. The only one I can think of is Israel.
>

>>No, it's a Bush thing. Gold stars for the families of those who've died
>>serving under him for his, as you referred to it, " Iraq folly."
>
>Don't like death? Don't join the military! Cause umm.... that's it's
>primary purpose. Killing.

You've been filling your head with silly movies. People don't join the military
for the purose of killing people..

>
>You remind me of all those idiots screaming for an AIDS cure. Don't
>like AIDS? Don't go having unprotected sex with questionable people.

You remind me of the idiots who look at AIDS and can't connect the dots. Some
day AIDs or a disease of this nature will be air born contagious like influenza.

>
>When will you liberals finally wake the *** up and learn that you CAN
>take control of your lives and destinies simply by growing a mansack!
>

On the contrary, standing up against the oil, tobacco, and gun industry does
require balls.


>>What date was that vote on?
>
>You're surprisingly uninformed. So tell me, did Bush just declare
>martial law and invade Iraq without Congressional approval?

Please cite the date of the vote. Once you have committed to that we can examine
the sequence of events that occurred after that vote before Bush invaded.

>
>>What are you talking about? Kerry went to Vietnam and saw live combat..
>
>So did the photojournalists sporting their trusty Nikons. Doesn't mean
>they fought like dogs.

Just shot yourself in the foot. Live combat Photojournalists are brave men.
They get killed too.


>>It was because at the time of the vote there was concern that Iraq was harboring
>>weapons of mass destruction.
>
>Ah... so it's ok for one dingledong to make a mistake erring on the
>side of caution but not another?
>
The dingledong is the one who can't reevaluate a situation that has changed.

>And if Bush had done nothing at all and another terrorist visited our
>shores you'd be the first in line crying about his traitorous
>inaction.
>

Keep telling yourself that.

>> with the way that Bush utterly abused this trust in the months to come.
>
>You mean like how Clinton lied to the American people after looking
>them square in the eye? Like how he bombed a pill factory to appear
>tough?
>

So are you trying to compare Clinton's mistakes to Bush's? Fine, why don't you
start off with the number of American casualties of the "pill factory" attack
versus Iraq invasion. In particular, you said you are only interested in
American deaths. Now I'm sure you won't try something really lame like claim
Clinton was responsible for 9/11, right? You are getting so predictable I
figured I'd just jump ahead a few .,

>>Every special interest group wants to do what's best for their constituents but
>>I think that giving gays some extra protection is a lot less harmful than
>>invading another country on false pretenses.
>
>You would think that. But our Constitution says "equal" not "more
>equal" or "more or less equal".
>

Tell that to the religious right.

>I for on think that stuff that occurs on my turf, no matter how
>trivial is a lot more important than serious *** happening thousands
>of miles away that ultimately cannot affect us much.
>
>And prosecuting one crime because the victim is part of a special
>interest group more severely than another because the victim happened
>to be a whitebread is not "fair" for any definition of. Now if you
>want to lock them all away and throw away the key, that's certainly ok
>in my book.
>
>>Who is HCL? What is their web site?
>
>http://www.handguncontrol.org/
>
>"There is no constitutional right to defend yourself"
>
>Is it any wonder you lefties are stuck whining about your irrelevance
>these days?

I saw the Brady Campaign to end gun violence. Did Brady leave the GOP?.
>
>>Ha. They are seeing through the deception that got us into this war. They are
>>seeing the damage loyalty to party rather than principles is causing.
>
>Cool. That means Bush is set up to be the fall guy and a new
>Republican to take his place.
>
Let's go with this scenario.... Now who was he set up by?



.

Loading