You may have f*cked a few women
“You may have f*cked a few women… ..but, I f*cked the entire country!!”
(George W. Bush & Bill Clinton)
picture: dunno source, via our lolcat builder. lol caption: charlajw
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous How baby planes are made | RAINBOW BRITE Next »
» 149 comments
-
Recent Comments
EddiePscetti on TRAIN ORIGAMI Rando the Filthiest,… on WOOPS Rando the Filthiest,… on WOOPS mabsba on WOOPS Nucky, the Official … on WOOPS Aremis on WOOPS keithybabes on WOOPS Endarkened on Let’s imagine the look o… The Steve on WOOPS Endarkened on Let’s imagine the look o… 
Cheezburger Network Blog
Bush might have fucked the country (in your opinion) but Clinton made sure the pants were down.
More Bush Derangement Syndrome… Yawn. Standard libtardedness.
I’m sorry, Steve, but where is the proof that Bush has made this country safer than it would’ve been with out him?
I’m not trying to be a “libtard”… I’m a libertarian, in fact. To me, it is evident that he has maintained or worsened the situation by continuing the War on Drugs, empowering and protecting corporations, giving subsidies instead of allowing the market to work things out.
I’m not saying we should impeach him, but we should have done much better.
You realize, of course, that Obama is about half as qualified as Bush wa in 2000?
lol… Where did I say that I want Obama to become president? And what do qualifications have to do with anything? Honestly, from what I understand, the President asks for solutions from his staff and he chooses the best ones. That’s all he does. The skills required are great foresight and the ability to see through BS.
Danny, that is one the most politically astute statements I have seen on this site. Thanks for bring some type of sophistication to the conversation.
The thing is, this site isn’t about sophistication, it’s about making fun of politics. So the people who make the pics are going to use their personal view points to choose what to make fun of. I see that making a comment like “More Bush Derangement Syndrome… Yawn. Standard libtardedness.” to be less than constructive and frankly, if you don’t like the political statement, make your own pic with your own views. Seriously, I’ve laughed at the ones that made fun of the candidate I support, it’s not that big of a deal. If you are tired of “liberals” making fun of “conservatives,” maybe you should explore a different site. If you’re looking for sophistication, you should definitely be looking elsewhere.
I agree. You’re here for laughs, not a political debate. If you’ve got something to say, I personally suggest heading off to your local office and saying your peice there where it matters.
(I know I spelled ‘piece’ incorrectly, but this text window wont wrap text properly)
Hi Skaadi,
I appreciate your point and agree with trying to inject humor whenever possible. However, Danny has been trying to bring some civility to some of our less civil contributors. I applaud his efforts. I do try to avoid being serious on this site, but when I see something that make sense and is responsible, I say so. I am sorry if my being positive about something someone else said offends you. I am amazed that it offended you to the point you feel the need to write about it, but I apologize. Note that I have not complained really about the fact that people make comments I disagree with, except to explain a few things here and there. I never said I was tired of anything. I just agree with the fact that the President does not really do that much. When he does well he is given way too much credit and when he does poorly he is blamed way too much. And that is for any president. At any rate, I think you and I can agree that this site has morphed into something much larger than making fun of politics. The humor of the pics and captions has more often than not been a catalyst for serious conversation. These conversations are sometimes valuable for people contributing to the discussion. Your comment is basically that the conversation should not be going on. I do not understand it, but I respect your right to say so. I will say though, that it will not stop me from speaking up and I would doubt that it will stop anyone else.
If you don’t like criticism of the pictures, then maybe you shouldn’t read the comments.
You realize the irony of this statement… right?
These pictures are all over a year old.. And Evil Pundit has been vanquished. Quit the year later post stalking.
Gosh, do you remember back in the days when people actually agreed with you? Wasn’t that cool, making fun of liberals when everyone was cheering you on? Doesn’t it suck now that everyone with an IQ over 60 has abandoned the Good Ship BushCo, and you are left alone on a sinking failboat with your eyes shut and your ears plugged yelling, “LALALA the boat isn’t sinking LALALA?”
So sad being the last of a dying breed, isn’t it?
I agree with Steve and disagree with your statement, Seth.
Got it. You think all liberals are retarded and Bush is teh AWESOME! Thanks for sharing. You do realize that you are in a small and shrinking minority, right? Very, very few people agree with you. Maybe if you all yell a little louder and froth at the mouth a little more, you will win back some converts.
See ya at the polls, losers!
I Don’t think I need to do any yelling or frothing. You seem to be doing plenty of that. I will just stick to simply explaining things in a calm manner while discussing differing views politely in order to spread my political choices.
I guess you can keep doing what your doing and I’ll keep doing what I’m doing. In the end we’ll see who comes across as more reasonable and intelligent.
You support a criminal traitor. That can hardly be considered reasonable. If you make less than a million per year, you support a man who views you as livestock, to be used however he and his cronies like. That can hardly be considered intelligent.
Do you dispute my claims that Bush has the lowest approval rating ever? Do you dispute that Obama is 15 points up in the polls already? Maybe you don’t like it when I use the same tactics you and your ilk use in political discussions? You’d perhaps prefer if we all sat back politely and listened attentively as your kind hurl insults? Sorry, that’s not going to happen. Times are changing.
Now, if you were a true conservative, I’d respect you. But by the fact that you support Bush I know you aren’t any kind of real conservative. Real conservatives deserted Bush long ago.
Your first paragraph really has nothing to reply to since it is really nothing more than your personal bias. As far as you second goes, I really do not care one whit about polls. I do not sway based on popular opinion. I form my views based on what I believe and what I see. I am not sure you really know what my “kind” is. I don’t believe we have ever actually met, nor had a real discussion.
Your kind is the kind that agrees with a person who supports criminal traitors and uses the word ‘libtard,’ and then goes on to make claims of reasonableness and intelligence.
Yes, ‘libtard’ is a reasonable and intelligent characterization of those who disagree with you, and it is perfectly reasonable to agree with the use of such a word, and then turn around and complain about how unreasonable others are being for daring to fight back.
That’s what ‘your kind’ are chump, sad sack losers who can dish it out but cqan’t take it.
It’s ‘reasonability’. Both are correct, but reasonableness sounds much less educated.
He did not use the word ‘libtard’ at all in his discussion, either. STEVE did.
So calm down. Everything’ll be alright, until the elections.
He agreed with Steve, dimwit, and then proceeded to call me on the carpet for being unreasonable. So, he agrees with a man who uses the word ‘libtard’ but I am the one who is being unreasonable. Typical of whiny, girly republicans who can dish it out but squeal like little piggies when anyone fights back.
And I’ll be here come the elections to shove those words back down your throat, TheLarrikan. I’ll make sure you remember calling this one for the republicans, and I’ll make sure to point out not only that you lost, but how badly you lost. See ya then, repug!
I’m not calling it for the Repubs. I’m simply saying that, when the elections come, we’re all doomed. God help us all.
I’ve said it before – we’ve two bad candidates running. We’re not going to have a ‘good’ president.
Looks like we have another crotchwaffle on our hands. Seth, buddy, (opens beer, hand it to Seth) relax friend. We are on the same side. We both want a great country. We may disagree on how to get there, but we can discuss these ideas in a calm way. Yes, there are many libtards out there, and you as a [good] liberal may be able to help them with there arguments. A libtard would say that Bush f*cked the entire country. A liberal would spell out seasoned arguments as to what Bush has done wrong. In my honest and probably worthless opinion, any extreme is bad. Extreme Islam=fail, extreme conservative=fail, and extreme liberal=fail. Now, calling Bush a bad President can be debated in an honest and intelligent way. Calling him a criminal traitor, when unproven and unsubstantiated, is an extreme. Just because he does things you do not agree with, does not make him a criminal or a traitor. Clinton lied under oath. That does not make him a traitor, just a felon. But notice that I am not spouting some silly venomous rant against those that supported Clinton. Are you getting an idea of how this works? We can get along and, preferably together, we can get the country going in the right direction. In almost all cases, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
I’m hoping this is in reference to Kinson.
It’s kinda scary how close his random avatar is to Seth’s.
seth, dear, as much as i despise right-wing bush worshippers, your inflammatory bullshit makes me ashamed ov being ‘on your side’.
Sorry, Seth. You have no argument. Though I would call myself a “real conservative”, many would disagree. “Real” has become a vague and self-serving adjective.
On the other hand, I think Bush has several faults, though I didn’t expect any better from him. Now, if he could bring our government back to more mobile size, then I could call him a conservative. As far as I’m concerned, he is not.
Yeah, okay, because you say that I have no argument, I must not have any argument, even though you don’t rebut anything I’ve said. On the other hand, you agree that Bush isn’t a conservative. Huh? Please try to keep your arguments at least internally self consistent.
You don’t have any arguements to rebut.
Okay, Kinson, you keep telling yourself that. Maybe the other four repugs here believe you, but sane rational people see that I do indeed have an argument, and that you have nothing but “Nuh uh! IS NOT!” If I were you, I’d just shut up now rather than digging yourself in deeper, you are only making yourself look worse and worse.
Okay, fine… I’ll look at it point-by-point:
______
You support a criminal traitor. That can hardly be considered reasonable. If you make less than a million per year, you support a man who views you as livestock, to be used however he and his cronies like. That can hardly be considered intelligent.
______
This is your opinion. He hasn’t been tried for any crimes. You can believe he is a traitor, but it’s your speculation based on what you’ve seen and heard. There’s nothing to rebut here. I can’t say that I disagree with all of it, but it’s nothing to base an argument on.
______
Do you dispute my claims that Bush has the lowest approval rating ever?
______
When did you claim this previously? Okay, I’ll let this one slide and we’ll just say that you said so right now. So, then, what are you trying to say?
_____
Do you dispute that Obama is 15 points up in the polls already?
_____
“The polls” is very vague. Some polls have McCain up, some have Obama up. I don’t really give a crap about either one. So, again, what is your argument?
_____
Maybe you don’t like it when I use the same tactics you and your ilk use in political discussions?
_____
Okay, now you are associating Kinson with extreme and/or fundamental, right-wing conservatives. Don’t be such a whiner! People argue terribly on the internet… cry me a river. Simply, just stop making stupid associations.
Is this your argument? “Maybe”?
_____
You’d perhaps prefer if we all sat back politely and listened attentively as your kind hurl insults? Sorry, that’s not going to happen. Times are changing.
_____
He didn’t say that. Whatever. Either way, you are being vague and making definitions out of opinions. “Times are changing”?
_____
Now, if you were a true conservative, I’d respect you. But by the fact that you support Bush I know you aren’t any kind of real conservative. Real conservatives deserted Bush long ago.
_____
All speculation and based on your own definition of a real conservative. I’m pretty sure that we don’t define conservatives as “those that have deserted Bush long ago”.
Really, where is your argument? Again, I’m not saying that I disagree on all points, but there is no argument. You are just stating your own opinions. So was it wrong of me to say that you had no argument, hmm?
My argument (for the simple minded, who need it explained) is that it was hypocritical in the extreme for Kinson to claim to be ‘reasonable and intelligent’ after agreeing with a person who used the word ‘libtard.’ The rest of that is just opinion, as you say.
It would have been much more intelligent to say that instead of all of that mushy opinion crap in between. Just like Occam’s razor, arguments should be stated as simply as possible in order to convey your message, just like Occam’s razor is applied to explanations for things. It makes you look like a blathering idiot, not the other way around.
Steve was the first to make a stupid insult by saying “libtard”, and Kinson said that he agreed, but you are the one saying the majority of the vile and immature things… at least by sheer volume.
Oh, and it took until your fourth post in that conversation to say that. So what were you doing before that? You have the right to be a frothing idiot, but don’t expect us not to point and laugh at you when you try to point and laugh at what you think is others being frothing idiots.
What I was doing before that was pissing people off. You want a real argument, I can do that too. But I play tit for tat, someone starts off a thread with the word ‘libtard’ and I am going to play the same game, just to see how good they are at it. Most of the time, I find out right away who the whiny babies are andand who the intelligent people are.
Hi! I’m Seth, I’m new here!
And you look like a libertarian. You’ll find that we agree on a lot of things, but the things we don’t agree on are going to REALLY piss you off. Sorry in avance. I’m a social anarchist, we’re like your evil twins to your individualist anarchism.
Like I said in my advice below, it’s impossible to piss me off. Especially on the internet. *shrugs*
And how the hell did you nest below where the comments are not supposed to nest! Are you some sort of l337 HAXOr or something?
+5 for using the word “ilk”!
Not all liberals are retarded.
But you are.
That’s the best you can do? Wow, that’s pathetic. Seriously, I was sitting here waiting for the illustrious Evil Pundit to show up so I could rip him a new one, and THAT is what you throw down with? Damn it, this isn’t even worth it, it’s like shooting retarded fish in a lolrus bucket.
Danny has already destroyed your silly rant, piece by piece.
Any further effort would be superfluous.
Check out today’s Gallup Poll for some fun!
No, he missed my point, which is that you can’t use the word ‘libtard’ or agree with someone who does, and then claim to be ‘reasonable and intelligent.’ I
And how did he destroy my rant? He just pointed out that it is opinion, which it is, and I agree. Mine and most of the country’s opinion. But he missed my argument completely.
You’ll really have to try harder than, it’s sad to watch you flounder helplessly like that, grasping at straws in the hope of salvaging a tiny shred of dignity.
Pretty full of yourself, aren’t you?
Danny is much smarter than you think you are.
Oh, and for the record, you didn’t state your point until one minute before I posted saying that you had no argument, which you hadn’t had up until that point.
__________________________________
Danny
June 25th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Sorry, Seth. You have no argument.
__________________________________
Seth
June 25th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Your kind is the kind that agrees with a person who supports criminal traitors and uses the word ‘libtard,’ and then goes on to make claims of reasonableness and intelligence.
__________________________________
That was the first place that you posted your “argument”, which you claimed to have before I said that you had no argument.
Just for the record…
+3 win to evil pundit
Uh-oh… You’ve summoned Evil Pundit! NOW you’re in trouble!
I wanted Evil Pundit here so I could demolish him, but it’s turning out that he’s just not much of a challenge. I wish I had some intelligent foes to argue with.
argue intelligently, and you might find some.
Indeed. mAlise for the win.
Ha ha yeah global warming is a myth- rush limbaugh is my god.
you do realize that you agree with someone who used the “word” “libtardeness”
It’s a good word, but you spelled it wrong.
Should be ‘libtardedness’.
Honestly any attempt to make fun of peoples names is pretty stupid, in my opinion. It makes people judge them without looking into their real beliefs. Ideologically, there are some good reasons for things that people know as inherently bad, such as communism or even liberalism. The hard part is seeing the implications of certain systems as they are implemented. Some characteristics are inherent, such as a lack of desire to do meaningful work in communism, and some are just due to crappy people, which can be just as random as disease. Just stick to the issues, if you please.
But, but I like calling their intelligence into question! It upsets them so much, because they assume they’re the clever ones.
Still, you have a point. But my mood varies — sometimes I’m serious, sometimes I’m just having fun. I also think tit-for-tat is a good rule — with all the false smears against Bush for being ’stupid’, it’s only fair to treay liberals the same way.
Not if you wish for it to stop. Of course, the “damage” we can do to such movements is minimal at best. It’s annoying as hell not getting the last slug in, but it’s important to give it a try now and again. Tit-for-tat sounds fun and makes you feel better, but it will not do anything to discontinue the terrible trend of fighting, in whatever forum it exists.
Oh, and I think both sides (really ALL sides, since there’s really never just two sides) deserve to be open for jokes. Really, there’s no limit as far as I’m concerned. It’s impossible to offend me. But going on record to say that something is true when it’s clearly false (like calling Obama a racist, muslim, muslim sympathizer, and not even an american citizen) is flat dishonest.
Whatever, like every other “evil” in this world, it is impossible to completely get rid of. Such is life.
I don’t think name-calling ever likely to stop. It’s just what humans do. However, it does annoy me a little when some people claim that one side is free from sin, and the other does all the nasty denigration.
As for Obama — I think the racism question is arguable because of his close association with a racist church. The rest, not so much.
In what alternate universe do people know liberalism is inherently bad? You realize you just wrote off a significant chunk of your countrymen, right? And how is categorically calling your opponents ‘inherently bad’ doing anything to raise the level of discourse here, as you seem to like to pretend you are doing?
Learn your history, son. Our country and both current parties owe their very existence to classical liberalism.
Stick to the issues indeed.
Classical liberalism has nothing to do with the current use of the word ‘liberalism’ in American politics.
I was talking about it to Evil Pundit, which he sees mostly as bad (I assume from his comments). That’s his opinion, and I was using it as an example, bot only to say that there are good reasons liberalism exists. They have good ideologies, particularly democracy. Democracy, in its essence, assures that every vote counts. It appeals to the little man, and not to huge bodies of people. This is most necessary at the state level.
Honestly, here’s a great piece of advice for reading comments on the internet:
Always (and I do mean always) take what people say as if they meant it in the least offensive way.
You can’t hear their voice. You can’t hear their tone. You can’t hear 85% of what they are saying (15% is not in the words you say). Assume the rest is lost in translation and always ask for clarification for what you don’t understand.
Just my two cents. It protects me from getting worked up over pretty much anything.
When I criticise ‘liberalism’ on this site, I’m using the modern American sense of the word. Classical liberalism such as that propounded by John Stuart Mill is an entirely different philosophy.
Just as the word ‘gay’ has changed in meaning over the last fifty years, so has the word ‘liberal’, at least in the sense it’s mostly used in the US.
‘Liberalism’ in that sense is pretty much ’soft leftism’. I’d prefer to use the word ‘leftism’, but I try to fit in with common usage for greater understandability, with the sacrifice of some precision.
That’s fine with me. And I understand about trying to speak others’ language. No biggie. What’s important is for people not to get so worked up and ask for a further definition of what they disagree with. Chances are that most people agree on many of the little issues. The only things that seem to change those are beliefs, which mostly stem from religion, it seems. People fail to see how alike we really are (and, sometimes, how different). I know that’s a paradox (or a contradiction , if you don’t believe it), but that’s what I see.
OH…. John Stuart Mill… the one who said the following?
I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.
*applauds* Thanks Danny, that was well said and much needed, regardless of political opinion.
I’ve been online since 1982 on CompuServe and GEnie. I hosted my own BBS in 1985. I know the difference between good intentions and poor choice of words, and a group of simian bullies who think they own a message board. What we have here is the latter, and what they do is drive off anyone on either side with half a brain. Most people who have the flame-proof hide to go toe to toe with them in insults don’t have the brains to make it look fun in the process. I’ve got both.
Please explain the ‘least offensive way’ to interpret the word ‘libtard,’ I’m dying to hear it.
Cry more, libtard.
Point out where I’m crying in the first place. I’d have to be crying to cry more. You guys are the ones with your pretty little panties in a twist, pal. “Oh noes! the big mean lib’rul is picken’ on me, waaaaaaaa! Make him stop!”
But at least you’re honest about being a dick, you make no effort to try to be reasonable or rational at all. Unlike some people who condone and defend attacks by one side, while calling out attacks by the other.
seth, please just shut the fuck up. you’re making all the intelligent liberals look bad by association. you have all the language skills ov a drunk at a NASCAR race, and coupled with the mysterious delusion you have that you’re winning some imaginary debate, you’re just about unbearable.
You shut the fuck up, you fake. You’re no liberal and you’ve shown no signs of intelligence. Chimps calling all liberals ‘libtards’: okay by you. Me doing the same thing: horrible! You know, I can do the same thing you’re doing: hey everyone, look at me, I’m a conservative and even I think Evil Pundit is a delusional cuntflap. Yeah, I can pretend to be something I’m not, too.
Hey, how about you shut the fuck up, mAlise? Yeah, it sounds mean spirited whe I say it, but SO intelligent when you do. You sound SO very liberal, too. I mean, no conservative would ever pretend to be a liberal to try to score a point.
Hey, how about you shut the fuck up, mAlise? Yeah, it sounds mean spirited whe I say it, but SO intelligent when you do. You sound SO very liberal, too. I mean, no conservative would ever pretend to be a liberal to try to score a point.
PROTIP: you may not want to exclusively defend conservatives using the word ‘libtard’ while using the word ‘fuck’ to attack a liberal, all the while pretending to BE a liberal. It makes you look like a hypocrite, a liar, and an asshole.
Hey, how about you shut the fuck up, mAlise? Yeah, it sounds mean spirited whe I say it, but SO intelligent when you do. You sound SO very liberal, too. I mean, no conservative would ever pretend to be a liberal to try to score a point.
PROTIP: When you defend conservatives who use the word ‘libtard’ and attack liberals by telling them to shut the fuck up, most people will assume you are conservative no matter what you claim to be. In the future, you may want to revise your strategy.
Look, Seth, this is what she said at another point of this thread:
mAlise
June 26th, 2008 at 8:49 am
seth, dear, as much as i despise right-wing bush worshippers, your inflammatory bullshit makes me ashamed ov being ‘on your side’.
So, either you believe that she is a liberal or you don’t. If you don’t, then you assume she’s a conservative just because she things that you aren’t arguing very well or representing your party well. Otherwise you are pretending to know that she is IN FACT a conservative in disguise, which makes you either paranoid, crazy, or correct. I’d argue slight (not completely terrible) paranoia. It’s common, and can be actually a good thing (in the right situations).
I’m going to have to agree with mAlise here, and I really don’t think anyone would claim that I have argued on the conservative side of any of the debates I’ve commented on. If you are offended by the term “libtard” (and don’t get me wrong I think it’s stupid and it lends nothing to any discussion) then going toe for toe as you put it isn’t going to “win” a debate it’s just going to make you look equally loud-mouthed and close-minded. It’s just the internet, you don’t know these people, calm down.
lol… I was born in 1985… but anyways.
So there was a little bit of baiting, also known as trolling. So what? That is not equivalent to being “a group of simian bullies who think they own a message board”. Insults are and always have been a waste of time. You honestly wasted your time trying to insult them instead of stating your argument outright. The least offensive way to react is to just shrug it off. The least offensive way to interpret “libtard” is “I think (hard-core) liberals make some terrible decisions, and, in what I’ve seen, have made my world worse on a daily basis.”
Honestly, why are you in so much pain over all of this?
I’m in no pain. I certainly don’t care what repugs think. I love the way you defend your side, “Oh, it’s just a little trolling, why get uptight?” But when I do the exact same thing, that’s suddenly a whole different ball of wax.
Why the double standard? Why is it okay to troll and insult liberal, but not conservatives? Why can you dish it out, but not take it?
That’s exactly what I said. I’m not defending sides. I told them to stop saying “libtard”-rooted words. But I also said that everybody can make fun as much as they want, but it does nothing to advance an argument. Both sides (all sides) can troll as much as they want. But I reserve the right to call them all idiots, and your right to call me an idiot for calling them idiots. It’s called freedom of speech, and I’m down with both sides having it. The intelligent people know the difference, and that’s all that matters.
Notice how I’m not making any assumptions about you, as opposed to all of your assumptions about me:
“Why can you dish it out, but not take it?”
Chill. Axe.
Oh, and I meant to say:
“Ideologically, there are some good reasons for things that SOME people know as inherently bad, such as communism or even liberalism.”
I had already used “some” in the sentence once, and I forgot to put it in again. My bad.
This whole thread just proves the adage: “Never wrestle a pig. You get dirty and the pig likes it.”
or “Never try to teach a Pig to sing—it wastes your time and annoys the pig” (W.C. Fields)
Instead of the usual Obama Derangement Syndrome of the standard conservatwitness? At least the criticisms against Bush have a basis in reality.
wow- question dodger.
wtf is wrong with bush’s teeth???????
BUY A TOOTHBRUSH WILL YA?
Indeed, you did. Much like Nixon, bu far, far, FAR worse. Bring on Jimmy Carter… err I mean Barack Obama!
At least I’d have this consolation if Obama wins: He’ll make Bush look good.
And what makes Bush- at all better than Obama?
Bush responded properly to a terrorist attack, and liberated two countries from tyranny. And the economy has grown rapidly on his watch.
Obama, on the other hand, doesn’t even know how many states there are. He’s a moron — the affirmative action candidate.
“And the economy has grown rapidly on his watch …”
Just thought I’d make sure I heard that correctly. Because the collapsing housing market, the skyrocketing price of EVERYTHING, the huge unemployment rate and the billions of dollars a day spent on the war didn’t hear you.
Try looking at the actual statistics, instead of the Democratic Party soundbites.
So why don’t you tell us about the 5.5% unemployment rate and how much we’re spending in Iraq? Or would that be “sound bites”?
What we are spending in Iraq is 1/4 of what the government spends every year on welfare and handouts. Look up the official budget reports yourself.
I went and looked it up. National defense is around 17% of the budget. Social Security is 22% of the budget, but that is funded separately. Medicare is 11%, and medicaid is 7%. Non defense discretionary spending takes up 20%, debt service is 9%, and other payments make up 14%.
What welfare and handouts were you talking about, exactly?
The ones in his head… or on FAKE news.
try living in real life, instead ov statistics.
Let’s look at this claim:
“Bush responded properly to a terrorist attack”
Bush gave up on finding the person responsible for the attack in favor of going after a country who didn’t attack us. He also exploited both his failure to uphold his promise to catch that person and invading the other country for political ends. This includes a nice November Surprise in 2004 in his favor. How is that “responding properly”?
“liberated two countries from tyranny”
Really? Iraq is a mess, al Queda is gaining strength, and the Taliban is taking over Afghanistan and is stronger than it was before 9/11. Is that your definition of liberation?
“the economy has grown rapidly on his watch”
If Bush is responsible for a growing economy, then isn’t he also responsible for when the economy is shrinking as it is now? Dow is down, consumer confidence is down, the only thing that is up is debt. And if a president is responsible for the economy, shouldn’t you be crediting Clinton for growing the Dow from less than 4 thousand to about 10 thousand?
“Obama, on the other hand, doesn’t even know how many states there are.”
You know for someone who complained about quoting McCain about 1000 years in Iraq (which he did say), you sure don’t mind taking Obama out of context. I suggest you try practicing what you preach, it would increase your credibility.
And in other news, today North Korea demolished its nuclear reactor.
Another win for the George Bush strategery against WMD-proliferating terrorist states.
And we should note that Bush is removing N. Korea from the list of bad bad bad evil countries. This is a bold move that shows other countries we are having difficulty with that there is a non-violent path to reconciliation. Bravo.
Just out of curiosity— Has anyone ever seen Obama eat pork ?
That’s one way he can prove he’s not Muslim…..
Now back to the show!!!
OMG! The USA LIBERATED TWO COUNTRIES?! Why didn’t we in Asia know about it at all? All we hear about are wars, wars, wars!
Well, you know, you guys just get the
propagandanews later than we do…Keep on smoking it, Mouthpiece….
Whatever, if you are arguing, then you have to have an argument! Right? Right??
One would hope. *sigh*
that’s the theory, but theories are often proven wrong.
Seth, for the record, while I disagree with many of your opinions as expressed here, you are all class dude. I mean that in all sincerity (in case it comes across as sarcasm). I wish more of us on any side of any political fence could maintain such dignity in a discourse.
Wow. Sarcasm about being sarcastic. That’s deep, man. You can’t nest sarcasm in sarcasm! That’s like… That’s like…….. a double negative!
Thank you. If there is a single place on the Internet more well known for it’s dignity in discourse than Pundit Kitchen, I’ve never heard of it. I truly feel welcome here, as if, at last, I am among kindred spirits. Huzzah!
Ok, let me just say that I consider myself a moderate Democrat and while I don’t necessarily agree with everything Danny said, he definitely said it in a much more intelligent and convincing way than Seth. To me, Seth sounds like an ignorant ass. I wish more people could argue politics in a sensible and mature manner.
Sorry I was out of the house throwing money away like a typical capitalist pig. I would just like to repeat the statement that I agreed with
“More Bush Derangement Syndrome… Yawn. Standard libtardedness.”
This statement was made towards the epidemic of Bush hate that is in near every 5th meme on this board. It is no longer funny. I am not, actually, a full out Bush supporter, nor do I feel that all left wingers are “libtarded”. Most of my family are liberal and I discuss politics with them quite often.
Seth you need a thicker skin much like you say we need. You are coming off as someone who is about to snap. Calm down. It is just the interwebs.
There’s a reason for all that hate, and obviously a significant number of people get a significant amount of enjoyment from bashing Bush. If you don’t, go do something else with your time.
But this is standard conservative mob tactics, sling mud and insults and then cry foul when then opposing side returns fire. I forgot, liberals are supposed to be pansy pushovers who just lay back and take it when people insult us. Nice how that works, you insult us, we respond in kind, and you call us unreasonable.
Bush is smiling cuz he actually finished a complete sentence. Clinton is smiling cuz he got a knob polish in the White House.
I’m kinda getting tired of the (insert random politician here) hate lol. I thought this was a humor site, not a bash the (insert random politician here) site. I don’t care who they’re bashing, just sick of it….Make funny things plz.
the trouble is, bashing politicians is humourous.
Hi Guys, I’m a Brit fron the good ol’ UK. You remember us? Of course you do , we’re the nation who elected Dubyas’ puppy dog Tony. We’re also the nation who now live in fear of terrorist bombs just like you do from an enemy we should have left sleeping by the fireside, an enemy that despite ‘The war on terror’ aka ‘lets steal their oil’ we have zero chance of ever winning.
Now, I’ve read through this thread with interest and to be honest I’m stunned that given Bush has long been exposed for the low life moron he’s always been, that irrespective of personal politics, anyone could be dumb enough to offer personal support for him. The world is suffering because of this fool and the sooner he’s gone the better. whether Obama or McCain are the next president is totally immaterial because the USA needs a leader capable of independent thought and either of those two qualify.
I agree with the previous post that this site should be fun and being reminded of a piece of crap who should have stood on the gallows INSTEAD of Saddam for crimes against humanity, I would have really enjoyed.
Seth, you appear to be the only other contributor to this thread with an IQ larger than their collar size, however, engaging in a battle of wits with the woefully unarmed is a thankless task.
Having differing views means that the other person has a low IQ. Ah, I see. Is this how all left leaning individuals see things or just the ones represented on this page?
left leaning individuals????????
I should never read the comments for this site again… this bull makes me sick…
How can anyone POSSIBLY think that the last 8 years have benefited our country in any way???? how can someone live so blindly to see that this man seriously fucked up this country?
where the hell do you live that you do not see the effects of this administration? where I live, unemployment is rampant, we have HUMONGOUS rates of foreclosure, our schools budgets have been slashed DRASTICALLY, my university just had to CUT 27 MAJORS because of these cuts, and the price of gas is $4.20
Seriously, if this administration has been so good to you, tell me PLEASE where the hell do you live?
Wow. Such anger. Calm down Dani. Where do you live? It makes no difference. I am just curious.
Where I live, there is actually a lack of employees. We have trouble filling vacancies from dishwashers to IT professionals.
The forclosures are high. But it is not fair to blame the Bush administration, an executive office, for the failure of the Congress to regulate the mortgage companies that practiced the predatory lending practices that are leading to the foreclosures.
School districts, on average, receive very little money from the Federal government. Somewhere around 2% of their operating budget. Most school funding comes from local governments and the taxes they raise. That is why areas with a low tax base tend to have poorer schools. So again, one cannot fairly blame Bushie for this problem.
I am sorry that your University had to cut 27 majors. But again, unless you are going to some Federally funded university, such as the college of the Department of Agriculture or the National Defense University, there is no connection between the Bush administration and the fact that your college is having budget issues.
The price of gas can, I think, be partly blamed on the Bush administration. However, there are several other reasons: Lack of investment in alternative fuels; lack of building new refineries; rampant overspeculation of commodities; resistance from Democrats to drill for new oil, etc. The point being that, yes the Bushies probably play a role, but there is plenty of blame to go around for that one.
Overall, I would have to say that your arguments are less than well thought out. There are some good arguments against Bush, but these are not the ones. The concern I have is that I do not feel that the two candidates we are faced with provide us with the leadership we need. Kinda makes me sad.
The enemy sleeping by the fireside was never truly sleeping. He was active in Clinton’s presidency, and was even offered to him by Sudan for freaking _crackers_! That’s where the disappointment should lie.
It is not so much that most of us Republicans declare open support for Bush, because he is certainly no Reagan, Lincoln, or Thatcher for that matter, we just cannot see how Kerry or (God helps us) Gore would have been any better. Does that make more sense? We yanks are kind of stuck with candidates on both sides who quite often=fail. Does that answer your question? I hope it does.
I appreciate your willingness to provide your opinion from across the pond. Not that it matters one bit. Last I checked we fully rejected British wisdom around 1776. Then, to show that there are no hard feelings, we bailed you out of a couple of world wars. That’s the type of thing that makes us allies. We became allied most strongly during WWII when, if you remember, some smart British folks thought it would be a good idea to let a sleeping enemy invade poland and annex Austria. I am glad that you actually admit that you think that was the right course of action. I am also glad to see that Ostriches have finally been introduced to England. However, sticking your head in the sand=fail. When we want some British ass to give his opinion on American politics, we will colonize the country and ask for it. I understand that British politics has become something of a bore lately, what with not mattering that much and all, but as my ancestors before me would have agreed with me when I say butt out.
Wow, I can’t imagine why people in other countries think we’re arrogant and obnoxious…
lol… No kidding.
Please note that the message was directed at someone already showing arrogance and being obnoxious by sticking their bum where it doesn’t belong. I refrained from making any comments until then. AND, I also answered the question. Even though it was put forward in a condescending way filled with myriad assumptions and opinions stated as fact.
Yes, that is true. However responding to an obnoxious a** by being an obnoxious a** gets nothing done. Here are the issues I have with your post:
1. “Last I checked we fully rejected British wisdom around 1776.” Well, if it weren’t for the fact that we got help from the French and the British had other things on their minds that were a bit more important that some uppity colonists we might not have been so successful with that.
2. “some smart British folks thought it would be a good idea to let a sleeping enemy invade poland and annex Austria.” And so did the United States. We happily ignored what was going on in Europe even longer than the British and it wasn’t until Pearl Harbor attacked that we decided to get involved.
3. “When we want some British ass to give his opinion on American politics, we will colonize the country and ask for it.” I think we’ve invaded enough countries without success for now, thank you very much.
Finally, Chris’ country was (and still is, do you guys still have troops there?) involved with the Iraq war and our strongest supporters. He as a citizen of the U.K. has as much right to make a comment on said war as we do. Just like he has the right to state his opinion on the totally free website that lets you make comments. To be honest, I’ve heard a lot more insulting things (and many directed at me personally, not just my country) on this website than Chris’ rant. I’ll say it again, it’s the internet people, you don’t know anyone here, calm down and get on with your lives.
Meant to say “the Pearl Harbor attack” not to imply that Pearl Harbor attacked us. And also, I hit some button when I tried to post this the first time and my comment went away, so if I double posted, I’m sorry. Must learn to slow down…
1. Did we win or did the British? We did. I appreciate the aid of the French and say thanks whenever I meet a French person. But we won. You have no point here. I appreciate that you need to tell yourself that this country has never done anything good. But we did. And we continue to do some good things. Some things could improve, and I would gladly work with you on them. But as much as we need to identify what needs changing, we also need to identify what “ain’t broke.”
2. The sleeping enemy in question was not in our back yard at the time. And it was not the US taking the lead on the issue. It was the British. The British were the only power in the region at the time that had the strength to resist. They chose not to, so we had no action to support. We were providing pilots and supplies to the British far before we officially entered the war. Roosevelt wanted a way in that would silence the seperatists and he got it with Pearl Harbor. No matter who wins this point, it is idiotic to say that we should have let a sleeping enemy lie. simply idiotic. Since your point is that they did it, it was wrong, and we did it too, I assume that you agree it was wrong and and was wrong in the case of Osama bin Badguy. I appreciate your support for my point, even if you think you were not supporting it. Of course, I expect just that kind of drivel from someone who thinks their country is the root of the world’s evils. Trust me the “We were doing it wrong too” argument does not excuse the fact that it was wrong.
3. We are succeeding. I am not sure if you noticed that the war has steadily been becoming less of an issue by the day. Soldier deaths are way down, civilian deaths are way down, the Iragi security forces are continuing to come on line and take over what had been done by our men and women. I know you do not want it to be true, but those are the facts. However, my main point is that we do not want their opinion and that if we ever did, we would let them know. I cannot see that ever happening. Especially us ever asking some weak-willed Brit who posts to Punditkitchen.
4. Accoriding to the TelegraphUK, the country still maintains around 3k soldiers in Iraq. I appreciate their support. They are still engaged in Afghanistan in a much larger way. I did not question his opinion of the war in any way. I welcome his comments on HIS country’s involvement in the war. However, every one of my comments was directed at his criticism of Bush and comments on American politics. Wanna have a voice? Become a citizen. I would welcome him with open arms, cook him some decent food, and we can have a real discussion on politics. I’ll even buy him a beer. Until then, he needs to butt out.
I notice that no one has commented on the answer to his question that I opened the message with. I was hoping someone would have something to say about that. I think that point, by far, is the more interesting of all the points I made.
You attacked Steve for being obnoxious, but you didn’t attack Chris — even though he was the first to be obnoxious.
Your double standards are showing.
Chris, you and all Brits are very welcome here. Just keep in mind that a large portion of the American populace is descended from the Border Scots. Need I say more?
“Seth, you appear to be the only other contributor to this thread with an IQ larger than their collar size…”
Is that in American units or in metric?
either way, it can’t possibly be true.
Somehow, it is at least halfway true in these people’s minds. From what I understand, an IQ less than 100 implies retardation. I could certainly be wrong, and I don’t care too much to look it up. Though these people are wrong in their assumptions, I won’t begin to accuse them of having an IQ less than the length of their weiners (in inches, of course). They’d probably use that to say that women are idiots… lol.
Well, Danny, though you are wrong in your assumptions, and a blatant hypocrite who feels justified in insulting others, I won’t begin to accuse you of having small penis. I won’t claim that you are putting on a fake front of civility while slipping in the insults when you think you can get away with it. I mean, saying those kind of things would just be mean and hurtful, and we’re above that, aren’t we?
Where have I insulted people? Where? Where have I made assumptions? Show me!
Oh, and I DO have a small penis! So does the rest of 70% of guys out there! Who cares? It still does it’s job (I’m having a child in a couple of months), and my wife is happy.
And I AM civil. Thanks again for proving my point that you are the one making accusations (saying that I’m not civil and that I’m insulting people).
Why are you seemingly so angry (not an assumption, I’m stating how it seems, just to be clear)?
But Danny, I never made any accusations, now did I? I specifically SAID I wasn’t making any accusations, why ever don’t you believe me? I mean, I completely believed you when you said, “I won’t begin to accuse them of having an IQ less than the size of their weiners.” And thanks to your sage advice, I knew that when you said, “These people are wrong in their assumptions” what you really meant was, “Although we have different assumptions, and I disagree with yours, I would never just say that the basis of your beliefs is completely incorrect without backing that up.”
I’m seeming angry because there is a double standard on this board, where conservatives feel free to insult and ridicule liberals, while whining about civility when it happens to them. I want to show them what they are doing. I’m just doing my part to educate, as are you.
Looking forward to seeing reprimand the conservatives when they insult and ridicule others. I’m sure you’ll be doing it with as much force and frequency as you are with me. After all, you are completely unbiased and fair, right?
“I mean, I completely believed you when you said, “I won’t begin to accuse them of having an IQ less than the size of their weiners.””
I was making a joke about when Chris said:
“Seth, you appear to be the only other contributor to this thread with an IQ larger than their collar size…”
I didn’t actually say that to them, I said that I won’t begin to. I was saying that I wasn’t serious.
And you never said that you weren’t making accusations. In fact, you admitted to trolling. I’ve only tried to argue with presented facts, and this can be backed up.
When I said:
“These people are wrong in their assumptions.”
What I meant was that they are wrong to assume that anybody on this discussion board has an IQ less than their collar size. So, again, you should ask for clarification before you start trying to slay people for what you interpreted as trolling.
Oh, and you can fight all you want, but I don’t think you will bring peace with more violence. Even if it’s just to show them how stupid their own methods are.
You may be surprised to know that there are, in fact, people on this earth (and even on this site) that are unbiased and fair. I’d like to say that I’m one of them, but you wouldn’t believe that anyways (after arguing for this long, I think I am safe in this, which is my first assumption).
Okay, if you say you didn’t mean to be insulting, I’ll accept that. As to whether you are fair, that remains to be seen. As for unbiased, please, you only sound silly when you claim to be unbiased. No one is unbiased, it isn’t possible. Even if you strive to be unbiased in your language, your choice of topics to converse about shows your bias.
Also, words and violence are different things. Words can’t hurt anyone unless they let them. You can’t ‘fight’ with words, because you can’t hurt anyone unless they choose to be hurt.
“No one is unbiased, it isn’t possible.”
You are getting back to opinions. Yes, people have beliefs, but they can be unbiased. In fact, when it comes to rules and procedures, I prefer to be somewhat of a machine and do things to the letter. I like common sense when it’s within my power to enforce, but not if it’s my job to follow process.
For judges in this country, I’d hope that being unbiased isn’t an impossibility, at least at a practical level.
“As to whether you are fair, that remains to be seen.”
Okay, can you show me where I was being seriously unfair? As in, I meant it not as a joke.
“Even if you strive to be unbiased in your language, your choice of topics to converse about shows your bias.”
Just because people have opinions and beliefs does not mean that they are biased. Here’s a couple of definitions:
bi·as (bs)
n.
1.
a. A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment.
b. An unfair act or policy stemming from prejudice.
2. A statistical sampling or testing error caused by systematically favoring some outcomes over others.
So, my judgment must be impaired, or I must be unfair, or I must ignore information in order to favor an outcome. Is my judgment impaired? That’s your opinion. Am I unfair? You said it remains to be seen that I’m fair, but you didn’t say that I’m unfair. And have I ignored information? I would argue that I haven’t. Besides, I agree that Bush has been far from a great president, and several of your other points.
And you are correct: words and violence are different things. It was more of a metaphor. By you trolling, you will prove very little to those that you annoy. They see it as justified just as you do. It’s most likely that both sides will perpetuate the “violence” just to prove a point to the other side and try to show how mean the other side is.
Ummm… Maybe you should think about increasing the dose of your medication?
TMI dude, TMI
Interesting stuff.
Steve is just simply the kind of loud-mouthed zero responsible for the Americans being largely despised around the world. You guys really ought to invent a ‘logans run’ scenario for fools like that, you’ll be the richer for it.
I do however find his comments about the various wars quite fascinating.
The allies have lost dozens of troops in Iraq due solely to American ‘friendly fire’, aka not being able to hit a cows ass with a banjo. I could go on and on and on and on but my name isn’t Steve
Interesting stuff.
Steve is just simply the kind of loud-mouthed zero responsible for the Americans being largely despised around the world. You guys really ought to invent a ‘logans run’ scenario for fools like that, you’ll be the richer for it.
I do however find his comments about the various wars quite fascinating.
The allies have lost dozens of troops in Iraq due solely to American ‘friendly fire’, aka not being able to hit a cows ass with a banjo. I could go on and on and on and on but my name isn’t Steve
And, on behalf of the Steves of the world, we are all thankful that you do not tarnish the name. Just as I am thankful that as a Brit, you do not tarnish Americans. I would point out that nothing I wrote was done in a loud way. I see that you are living up to your idiocy by asserting that anyone disagreeing with your point of view should be ejected from the country. Nice. I am glad you find my points fascinating, and appreciate your not being so thickskulled as to diagree with them. Lastly, I believe that the issue with friendly fire is that we are all to skilled at hitting our targets, whether they bey cows or, unfortunately, an ally. I may be a fool, but at least I am an American fool. I may be arrogant, but at least, as an American, I can justify it. When Britain every takes the lead on anything, I’ll be sure to keep you in mind.
britain has already taken the lead on not being a nation ov douchebags (albeit by a fairly narrow margin).
they’ve also been in the lead in terms ov culture and entertainment* for pretty much ever.
*as opposed to america, at least; i say nothing as opposed to the rest ov the world.
British takes the lead on culture and entertainment? When did Hollywood move to the UK? Even India (Bollywood) has more of an influence on culture and entertainment. When does a fashion designer hold major premiers in London? Some time after it premiers in Paris and New York. You are mental. The last time the UK led anything except in currency value none of us were born.
Hello ladies and Gentleman Chris….
I’d just like to agree with Chris here, your a topman for having the balls to speak your mind infront of Ameri-tards, as i am suprised to see that you are still posting here and have not been killed for disagreeing to the all mighty and all knowing ameri-tards!
Friendly fire….ever seen that video of the ameri-tard plane that totally wipes a British convoy out? Those pilots were so stupid they didnt see the huge orange ‘please dont shoot me Mr american’ markers on the roofs of the vehicles. Secondly, was there a hint of a hill-billy accent in there? or do you all talk like you’ve got Saddams hairy balls in your mouth?
So as my opinion…i think George dubya Bush is a fucking moron in all fairness as he is just an oil stealing, ally killing tool =) From my point of view he has done a piss-poor job in Iraq and Afghanistan as all he has done so far is kill your troops *also highly respected, well mainly* and kill our troops and a bunch of people who managed just fine before you turned up and took a great big hot dump on them =)
Kindest Regards,
James
Yes he has huge cajones for speaking his mind (on the Internet) in front of (those who have saved Britain in two world wars) Ameritards. This is not about Dubya, I can take him or leave him. But, in all fairness, he has not pulled the trigger on anyone. It is those kinds of leaps and bounds that expose you for the dumbass, kool-aid drinking git you are.
“Huge cajones” what does having huge BOXES to do with anything? Is he moving?
OH MY GOD. CAN PEOPLE JUST LOL AND GET ON WITH IT???!!
Say and think what you want, at least Bush never tried to rape anyone like Bill did.
http://www.amazon.com/Target-Caught-Crosshairs-Hillary-Clinton/dp/0974670162/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214770466&sr=8-1
I blame Oprah.
Great caption! Vote for McBush if you want 4 more years of:
Record deficits
Record job losses
Record number of uninsured
Record number living in extreme poverty
Record gas prices
Record number of wars
This site is for Humor, Geeze! I think you guys are all being a little serius for a comedic website! I am an independant, so I’m not agreeing with seth or steve. But every one needs to lighten up a little, god. I came here for relaxation not politcal debate!
mr hammer man, you is on site will find both funny and intellgant thoughts on polotiks, and stupids, lots and lots of stupids.
I agree with BB