Be the worst president of the States
Be the worst president of the States, invest in war and in destroying other countries and you’ll be okay..
But if you invest in you own country, you’re a communist?
WTF!?
(Barack Obama)
Picture by: dunno source. Caption by: Marts via Advanced Lol Builder
You May Like:
So true.
Be the worst president of the States
Obama’s got that distinction wrapped up. He’s even worse than Carter was.
invest in war and in destroying other countries
Like trying to destroy Honduras by trying to place a Chavez puppet commie back in power?
George W. Bush is by far the worst president the U.S. has ever had.
The Honduran president was elected by the people in a democratic election. I can see why a fascist coup on behalf of the Honduran financial elites would have more appeal to a wingnut.
Coming from someone called Nailin Palin. You are a puppet of the media my friend.
Maybe he just thinks Palin is hot.
I’d rather nail McCain’s daughter myself, that girl is HAWT.
seconded
Nail, yes.
Date? Dear gods no. You know who her dad is right? :p
maybe if he stopped destroying the middle class, i might have a shred of respect for him.
Not related at all. We’re talking about f*cking Mccain’s daughter here.
Thanks for keeping this on topic Tyler.
first the worst presidents we ever had were carter and nixon
second you stupid liberals he is not investing in the country he is having the government own everything and that is communism
lastly dont blame bush because he had to clean up the mess from clinton and if you have to ask what mess your an idiot
We’re talking about F*cking Mccain’s daughter here! No politics allowed! -Tears hair-
Bush picked up Clinton’s intern’s drycleaning? That was neighborly of him.
Also, word of advice, A.R. — the conservatives on here have a hard enough time, so please try not to make us look stupid. Nest your reply in the appropriate place, use correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation, don’t resort to namecalling, and try to argue reasonably instead of foaming at the mouth. Thanks.
Thank you for saying what I was going to reply at the bottom. The point of Government is to defend our country and make sure that other countries are playing by the rules, not spending the money taken from the wealthy and giving it to poor people and failing companies that should take care of themselves.
I just love how no-one even knows the distinction between socialism, communism and facism
Whut? You mean Adolf Lenin isn’t teh tyrant who speaks for national healthcare and other tools of oppression?
Now I’m confoozled.
Uhm, you do realise that every decent European country has a public heath care system, and no one has a private health care? Okay, now realise not a single European country has a communist regime.
are you sure you don’t mean “you’re”?
haha
I’d f*ck her.
Honestly, I don’t see many diffferences among communism, socialism and fascism. They are all statist, totalitarian ideologies that have as their aim the total suppression of the individual at the altar of collectivism.
Then again, I have this subversive habit of thinking for myself, so maybe it’s just me.
No, they are not.
But it is why in the U.S. the healthcare system is completely lacking, and a lot of people live in poverty (wile the U.S. are not a third world country, are they?).
Do your background reading on wikipedia, for instance.
Firstly, Yvette, you need to learn how to proof-read. But more importantly, I should say that all 3 ideologies don’t have anything in them in regards totalitarianism or a dictatorship (those 2, in and of themselves, are ideologies). Communism is based on equality amongst classes (meaning that all companies and enterprises are owned by the people and sustained by them). Socialism is the idea that government controls business in order to regulate what the public can have. Fascism is the same idea as Socialism but with an emphasis on certain principle’s (like Hitler with the “religion” and “the superior race”). So, clearly, Obama falls most harshly under the category of Socialism (which many believe is the “road to Communism”). =)
Are you kidding me Yeah Yeah Yeah? Socialism has nothing to do with Fascism. Socialism is the light-version of communism, like conservative parties are the light-version of fascism. Actually by european standards, Obama is a right-centered politician who doesn’t come near what you describe as “communism”
Peter, you have no idea what you’re talking about, do you? Yeah Yeah Yeah is dead on, fascism and socialism are both about state control of business. The difference is whether it’s done to benefit the government (fascism) or the people (socialism). Of course, in practice it has always benefitted the government.
Ew gross!
Why is that gross? She’s an adult and all…doesn’t appear to be horribly unattractive …I don’t get it.
She strikes me as airheaded, which negates any hot points (IMO). Plus I don’t think she’s hot.
Yeah? Well, she is.
Are you kidding? She’s a republican, but she’s not crazy! I would vote republican if they moved the party to align a bit more with her values than her fathers.
Check out her appearance on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, she’s actually quite intelligent (another turn-on), and she’s not afraid to give her honest opinion.
I’m a chick and I think she’s got some of the prettiest stems I’ve ever seen!
I saw her on Bill Maher recently and she struck me as dumb. I was dumb struck! Didn’t catch her on The Daily Show or Colbert though. I still don’t think she’s hot.
There are many far hotter, but she’s not bad for a republican
Oh, whoops. My mistake; linked to the wrong thread. {http://media.photobucket.com/image/mccain%252527s%20daughter/catholiclouisiana/catholic2/meghanmccain.jpg}
let me at her and REAWR! IT’S ONNN!
the fact that you watch bill maher makes me think you’re dumb… that guy spoon feeds his audience…
I watch it sometimes, I don’t have a shrine built to the guy in my house or anything.
I don’t agree with him all the time…maybe not even half the time. He has good guests though.
If you want to really get on the judgement wagon, perhaps you’ll be interested to know that I also recently watched a Daisy of Love marathon on MTV. Now that’s dumb.
Dude, are you serious? I caught 5 minutes of that crap and felt so dumb afterwards I was eating crayons.
…they taste like purple, you know.
But do they smell like blue?
I HEAR RAINBOWS! YAYYYY!
Yes. I’m serious.
MMMMmmm! Purple!
Bill Maher can be funny. Very funny. But he might actually be too left for me. Which hurt saying, I might add. Plus I find his blatant condemnation of all religion insulting. That being said, he can still be very funny. I find his show annoying though.
I take it you didn’t see Religulous then?
Uh, no. I passed on that one.
I did, too. I was raised to treat other people’s religions with respect even if my beliefs differ and I don’t agree with them.
Well, it was some funny stuff!
Bill Maher:
I have no respect for any cast member of “DC Cab”….
… Thank you google images.
Yes, Fox News can be so biased.
The Honduran president was elected by the people in a democratic election. I can see why a fascist coup on behalf of the Honduran financial elites would have more appeal to a wingnut.
And the Honduran legislature and Supreme Court threw his ass out of office and ordered the military to arrest him when he illegally tried to abolish term limits.
I can see why a fascist coup
on behalf of the Honduran financial elitesattempted by a puppet of Chavez would have more appeal to awingnut/del> moonbat.What the president was attempting to do was legal, but the rightwing rich were afraid for their money and power, so they instigated an old-fashioned military coup. It was the same in Venezuela, where the rich pulled off a coup after Chavez was originally elected by the people. Bush and his rightwing cronies, of course, initially praised the attempted fascist takeover, until it was pointed out that they were showing their true colors.
What the president was attempting to do was legal
Read the Honduran Constitution and learn why it was, in fact, illegal for Zelaya to try and abolish term limits.
It’s called an amendment. Like that first one to our Constitution that gives you the right to sound like a complete and utter idiot.
Or are you against the idea of amending the Constitution when it comes to term limits? If that’s the case then I guess we should get rid of the one in ours that LIMITS presidents to only 2.
It’s called an amendment.
Which has a process to go through, that Zelaya didn’t follow. Therefore, his actions were illegal, and he was effectively impeached and removed from office.
Oh my God!!! Asking the people if they would support a change and making it non-binding. HOW OUTSIDE THE PROCESS!!!!
That would be like…taking a poll. Or….drumming up support for a policy. HOW DARE A PRESIDENT!!!
You missed the illegal ballots imported from Venezuela…
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/07/in-russia-president-obama-explains-his-support-for-ousted-president-of-honduras.html
I think you missed the illegal ballots that Obama used in his election, too, pal…one word: ACORN.
Try getting your facts straight. ACORN workers falsified ballots, yes. But ACORN itself flagged the ballots as suspicious when they were turned in. By law, the ballots HAD to be turned in. They did the right thing by flagging them.
Can we make ACORN a corollary to Godwin’s Law?
No. Acorn is ≡ oak.
@sigh, it wasn’t ballots, it was voter registrations, but acorn did turn the forms in and the workers were terminated
Yes, it’s called an amendment. And there’s nothing in the constitution that prohibits an amendment removing term limits. However, there is this.
“No citizen who has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.”
He proposed its reform, and therefore removed himself as president.
Neqamel is right on point with that. You can read the Honduran constitution for yourself.
http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Honduras/hond05.html
Further, you speak of the wealthy and powerful. Do you know who Manuel Zelaya? Do you know his background?
Get some education and then come back to the discussion. This is a serious issue. Peoples lives are in the balance.
Grammar is also in the balance. “People’s” is the proper form for possessive plural.
Yes, you are correct. Thank you for pointing that out. It does quite easily undermine my whole point, doesn’t it? I will remember the damn apostrophe next time, troll.
Don’t call VG a troll if you don’t know the regulars. VG is awesome and regular around here, don’t call her a troll. Wanting the English language not to be disrespected and hoping someone will read their viewpoint and think about it before posting is NOT a negative thing.
Can I let loose the hounds? Pleeeeease?!
GO!
That was a troll post. An absent apostrophe was not a showing of disrespect for the English language. The comment was a showing of disrespect for me.
Your argument about about thinking about a post is moot. The absence of an apostrophe in the word people’s does not change the substance of the viewpoint. Further, how am I to consider her post before I post when she posted after mine? I do not follow your logic.
The problem is that these trolls are looking for grammatical errors so that they can lambaste the author. I do not need an English lesson. I hold a doctoral degree. The absence of the apostrophe was unintentional and due to my hurried typing. Any person of rational thought and having stable mental health would overlook the issue and discuss the substance of the comment.
No, VG is a grammar troll. Her “trollness” may not infringe upon her “awesomeness” in your book, but it appears that VG is a very petty person.
Still, I will try to not disgrace the hallowed pages of this site with my horrendous lack of English skills. For I know that my lack of an apostrophe injures the senses of the better versed and benevolent English speaking persons who visit its comment pages.
Get to know someone before you judge them, or you’ll still come off as an asscrack. She shouldn’t have to think about your post- What I was saying that you, with your missing apostrophe, which I don’t really care enough about but VG just corrected, not attacked you in any way, but I think if an author types lik ths nd dont thnk bout grmr then they’re not even trying to post their viewpoint, and that if you want to make a logical discussion, it’s probably a good idea to proof-read your longer posts for mistakes, so it doesn’t imply that you didn’t think about your post/viewpoint before you added it. Anyway, VG is NOT a troll. Doesn’t matter what you say, she may have offended you by correcting your posts, but that doesn’t make her a troll. Your definition of trolls is mistaken. Her correction of grammar was simple. You spent much longer attacking her for the correction. Please, it doesn’t matter enough to argue over. Don’t be offended because VG just wanted to fix your grammar a bit. It’s not a negative thing.
Not trollish.
Strawmannish, perhaps, but not trollish in this forum.
Deep’s got it. We’re all guilty of being pricks here. You, however, come off as unable to ignore a correction to your spelling and need to rage on about it for paragraphs and paragraphs.
Wow. You should read your longer posts before you hit comment. Look at that run-on.
I don’t need to argue with a kid.
She’s a troll in my book. End of story.
I’m gonna have to go along with Sud here. It was obvious what the intent was, and it always happens when someone can’t tackle substance.
Sud, you’re an idiot if you think that “because I’m a kid” is a valid argument to prove you right for calling your names. Annie, it also happens when someone doesn’t feel like tackling the substance, or just wants to help. Straw man? Maybe. Trolling? Definitely not.
Wow! Sud, thank you for creating complete thoughts and conveying them well. Tyler, work on arguing, it might not be your strong suit at the moment. Also work on conveying a message; despite a few errors in Sud’s writing, it is still simple to tell what the over intent of said writing is. On the other hand, Tyler, your arguments seem to be repetitive and poorly conveyed. There are online english classes that can help you with this. You can sign up for them and never have to worry about leaving your computer, it might suit you well. Cheers.
you were very lengthy in the way you stated your point. Also, you made a point to slam the author, which makes you, by definition, a troll. Not as much as is traditional on forums, but one none the less. Also, “pulling rank” is usually deeply frowned upon, unless it is a topic of expertise. And if you must use a negative term for such ‘pettiness’ as you called it, try ‘grammar nazi’. Its more context appropriate.
And yes, I realize I just made some capitalization errors and possible gammatical ones too, due to not checking. Ahh, the irony.
Asdf, I’m sorry that I don’t like people calling my friends trolls, even if they do make a slightly straw-man move. If you feel the need to insult me, at least do it for something you can prove, rather than the assumption that I try never to leave my computer. Go f*ck yourself, I don’t feel like arguing with you.
Tyler: I agree to a point, but to argue with someone and invalidate points b/c of spelling and/or grammar, at least to humble lil ol me, kinda is a snotty approach. No to disagree on points and then point out grammatical and spelling errors is just plain annoying, but ok.
It doesn’t invalidate their points, just makes them look stupid.
Oh damn, a REGULAR?! Gods forbid someone insult a REGULAR!
‘Don’t insult him/her, she/he is a regular,’ is the dumbest argument I’ve ever heard. Are ‘regulars’ so insecure about themselves that they have to throw around ‘I’m a regular,’ just to stop others from insulting them? Get that stick out of your ass, you fool.
Anyway, yes, it’s ridiculous that someone focuses on a fucking APOSTROPHE and ignores the rest of the post.
That’s not the only point I made. The fact that you focus on that point is ridiculous.
Wow, is that your opinion or did you get that from your college professor?
lol
the honduran president also tried to illegally hold a referendum to alter their constitution so he could stay in power and when their high court said no, he tried to do it anyway. so actually this “elected” president is the one trying to hijack the country.
and instead the military came in and ousted him before his term was over and before the next election… sounds like a coup to me…
No, sounds like impeachment
Since O’Bama is continuing or re-affirming many of Bush’s poicies (re: war, Gtmo), does that make O’Bama the worst president by proxy?
If you douchebags weren’t so concerned about the letter follwing pols’ names, this country would be a lot better off.
He’s worse than your talking-point pundits keep repeating over and over that Carter was.
The reality is decidedly different.
Yes, because taking a massive debt which is causing financial problems and ballooning to even more stupid levels is GOOD for the country.
By the time Obama and the congresscritters are done, America will be bankrupt, the dollar will no longer be a reserve currency, China will be trying to dump it’s American debt, and there will be hyperinflation.
We will be like Zimbabwe or Hungary, with triple digit MONTHLY inflation.
So in 4-8 years when none of this happens will you kindly go jump off the nearest bridge to put us all out of your misery?
Poor form ‘The Steve’
True. I tire of “the sky is falling” rants…
Things aren’t great, but they aren’t as bad as some people like to claim.
I’m with the Steve. Dave is a bit of a drama queen.
right now, no they aren’t that bad, wait until about 3 and a half years from now and then see if it still holds true, I’m thinking it won’t.
The Steve: Thingas aren’t that bad. But they aren’t getting better. And a lot of people don’t think Obama’s philosophy (more taxes, more spending) will help. I don’t thin the sky is falling yet, but it sure does look like rain.
Really? Is that why China, Russia, and several other countries are supporting creating a new reserve currency?
Let’s talk inflation. Inflation is caused by expanding the money supply by either printing money or selling government securities. The government has been selling securities to China and other governments for decades. That has resulted in hidden inflation because all of the expansion has occurred over-seas. When those governments decide they want to cash in all those securities, that inflation will come home to roost.
Because the value of the dollar will be falling, it will be hard for the government to borrow money. This will result in an increase in interest rates. But, even then, the government will have problem paying for all these programs, most of which are unnecessary and not in the purview of the federal government.
THIS. Dead on.
Thanks, Dave. Not to mention the fact that Obama is breaking every promise he’s ever made. It’s not ‘investing in the country’ that makes him a Communist and a bad president, it’s the way he is doing things. He’s not being accountable like he said he would be. The list of terrible things he is doing goes far beyond the limited space I have in this forum.
Note: I used to be a huge Obama supporter. I truly loved the guy. Until he started supporting worse plans than Bush ever did. And I hated Bush.
(By the way, all this may soon be illegal anyway, because there is a bill being passed that could make it illegal to post or portray anything on the internet that even hurts someone’s feelings. Check Miley Ray Cyrus’s endorsement and the link on my name.)
He has NOT broken every promise he’s ever made. He’s keeping them, which is scarier to me than if he’d broken them.
That website is positively oozing with right wing propaganda and fear mongering… There were banner ads for free handguns and survival gardens for the coming apocalypse…
Is it fear mongering if it’s really happening? I’d rather risk looking like an idiot and try to save a few people than sit back, be quiet, and go along with the status quo and watch my beloved country go down the shitter.
There’s nothing wrong with a survival garden. We aren’t eating right anyway. And what’s wrong with a free gun if you get it only after taking a five day safety course that gives you better training than law enforcement?
At least ask questions, people, instead of just swallowing what you’ve been fed.
If you don’t like my opinions or my facts then do your own research, I’ll celebrate when you do, I’m just trying to help get people thinking. I couldn’t stand Bush either.
I’m not on that infowars bandwagon, but could your respond substantively to the information you disagree with on that site?
Oh the drama…and the bullshit.
Yep, that’s right, Dave…this whole economic crisis that was in full-swing well before he took office is ALL his fault. Bush did NOTHING wrong.
Loosen up the tinfoil hat there, bud. It’s cutting off the blood flow to what little brains you’ve got.
Here is a suggestion for you: Take a reading comprehension course.
Just curious– Were you squealing about our spending when we were wasting multiple billions of dollars on a useless war? I didn’t think so.
And if a Republican were president, you would be saying nothing just as before.
A “useless war”, that, mind you, was a retaliation against radical terrorist sects who attacked us first. In the unspoken words of SecularPatriot, “Oh, come on. It’s just millions of people. We can make more.”
obama isnt investing
hes SPENDING AND SPREADING
he is spreading our wealth LIKE the communist he is
give me a break. instead of spouting garbage, try to figure out what a communist really is.
Communism in this country is face painted onto an enemy of the state during the time period of the cold war. Socialism as well but thats another story… If you’d like to know the rest… read a book, preferably one from the library.
And that last bit was towards Ryan, not you Charlie.
You keep using that word….I do not think it means what you think it means.
-Laughs so hard he chokes-
ah princess bride you’ve taught us well.
I guess my above comment should have started with: “Let me explain… no there is to much…. Let me sum up.”
Well, my mom always told me if I couldn’t say anything nice to shut the fu(k up….. So, everything seems to be spelled correctly.
The spelling might be OK but the punctuation is a bit weak.
I think President should have been capitalized, too; am I right?
tis only proper. It annoyed me a little on GMA this morning they kept referring to him as Mr. Obama on the scroll. I kept going “It’s President, we called Bush President, we still do, same with Clinton and all the others, call him President!”
I’m guessing they’re not switching to the WSJ/Economist style?
I dunno, it just irked me. >.< My mother laughed at me though when I ranted to her about it.
There’s a new style book? They’re not using AP style anymore? Nobody ever tells me anything.
Yes, there are more than a few style books out there, and no, they aren’t using any of the style books, or copy editors much anymore. These days you’re likely to find fewer typos and grammar crimes in an internet flame war than in the daily newspaper, or an AP wire-feed.
That is so sad. Back when I was in high school and college we were required to follow the AP Stylebook to the letter. To the LETTER! And God have mercy on us if any typos slipped through. And this was HIGH SCHOOL!
No. It’s only capitalized when used as a proper noun.
Like “President Bush” kicks “President Obama’s” ass at Texas hold-um.
Not “the former president, you know, George Bush, doesn’t hold a candle to the current president, you know, that muslin africun dude Barrack Insane Obama.”
And stuff.
Thanks, Deep Thought. I wasn’t sure about that one.
Journalism major.
Considering the languishing state of our country’s press, you have my sympathy.
Many people feel distrustful of President Obama because he is so much smarter than they are. Those same people loved Bush because he was a moron and they could identify with that.
Many people feel distrustful of President Obama’s TelePrompTer because
he is so much smarter than they are.because without it he’s a uh.. uh.. bumbling moron … uh .. um.. uh… who comes across as uh.. even dumber uh.. than Biden.. uh uh uh.Sorry, I would just like to ask, have you ever done public speaking on a large scale? Or even just to a full high school or college auditorium? It’s nerve racking, even more so if you don’t have your notes or a prompter so you can focus so you’re not so nervous. Saying that just because he goes ‘uh’ so much makes him idiot doesn’t do either you or him justice. I never said W was an idiot because of how much he stumbled on his words, just on how I interpreted his politics.
Sorry, I would just like to ask, have you ever done public speaking on a large scale? Or even just to a full high school or college auditorium?
Public speaking, and performing in front of crowds numbering in the thousands, thanks. Been there, done that.
And the fact that uh, uh, Obama is uh, lost uh, without the TelePromTer is not the only reason he’s an idiot.
Just supporting evidence.
Well, so have I, I’m just saying that he could be nervous you know. There was no need for the snarkiness.
I was merely stating that there might be a reason for stumbling over words. We all do it. The stumbling was the only reason you gave, initially, for him being an ‘idiot’.
I’ve seen him speak many times without the aid of a teleprompter and he did very well. He comes across as thoughtful, deliberate, and intelligent. He displays a firm grasp of the issues he’s ask to speak about, and he speaks clearly and eloquently.
If you’re bitching this much about Obama’s speaking, you must have had a FIELD DAY with Bush.
Exactly.
Bush couldn’t speak with or without a prompter. At least the new guy can read and refrains from making up his own words.
Or have I misunderstimated the situation?
Bush was better off the hip… and that’s where the GOP went wrong… they tried to take something unpolished and present him in a polished manner… nope, I voted for him and still think it was a fail.
It does seem if you take a script away from Obama he has a very tough time.
“They tried to take something unpolished…”
This is because no matter how much effort one puts forth, you cannot polish a turd
You stand corrected sir:
http://youcanpolishaturd.com/?p=3
lol!
MYTH BUSTED!
beautiful
“Bush was better off the hip…”
I seem to recall reading a research paper where someone (or a group of someones) evaluated a couple of years’ worth of Bush’s speeches, and noted that he was spoke nearly flawlessly when speaking on matters of violence and war, good (us) vs. evil (them), and “punishing” our enemies. When speaking of domestic, social, financial, environmental, casual affairs he typically bumbled and stumbled, but when talking about military attacks, the threat of terrorism, and what he perceived as “evil,” he was smooth and polished. It was really interesting, and a fascinating possible insight.
It makes perfect sense to me. The war was something he had plenty of confidence with. He felt like he knew what he was talking about. I’m sure the same probably couldn’t be said about the other issues.
sorry, but he makes up his own words too… they just don’t get brought up in the media because they like him…
And apparently they don’t get brought up by you, either.
Even if Obama stumbles at times, at least he consistently uses correct grammar, spelling, and pronunciation.
Why does he need to make up words? “Uhhhhm” works just fine.
*snerk*
ooh you found out my secret!
not.
.
in a press conference about the new health care for federal government employee’s domestic (same sex) partners obama used the term dynamism when we really meant dynamic. unless you really think that he meant a metaphysical concept developed by leibniz…
.
and how can you tell that obama uses correct spelling when he talks? are you reading the teleprompter along with him?
Obama made up his own language: Austrian
Congrats. You’ve officially Godwinned this thread
Yes I have and I do not have that problem. I have a bit of advantage though… I get to speak directly from the heart and don’t try to grandstand.
The wingnuts have used their Rove Reverse Reality approach here. Obama is brillant, hardworking, and prepared. Bush was brain-damaged, lazy as only a rich brat can be, and clueless. Therefore, being brain-damaged, lazy, and clueless is superior, and being brilliant, hardworking and prepared is inferior.
Not only has Naqamel spoken before thousands of people, he’s also been president, so he would know.
Translation: Naq made me look like a fool on Honduras, so I’m going to piss and moan about it.
You stay classy, NP.
Translation: I’ve been on the internet long enough to recognize bogus claims by wingnuts wanting to falsely impress people with BS claims of superiority.
LMAO!!!
FTR, WillySTL is no relation to Eric-in-STL. In case the STL threw you off.
I was just wondering if you were neighbors.
Haha, what? I didn’t like Bush but I respected him. There’s no need for you to call me a wingnut. For your information, I’m a democrat that’s middle of the road. I’m by no means liberal. There was no need for such an attack. I was merely saying that, like bush, and like any other president, he’ll fumble since public speaking isn’t something that people are inclined to. I, personally, start shaking like a leaf.
I didn’t refer to you as a wingnut. I was referring to Naqamel.
I know, >> that’s why I put a nesting fail underneath. I was incensed that they decided that just because I was sticking up for BOTH presidents in that they speak publicly and therefore would get nervous that I was sticking up for only ONE of them. I apologize.
sorry, nesting fail.
Please cite evidence that Obama is brilliant, hardworking, and prepared. (Other than campaign advertising, please.)
If it’s hot enough under the tv lights, he gets a little shiny. Does that count?
Only if we can claim that Original Recipie Kentucky Fried Chicken is hard working.
The vote is out on that one… I mean the chicken tries so hard, but does it really put in the work?
How’s this for you: one doesn’t get to lecture on Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago for 12 years by being a slouch.
Nope; it requires that most revered of Chicago resources – clout.
Don’t knock clout, it’s good stuff. It’s also really fun to say.
As opposed to nepotism, which is much more American.
See that blip, way off to your left? It’s the topic! Run run run and catch up!
Oh snap!
Nepotism didn’t get him into college any more than it got John Kerry or Al Gore into college. In fact, Bush’s grades were slightly better than Gore’s, and on par with Kerry’s. If not a little better.
So he can test well. I’m not impressed. I am a master bullshitter on essays and tests. I’ve gotten A’s on papers that had about one page worth of substance and 8 pages worth of filler. It’s a family trait to be honest. We’re all good at it. And I *totally* see Bush in that light. There’s more than one kind of smarts. Bush is a manipulator. He’s good at that. But he’s too much of a goof-off to really pull off book smart. But honestly, did he really need it? He was f-ing president for 8 years. No matter how he got there, he got there. I can’t stand the fool, but somehow he ended up president, and you can’t do much better than that. So whether it was something he did well at school, or because he could use daddy’s influence, or whatever, he clearly did something right to get into the highest office in the land. And I still hate the fool.
Then how is it completely ignoring the constitution if he taught the law for 12 years?
Oh oh, I know this one! He’s not.
you might want to go reread the tenth amendment… a majority of what the federal government does is against the constitution…
But don’t you knooooow? Anything the government decides it wants to do is somehow tangentially related to interstate commerce and therefore authorized under the Commerce Clause!
[/sarcasm]
Living document, and all that.
Yeah, well where is it in the living document that says Obama can but privatized companies as the federal government. I’m still looking for that one.
Somewhere in the back.
Damn the fine print!! I thought Obama’s credit bill he got passed got rid of the fine print?
Actually, it was hidden in the last software license agreement you checked “yes” to without reading. Pretty sneaky!
It also says Microsoft now owns your car. Gotta read that fine print, people!
They’d want that piece o’shit. More power to them. Then I’ll say it’s stolen, get the insurance money and get me my Charger (yeah I’m going Green, green with envy!!!)
One of the new Chargers or a vintage? Either is awesomeness, in my opinion, I’m just curious.
Diss: New, need four doors to get the Car Seat in and out.
ILPB: *sigh* Yeah, I do start coveting those when I see them.
The last president we had that “spoke from the heart” told us that God wanted him to run for President and invade Iraq. I think we can all do without another one of those. I’ll take a president that thinks with his brain.
I’ll take a president that thinks with his brain.
And the irony is that you support Obama.
…who, while condemning the surge into Iraq and saying it wouldn’t work, is now surging into Afganistan (different topic, I agree with him on this one) and not bitching about the loss of lives.
If only we had just “surged” earlier in Iraq we could have saved lives. This I also agree with Obama on. I just wish more countries would understand the urgency and relieve us a bit on this.
Dems fought against any surge, now or earlier. I’m a blood and guts kind of bloodthirsty Conservative, and I personally think we should have turned both Iraq and Afganistan into parking lots. They need Walmarts over there too.
Wow. Healthy worldview.
Healthy for us and people who don’t want to kill us.
Not healthy for anyone, actually…
Oh, and link. I guess this kid wanted us dead…
War is hell and no one wants children to die, but don’t blame us for the collateral damage, blame the attackers. They are the ones that are to blame for innocent lives. I am talking about the Taliban and Islamic terrorists like Hamas who hide inside schools and hospitals where innocents tend to be. Then when they are attacked run around screaming about how the US attacks and kills innocent civilians.
Once again….Iraq didn’t attack us.
Yes, and once again, we weren’t fighting the Iraqis. This has been gone over, but we believed that SH had WMDs, he did have some pretty severe weapons and if there were terrorists in the country it would have been very bad for everyone and Bush would have been blamed for not acting. His worst mistake was not winding things up faster.
So…hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died (though we weren’t fighting them), thousands of US troops have died, the middle east is more unstable than it was prior to the occupation, we lost support and respect from many other parts of the world, Osama Bin Laden has never been captured, but had Bush not attacked it would have been worse? Keep thinking that if it makes you comfortable.
Point, set, match, SB.
“but had Bush not attacked it would have been worse?”
Um, when did I say that? I said if it had been true that their were WMDS (which we still don’t know for sure) and terrorists and we had been attacked then Bush would have been blamed. But I do believe Iraq is in much better shape than before and in fact the people in Iran would like to have the same kind of Independence now. I hope they can get it on their own…
there’s quite a few kurdish corpses that will testify that saddam had chemical weapons…
Funny, the Bush administration knew “beyond a shadow of a doubt” that SH had WMDs before we attacked. You’re creating scenarios for what could have happened, rather than address what did happen.
You believe that Iraq is in better shape now than before? On what do you base this belief?
Not just the Bush Administration was convinced of the danger.
For one, the Iraqis are minus one evil dictator and his sons who were torturing and raping citizens to put it simply. They are free now to run their country the way they see fit, I wish them luck with that.
Okay, so people outside the Bush administration who were “convinced” that Saddam Hussein intended to attack the United States using WMDs, and whose conviction led the US to invade Iraq, are just as stupid as the Bush administration. I’m totally comfortable with that.
If you think Iraqi civilians are no longer be murdered and raped, you are sadly incorrect.
At least before they had plumbing and electricity.
No, they aren’t, not anymore than anyone else in a free society is being murdered or raped. That happens in the US too you know.
You are horribly misinformed, yikes.
I don’t even know what else to say after your last post. Shocking.
Link. Baghdad and New Orleans had a similar murder rate in 2008. (And by my estimate — not in the link — you’re only about three times as likely to be murdered in Baghdad as in Chicago.)
“None of this is to suggest that things could be considered safe or normal in Baghdad, where at least 150 people died in a series of bomb attacks over a 24-hour period just last week. None of the world’s most violent cities see carnage like that on a regular basis. And it is safe to assume that virtually no one living in Baghdad feels lucky when considering the situation in Caracas or Cape Town. Many Iraqis still point to the years before the U.S. invasion, when Baghdad had a reputation for some of the safest streets in the Arab world. “In the eyes of the Americans and Europeans, maybe these statistics could be acceptable considering their crime rates,” says Ra’ad Mahmoud, a 51-year-old computer technician and lifelong Baghdad resident. “But for us Iraqis, we never witnessed such crime rates in the 1960s, 1970s or 1980s. We used to have an anti-crime squad. It was one of the most efficient in the Arab world. If there was a killing or a robbery, they captured the culprits within days. But now, we don’t know why people are killed. Is it robbery? Is it revenge? Is it a political quarrel? Or is it to settle old scores? So, the motivations for these crimes are quite different than what we used to witness.”
However, Dhoti, you should probably take into account the massive hurricane that made the sample population much smaller and the fact that there are people struggling to rebuild their lives could cause some of those murders. Also, you should point out that NY’s murder rate was 6 times lower, and Moscow is about 4.5 times lower.
Gee, thanks for reproducing a paragraph I already read and understood, SB! (And without express written consent…uh oh…) I was just introducing some recently published, interesting facts into the discussion; why get so defensive?
Tyler, if the hurricane killed equitably, the population loss shouldn’t factor in. (In fact, given that most of the people who died were poor residents from high-crime areas, you might even argue that it should have reduced crime. Heartless, I know.) And since I’m not making a point — just introducing some facts — I felt I’d leave it up to the readers to point that kind of stuff out.
for any gullible people NOT to read the article*
If you consider cutting an pasting an excerpt from the article you posted being defensive, then I’m defensive. So defensive, even.
When 150 people a day start getting bombed to death in U.S. cities, I’ll give you a cookie for providing that article.
From Dhotis link: “But for us Iraqis, we never witnessed such crime rates in the 1960s, 1970s or 1980s.”
I think most countries, including the US can say the same. I wonder why he said nothing about the late 1990’s?
“Baghdad is a city of about six million that makes for a murder rate of about 48 per 100,000 people….
Washington D.C.’s about 32.”
The amount of violence is decreasing yearly as well.
I think SB’s just upset that her “horribly misinformed” card didn’t play quite like she hoped…
tyler – and the point was that congress voted to go into iraq, it was not just bush…
.
cf – if the repubs stopped the ground war in kosovo the dems should’ve stopped the ground war in iraq. that’s the point sb and i were going round and round over, not this whole idea about the commander in chief and the chain of command. the points you made were correct in regards to those, but stating that the buck stops at bush completely ignores the incompetence of a multitude of other people who still work in our government. bush will never be back in office, but those people who screwed up in 2003 are still in power and if we stop at bush we will never bring to justice, or at least bring to light, those who shared responsibility with bush for his bad decisions.
Ubr? Nesting issue? I don’t see CF posting anything here.
yeah, i think i scrolled too far on this one…
Iraq didn’t attack us? What do you call violating a cease fire and shooting at US planes that were patrolling the no-fly zone?
I’d never make it as a public official, which is why I restrict my particular world view to the interwebz
I’m sorry, but if you threaten me or my family or my extended family by way of threatening the nation at large, “shock and awe” in no way describes what I feel should be done to you. I never said it was right, Christian, or very diplomatic, but it is my world view, and I stand by it.
Once again…Iraq didn’t attack us.
naw, that whole thing back in 1991 was just a tv show produced for our benefit… next thing you’re going to be saying that saddam didn’t have wmds either…
We should have leveled them the first time.
Oh I forgot that Iraq attacked the United States and that’s why we fought the Gulf War…Oh wait, I didn’t forget, that’s not what happened.
saddam attacked a sovereign nation that we had signed treaties of protection with… attacking them was tantamount to them attacking us… so yes, they did attack us… unless you also believe that we shouldn’t have attacked germany in ww2 because they never attacked us, only our allies…
It’s not the same thing ubr, and I think you know it. Also, Japan attacked the US, and in order to defeat Japan it was necessary to attack Germany.
blonde, i thought we were actually getting somewhere, but your argument has fallen flat. by your logic we were justified in attacking iraq because (according to the information gathered from iran) iraq was supporting afghanistan.
.
i’ve expressed my viewpoint on this many times on pk, but here we go again. we should’ve taken saddam out of power back in 1991-92, but between bush and clinton nobody had the cajones to do it. we supported the iraqi revolutionaries and then pulled the rug out from underneath them. then we got sucked back into the war due to false information and a congress that did as little fact checking as our media. but yet, it’s only bush’s fault.
we have a history of attacking countries that have not attacked us. the only four attacks on US soil this century caused us to enter ww2 and the war on terror, yet we fought in korea, vietnam, ww1, grenada, haiti, colombia, bosnia, somolia, panama, the dominican, laos, cambodia… where’s your righteous condemnation of those actions?
and don’t forget, clinton was president for several of those military actions…
sorry to jump in here, but since you are talking about logic fail ubr, then yours fails miserably. first, clinto had nothing to do with the first gulf war. second, the president of the usa is responsible for all his administration does or fails to do — basic leadership. in a conflict situation the congress acts based upon information the POTUS supplies. when in doubt, the congress should support the president if he provides an argument that reasonable people should believe to be true. korea and vietnam meet your initial criteria regarding kuwait. the remainder of your examples, wheter justified or not still met national security criteria. the problem with the second iraq is that the president was wrong in his assessment… any iraqi threat in the aftermath of sept 11 2001 was contained. simple economy of force operations would have continued to contain the threat. President Bush chose to divert resources away from the primary effort. After doing so, his administration avoide all indicators of a growing insurgency until it was firmly established. He alone bears the responsibility for his mis management of the “war on terror.”
hey charlie, but back out.
the constitution clearly states that the congress and only the congress has the right to declare war. if the president was really responsible for everything in the government why would we need the congress?
.
and next: clinton was president when we had inspectors on the ground and a no-fly zone in iraq and we still had troops in saudi and kuwait ready to go. notice i said bush AND clinton.
.
in the future please reread all comments above yours before you jump in. otherwise you sound like a moron. the whole point was that blonde suggested that we shouldn’t attack anyone who hasn’t attacked us…
Hey ubr, i did read the comments. I won’t back out. The Pres is the CINC, and while the congress does have the power to declare war, the president has the power to use military force as he sees fit. In the military, the Commander [in Chief] is responsible for all that his unit does or fails to do – basic leadership taught to cadets, lieutenants and reinforced throughout all of the officer ranks. While the congress has the power to declare war, throughout our history it has responded to presidential requests to do so. It has done so based upon information that the president provides. There has not been a declaration of war since WWII. These so-called resolutions are solely in response to the WAR powers act – passed in the 1970’s in response to the Vietnam Conflict – neither branch wants to challenge its constitutional validity, so they cop out with resolutions. Pres Bush (41) did not complete the job because his Saudi friends wouldn’t let him and Pres Clinton didn’t have the option – remember Kosovo? So if you want to sound all big and bad about national security, then rely on some real experience and or knowledge otherwise you sound like the moron your truly are.
ubr, you’re assuming that my opinion (like it matters) is that we were justified in attacking all of the other countries you’ve listed, but in fact I never said anything of the sort. If you compare WW2 or the Gulf War to Iraq and I point out differences between those events, it doesn’t mean I’m defending one and condemning the other.
I’m not convinced we should have attacked Iraq in the 90s, nor am I convinced that lack of “balls” was the answer. In fact, in most wars (and this is a broad statement, I realize) it’s my feeling that less balls and more brains would work out better for everyone.
I haven’t defended the 109th congress so you’re preaching to the choir on that one. They sucked mightily.
If you scroll back, you’ll find that I wasn’t defending Democrats or wars that took place under Democrats, I was merely pointing out that the occupation of Iraq was unjustifed and a complete failure, costing still more lives every day, and billions of dollars which could be better spent in a myriad of ways.
Also, what he said
charlie – in one sentence you say that the CINC is the power to be, yet in a later sentence you say that bush couldn’t because of saudi (the place we mounted the invasion from) and clinton do anything because of kosovo, which is a funny point because kosovo didn’t stop him from invading haiti and somalia… you just don’t seem to get the point. if the commander in chief has the ultimate power why would we have to go to congress to get a war resolution. as for your comment on the chain of command… yes, the president is at the top of the chain, but the constitution of the united states clearly states that he can’t declare war. you’re stuck in a dichotomy. you want bush to be ultimately responsible for all the evils that occurred during his administration while the balance of power proves that he wasn’t the only one responsible. even sb (whom i never agree with haha) agrees with me that the 109th congress is at least partially responsible for giving bush the green light to attack iraq. if it wasn’t for that green light bush would not have attacked iraq.
as for your comments about real experience and real knowledge, as far as you know i’m a colonel in the usmc who attended the academy and the war college… in short, it’s the internet, go fux yourself.
.
sb – my point was just that we have a history of fighting unjust wars and some of them (somalia, grenada, haiti, the dominican…) get swept under the rug like they never happened. in order for there to be real change in the way we operate as a foreign power than these wars need to be brought up and understood by the american people as to why they shouldn’t have happened…
And so goes one of my favorite forum dances. I call this one the ubr:
1) Make a basically correct point, but screw up the details
2) Get called out on it
3) Whine and moan petulantly
Let’s watch… *grabs popcorn*
I agree with you wholeheartedly on that point, ubr.
-Hops on Dhoti’s couch and makes more popcorn- Mind if I watch?
ubr, nice try – if you are a colonel, then you are not a very bright one. First — if you were a colonel, you would realize that Pres Bush (41) pulled together a very loose coalition in order to conduct DS/DS. He did so with the begrudging support of the king of Saudi Arabia, and only with the limited objective of removing Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Second, the president, as commander in chief does not have ultimate power. What he does have is the ability to use US Armed Forces to defend the nation, as he sees fit – the timeframe that he can do so remains cloudy, constrained by the war powers act which no president has agreed is constitutional, but which no president has had the guts to challenge in court. Pres Clinton was constrained from operations in Kosovo because the Republican controlled Congress opposed whatever he did – in that role reversal, democrats acted like hawks and publicans acted like doves. Third, I never said Pres Bush (43) was evil, stupid maybe, but not evil – calling someone evil is a conservative response to someone they object to. Forth – I don’t believe that you are a Colonel in the USMC, you are, however a dumbass.
*munches, listens, learns*
@dhoti – you’re still bitter after the whole “retranching” conversation from several months ago? i must’ve really hit a nerve with you…
.
@charlie – you obviously don’t understand the meaning of the word sarcasm. as for the rest of your argument, your last post and your first post are completely contradictory.
.
as for the part about being a colonel, you’re right, i’m not a colonel, i’m an four star army general with the initials gsp.
.
the point you completely missed was that on the internet claiming that you are more knowledgeable or more experienced is the equivalent of pissing in the wind… the only person who cares about it is you.
and before you reply can you please really read what i said? your speed reading classes are making you miss the meaning of sentences. i didn’t say that bush was evil, rather that you were blaming the EVILS of his administration. i didn’t say that i was a colonel, rather that “as far as you know i’m a colonel”
He understood that, Ubr.
@COL/ GEN ubr – you used sarcasm? No my posts are not contradictory; you simply read what you wanted to read. Missed, I didn’t miss anything, I simply stated that you were talking out of your ass when you spouted off.
Quite the contrary, ubr — I thought your constipated flailing was absolutely hilarious. (In fact, just thinking about it makes me chuckle, even now.) Obviously it bothered you if you can still remember the details…
But if it makes you feel better to believe that you pissed me off with your in-depth knowledge and incisive wit, go right ahead. Just imagine me sitting at my PC screaming “CURSE YOU REED RICHARDS!!!!”
“Second, the president, as commander in chief does not have ultimate power.”
.
“the president of the usa is responsible for all his administration does”
.
if he doesn’t have ultimate power how can he be responsible for all his administration does?
Dhoti- Constipated flailing? Possibly the best description of anything, ever.
And the “CURSE YOU REED RICHARDS!!” bit really made me LOL.
@dhoti – all i remember was you and your sock posting messages back and forth to each other how ‘retranching’ was a word readily used in the financial industry…
Ubr, he’s responsible for what HIS administration does. Not everything, not what the congress does, what actions HIS administration performs and decides upon. Moot point.
Most folks, when they see multiple people disagreeing with them, take a second to think about why. (Or at least how to dismiss them all as dolts.)
But not ubr. Sock puppetry! EBIL SCHEMES AFOOT!!!!1!
“Second, the president, as commander in chief does not have ultimate power.”
— response to your deliberate mis reading of my initial response in which you lumped the Saudi King with the US Congress — try again COLONEL.
.
“the president of the usa is responsible for all his administration does”
— operative words “His Administration” strike 2 GENERAL
.
if he doesn’t have ultimate power how can he be responsible for all his administration does?
Its his administration, COL/ GEN dumbass.
Bye the Bye — COL/ GEN ubr — how do you spell Bob backwards? Megabob with any other name is still pathetic.
tyler – and the point was that congress voted to go into iraq, it was not just bush…
.
cf – if the repubs stopped the ground war in kosovo the dems should’ve stopped the ground war in iraq. that’s the point sb and i were going round and round over, not this whole idea about the commander in chief and the chain of command. the points you made were correct in regards to those, but stating that the buck stops at bush completely ignores the incompetence of a multitude of other people who still work in our government. bush will never be back in office, but those people who screwed up in 2003 are still in power and if we stop at bush we will never bring to justice, or at least bring to light, those who shared responsibility with bush for his bad decisions.
.
and after having read your post above this one… there’s no further point arguing with someone who can’t even readily explain their own statements… i’d rather fight with dhoti, at least he attempts to crack jokes…
The fact that he and his administration suggested we go to war still destroys your point, I doubt congress would’ve voted “go to war!” without him WANTING to go there in the first place.
Who controlled the Congress when Pres Clinton faced the problem in Kosovo?
Who controlled the Congress when Pres Bush (43) went into Iraq?
You need to read your own words, “in the future please reread all comments above yours before you jump in. otherwise you sound like a moron.”
Argue with whom you please, but your rabid defense of Pres Bush is a knee-jerk response.
I don’t mind a few jokes, but if you choose to open with calling someone a moron, then stand by for incoming.
oh I forgot, COL/ GEN — you must have experienced that when you were up to your elbows in hand-grenade pins.
On another note, d’you guys like the vid behind the name?
suicide_blonde –
If the law I read (hopefully in my name, if I did it right) was the law that approved the war in Iraq then it is about much more than WMDs (as Bush, or maybe the media has protrayed). The law includes as reasons: the war against Iran and use of chemical weapons, numerous accounts of attacks on Iraqi civilians (including chemical), the invasion of Kuwait and resulting death and destruction, the refusal to follow numerous UN resolutions, threatening Saudi Arabia (among many other countries), not allowing the UN investigators to confirm destruction of their chemical weapons, ect. Iraq did not attack the US, but it did threaten everyone it could and attacked many of its neighbors.
The US entered WW2 because of the attack on Pearl Harbor, but it should have years before. If the US had entered the war earlier then maybe millions of innocent civilians could have been spared…
I think declaring the invasion of Iraq a “failure” is inaccurate. It was mis-managed and used as a means by some to kill others (the vast majority of deaths in Iraq), but there is now a democracy in Iraq and the possibility of a thriving country, unlike under Saddam.
Charlie Foxtrot –
You state that the President is responsible for all his administration does, yet it was the Congress (a seperate branch in the government) that approved his law to initiate the war. The President can only be responsible for those whom he can exert power over, not those who are independantly elected. The President presented many arguements for the invasion, its just that many only focus on one (WMDs). You state that Iraq was no threat, but no one could verify it. The UN was unable to determine if the chemical weapons had been destroyed and Saddam kept threatening all with them. You bring up the economic sanctions but fail to remember the Oil for Money Scandal at the UN that Saddam profited greatly from while his people languished and died.
Beuken- you’re right, the congress approved his request- BUT HIS ADMINISTRATION STILL MADE THE REQUEST. That is why he is responsible for his administration, and the Congress didn’t do it all on their own.
so… if congress had been controlled by dems we wouldn’t have gone to war in iraq? thanks, you just made my point for me…
.
and trust me, i am not a rabid defender of bush by any means, i just don’t think that he’s the only bad guy in washington… imo they’re all corrupt and touting one over the other just disguises what is really happening… if no one gets past the “it’s all bush’s fault” sentiment then politicians will be able to get away with anything simply because compared to bush’s f–ups theirs are insignificant…
.
and i apologize if you thought i was calling you a moron, it was just that your original statement was completely off topic from what sb and i were talking about… bush and clinton both were president when we had forces in, over, and around iraq and a multitude of wars have been fought with no good cause except that it ’seemed’ to be right at the time…
.
as for being ‘knee deep in grenade pins’ out of ammo and vicious insurgents closing in on all sides with only a bayonet and some silly string left… i have the utmost respect for our military and those serving… i’m not sure where you got your name from, but if you were trained in the phonetic alphabet i’m sure you spent a bit of time in too…
@tyler – no one is saying that congress did it on their own… it took the legislative and the executive branches to screw the pooch on that one…
@ubr, now that we are past the measuring contest, perhaps we may be able to talk. I doubt that a democratic congress would have stopped Pres Bush (43) from invading iraq. As President during a undeclared, yet active war he had the right and responsibility to choose where he wanted to cast his spear into the ground, in effect stating this is where we fight. He is solely responsible for that decision and, right or wrong, he will stand responsible for that decision throughout history.
then we need to have a lot more conversations about unjust wars. iraq is only the most recent place where we fought without really knowing what was going on… i still want to know wtf we were doing in somalia…
wasting the lives of good soldiers. Having said that, those soldiers did not die in vein. No soldier, sailor, airman or marine who gives their lives following the lawful orders of the POTUS dies in vein — the vanity lies with the politician who screwed up.
@BeukendaalMason — I didn’t say that Iraq wasn’t a threat, I said that the threat was contained, and I believe that it would have remained contained with an economy of force thereby allowing the US to pursue the extra-national terrorist threat of al-Quaeda through Afghanistan/Pakistan. The comittment of our main effort into Iraq diverted critical assets away from Afghanistan into Iraq, hence the continued struggle in Afghanistan.
Crazy nesting, hope this gets in the right place.
@ubr: Charlie’s my dad. He’s a retired LtC.
@suicide_blonde “If you think Iraqi civilians are no longer be murdered and raped, you are sadly incorrect.”
So, because Iraq has crime, it’s our fault? Muslim sects don’t get along with each other too well, you know? And although I’m not blaming it entirely on that fact, there are quite a few there, and that is definitely playing a role.
P.S. – Rapes and murders happen here, too.
I mentioned at some point that if we really wanted to change things in the mideast, rather than bombing them, we should build a lot of Targets, Starbucks, and Taco Bells.
Tabouli Bell.
Suicide bombing “Targets”?
Yikes… Id hate to work there.
No. Build lots of Wal-Marts, not Targets. We would dominate the entire middle east that way. Assuming they didn’t get mad and burn them all to the ground.
I’m willing to negotiate on that part of my master plan.
I hate Wal-Mart. If the one near my house burned to the ground I wouldn’t complain.
I agree with Afghanistan. Iraq not so much.
Make an example. Then other countries are less likely to screw with us.
-
I’m sorry, I’ve already admitted to being bloodthirsty when there is a threat. I’m not likely to change any time soon, so I apologize for my blanket bloodthirstiness.
and people wonder why the israeli airline, el al, has only been successfully hijacked once…
the details were never (and probably never will be) released, but the suspicion is that the mossad went through and murdered pretty much everyone who had ever met the hijackers… the next time someone tried to hijack an el al jet, the israeli military blew up half the beirut airport…
I don’t know who convinced Zero to not turn tail and run in Afghanistan, but whoever he/she is gets free beer from me for life.
As if Obama’s the only president to read from prepared text. Come on.
I think “um” is the sound of someone choosing his words carefully.
In that regard, we’re lucky to have a leader who thinks before he speaks.
hell, he doesn’t even think before he acts
After 8 years of Bush’s bumbling you guys can’t even admit that Obama is smart? Don’t like his policies? FINE. I’m happy for you. Congrats. At the very least admit that he’s smart. Geez.
Eric: Obama may be somewhat book smart, might read people somewhat, but I don’t htink he’s overly intelligent. I think he has an ego, superiority complex, and frankly doesn’t listen to half the country. An intelligent person in power wouldn’t alienate half the voting population and have his approval rating drop 20 points in the first six months (started at 80, and is now at 60). Once again before all the Bush haters chime in, I NEVER said Bush was intelligent either… “Fool me once, sh sh you’ll never fool me again…” WTF speak retard speak.
speaking of retard speak – what about such gems as obama trying to go without the ‘prompter and insulting people with developmental disabilities…
ah, but they glaze over it because it’s ok for him to sound socially inept
Didn’t glave over that. But if you throw them a bone once in a while, they actually listen to what you say. And I’m sorry it hurt my ears and brains to listen to Bush speak. With Obama I don’t watch it, ruined too many TVs. Didn’t think the cat could do that much damage to the TV.
Is that your strategoryialitic assessment?
Strikeout italic troll knows how to use strikeout and italics. We’re all very impressed.
so people who don’t trust obama…aren’t as smart as him?
people who “loved bush” (i’m using your words, which should just read “didn’t hate”) were morons, as was he?
well, you have a way of making sense of the world around you that could shield you from actually having to think about things and reflecting on reality.
But people who didn’t hate Bush were morons.
As are people who don’t agree with me. But only because I’m always right.
I love tacos.
I like cheese!
i like turtles
So do I. I’d better with a name like that.
OMG that was perfect. +1 Internet to morecowbell.
thank you
Tacos are always right, that’s true. And magical. They’re also magical.
SO magical, SB.
Agree!
I’ve started living off those 89 cent chicken tacos from Taco Bell. It’s actually cheaper than taking lunch to work!
That should be their new ad campaign: “Taco Bell — it’s cheaper than real food!” Actually, come to think of it, it’s not far off.
89 cent Heart Attack!!!! **no jokes about Eric’s weight**
*waiting for Deep Thought to make a crude taco joke*
*disappoints due to meeting*
Sorry
But I have an awesome story from a local gourmet magazine!
THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST –Refined diners appreciate the savoury taste of one of the Pacific’s little-known seafood delicacies, the bearded clam. Renowned for its pungent, yet robust flavour, the bearded clam is a rare treat that is a genuine pleasure for the tongue.
The savoury flavour of the Pacific Bearded Clam is an irresistible temptation to most people.
This furry little mollusk is often compared to chicken in its texture, although it can smell fishy if not snatched up fresh. Inside its shell, the bearded clam stews in its own juices, and the delightful taste is revealed every time it is opened up.
The bearded clam gets its name from the seaweed that grows on its shell. The seaweed nourishes itself on the minerals in the clam’s shell, and clings to it like lichen. The mossy seaweed gives the clams an appearance of facial growth–like a beard.
The bearded clam is found in the northern Pacific regions, buried deep in hard-to-reach seabeds. Bearded clam divers toil hard to get to their tasty treasure, but they know the reward is worth the effort.
Restaurateurs admit that men love the bearded clam, and that for women it in an acquired taste. They say that the bearded clam is best when it’s tasted for the first time, moist and dripping in its own succulent juices.
The clams make for an excellent chowder, but connoisseurs insist they be kept uncooked, preferring to pry them open with their fingers and slowly lick the insides. Many Canadians find that the bearded clam is almost as desirable as beaver, another delicacy.
Creston Colgate, a Seattle chef working in Vancouver, has a few tips for would-be gourmets.
“Coaxing them out is half the battle,” said Creston. “And they go very well with zucchini. You’ll find them juicier and almost begging to be swallowed. For bearded clam, you’ll definitely need to head downtown.”
“Bearded clams are the reason I like to eat out so much!”
Those who have tried bearded clams are passionate about them. “I love them when they’re hot and steamy,” said Diana Butcher, a recent convert. “I let the juices run down my chin. It’s so sensuous.”
“I love chowing down on bearded clams,” agreed Woody Normus, seafood lover. “I can’t get enough of them. In fact, bearded clams are the reason I like to eat out so much!”
“I’ve never seen a bearded clam,” said young Billy Roth. “But someday, when I’m older, I hope to sink my face into one.”
Although most bearded clams are bearded, there is are some recipes that call for the beard to be shaved off. Incidentally, bearded clam chowder is one of the only soups where it’s normal to find a hair.
Deep. I LOVE YOU. SO DAMN MUCH. BEST ARTICLE EVER.
*mutual* *feeling-thingies* *inside*
Yah. And stuff.
*goes home to play with inner 12-year-old*
Night!
-Needs oxygen stat-
Disappointed? Hell no, you came through with flying colors! I salute you!!
Bravo, sir. Bravo.
Your eloquence is top notch.
*standing ovation*!
If Obama is so smart, why does he think he can fix a debt problem by spending even more money that he (which in all reality is “WE”) doesn’t have?
We haven’t had money for years….
So we should cancel all government programs until we have a positive balance again?
I agree with your principles, I myself never spend money that I don’t have with the exception of things like my car loan and my mortgage that are unavoidable. The problem is you can’t just shut down the government…
The government is a bit bloated, they will have to cut some things. We may have to also submit to higher taxes until the deficit is paid or the dollar won’t be worth dirt. It’s near that now…
If you did not live in debt, you would not need to borrow money for your car loan and mortgage.
You paid cash for your house?
(I’m not saying it can’t be done, but ….damn.)
i paid cash for my house, but that was after years of living off top ramen and selling drugs to college kids…
if i lived in the midwest or the south or any other unpopulated area i probably could have done it without selling drugs to college kids, but i live in southern california…
Yeah, the unspoken next sentence to “You paid cash for your house?” was actually “So what are you, a drug dealer or something?”
Still, from my point of view the government should keep their nose out of that type of free enterprise, so, congratulations.
So you paid for the home you live in with cash, up front?
I’m sorry, but I don’t believe you.
I wouldn’t be able to afford a house until the ripe age of 50 if not for loans. I don’t have $150,000 just laying around.
So you are saying that I should continue to live in an apartment building while saving what little money is left after the monthly rent payment in a bank account to slowly accumulate for the next 50 years? That doesn’t make sense when I can get a loan, live in the home, shift my monthly payments from rent to the mortgage thus accumulating equity rather than throwing the money down the drain. In 30 years I will be in better financial shape than I would have been had I simply banked every extra cent while paying rent.
It isn’t impossible to live a life without debt, it just isn’t practical.
You’re either just trying to get my goat (congrats, he’s ornery)
or you live in your parents basement and you have no idea how the world works.
Having “debated” with ubr before, I’m going with the “basement” option. (Or possibly he’s a trustafarian, collected an inheritance, etc.)
$150? I need to move…that’ll barely buy you parking around these parts…
dhoti – nesting fail dumbass… and no, i’m not still in school (like you) and yes, i did save money while i paid for my own schooling. i will say that i did split the house with my brother, but we both put down cash. $80k is not that hard to come up with if you know how to invest properly… but hey, you’re the financial industries expert you should know that already…
You really do have a complex, don’t you? Then, for your benefit — yep, you got me, I’m still in school. Elementary school, even. I’m skipping around in my overalls and my fluffy hat with my big lollipop, like Mr. Burns in flashbacks…tra la la…
You must be mad if you didn’t realize I was replying to Steve. LOL! So sensitive…see, that’s why I love you.
That’s what I said. “So sensitive… See, that’s why I love you.”
Ugh. Really?
Of course.
Um, ew.
take a look and you’ll see that steve wasn’t even replying to me in the first place, yet you still mentioned me in your response…
Who was he replying to, then? Mild nesting fail or not, it’s quite obvious.
yes it is. he’s replying to dave… or do you really think that he wrote that whole three paragraph essay in the 1 minute between our posts?
Actually, I thought he may have tweaked it on preview (as the mefi cats say), given that Dave’s talking in broad hypotheticals and you’re talking in specifics.
But if I decide to be nice and give you this one, will you pull one of the sticks out of your butt?
give me this one?
.
that’s rich…
he’s tripling the deficit. not having money is one thing, but this is a new ballgame.
Eh. Is it really though? It doesn’t really seem like a new ballgame to me. Hasn’t deficit spending been a fairly consistent government tactic for a long time? And has anyone really considered the shock that would occur from cutting large amounts of spending? I’m all for cutting waste, but if you take a hacksaw to spending things are gonna go badly, I think. Start cutting spending and suddenly government jobs are on the line, and isn’t unemployment high enough?
The government is the only sector to have grown jobs in the last year. Does that not seem like a problem? For all the jobs that the stimulus was supposed to create, there haven’t been any except for in the public sector. Meanwhile, the private sector is hemorrhaging jobs with no end in sight.
-
I said that to say this: The things we’re deficit spending on are not working. We need to stop. Stimulus 2 will only make the problem worse, or at the very least, still not help at all. The Republicans have been castigated in the past for deficit spending by Democrats who say it doesn’t work and mortgages our future. Now, it’s ok because “Bush caused it”? No, it’s still not ok. And at what point does this become Obama’s problem as opposed to being laid on Bush’s head?
-
Deficit spending and spending money we dont’ have is pretty much par for the course in the government. We have people there who have never had to live under a budget themselves, so how are we expecting them to live under one now? We ask them to term limit themselves, to make their own pay decisions, and to spend our money, all while trusting them not to screw us over too badly. Is it just me, or have we given the keys to the gold room and the asylum to the crazy people?
-
And as a side note, why are these people allowed to vote on their own pay? I don’t get to dictate my pay, why should they??
-
/off topic angry ramble.
The question I’ve always wondered is this: At what point is it too much? Our debt has been going up and up for a very very long time (I’m not up on my debt history, so I don’t know when if ever we were able to pay it down). As far as I can tell, nobody has ever really held the government accountable for said debt, and I wonder if anyone actually will. At what point does the government say, “Oops, ran out of money we didn’t have in the first place. We’re screwed.” Anyone who can answer that for me gets all the money I have in my pocket.
“At what point is it too much?”
When you monetize it. In other words, to cover it, you print more money, which makes faster the devaluing of our dollar and increases inflation. When you hear people talk about “hyper inflation” this is what causes it.
So far, the plan is to monetize 1.75 trillion of the debt.
Before Obama, total amount of debt monetized?
Zero
To put the 1.75 trillion in perspective, in 2007, the total taxes taken by the federal government was 2.3 trillion, and 500 billion of that came from exxon.
Monetization in of itself is not a bad word, but when applying it to a national debt, it can be more than toxic.
Enter monetization into wikipedia, they have a pretty accurate article on it, with one exception.
They site the federal Reserve as being the US’s “central bank”. In one sense, it is a central bank as it operates interest rates and prints money. in another and much more important, it is not owned by the government and makes a profit off of the money it prints. For every nickel it creates, it charges us 7 cents.
A central bank is primary and vital to the functioning of a socialist or communist economy. Take that any way you want.
tripling the deficit is not the opposite of cutting spending. some programs are just inefficient and their processes could be reviewed.
besides, i was commenting on the multiplier more than anything. increasing the deficit happens. but tripling…
because our kids will have to pay it off
Put it on their tab. Actually nah, our chidlren’s children’s chidlren MIGHT actually pay some of it off. If it ever gets paid off. “China the checks in the mail!”
speaking of china, i gotta go to walmart to buy more tshirts
George Washington would be ashamed.
Obama isn’t an idiot. He isn’t smarter than I am either, and I’m not really intimidated by him. He is, however, quite dangerous because he’s very popular (I used to think he was great as well) but is not working in the interest of the American people. He is also a verifiable liar.
He said he wouldn’t use signing statements. He does now. He said he wouldn’t raise taxes for the middle class. He now says he will. He said he’d pull us immediately out of Iraq. Nope. Etc, etc, etc, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.
But then again, who should expect anything different? He’s a politician.
The only reason you think Bush is an idiot is because every time he made a small mistake in a speech the media played it over and over until the whole country thought he was an idiot. Bush actually has a higher IQ than Obama. Besides, Obama has made way more stupid mistakes in speeches than Bush. You can hear them all on youtube, but there was a speech he gave to Hispanics on the day before Cinco De Mayo and he said “Welcome everyone to Cinco de Quatro”. There was also a time where he gave a speech on veterans day where he said that he “would like to thank all those that have fallen for our country, I believe we have a few of you in attendance today. And there are many more that I don’t have time to list. Obama has said way more stupid things than Bush, but of course the media loves his and would never say a bad word about him, but if Bush would of said the same things they would of crucified him for it. My point is, you only think Obama is smart and Bush is an idiot because of what the media told you. And they are wrong, both men are intelligent individuals.
Interesting points you raise, Tychosonic. When will everyone realize that this isn’t about right vs. left, and it isn’t about Bush vs. Obama? This is an invented divisiveness that is taking our focus away from what is really going on.
It’s like having someone ask you if you want vanilla or chocolate, when you really wanted strawberry all along.
Exactly.
Instead of Republican vs. Democrat, can’t we just do what is best for the nation as a whole?
for starters can we please nuke fox, msnbc, and cnn? i think they’ve caused more terrorists than anything else i can think of…
Only if we get to add Lifetime.
The Lifetime Movie Channel too. Lifetime’s slogan is “Where All Men Are Evil”, and LMC’s slogan is “Where All Men Are Still Evil, And They Smell Too.”
Yes. If Lifetime is “Television for Women” (is that still their slogan?) I’m ready to question my gender identity.
can we add the oxygen network too?
Why not? I’ll happily throw in Home Shopping Network and the Disney channel, too.
Lifetime gets me laid.
Ask me how.
i don’t want to know…
Because….sleeping with you beats watching that crap?
(Please tell me there’s a reason that doesn’t sound that bad!)
Since you asked so nicely:
Teh movie night.
Antagonist = teh super badmo!!!!elebenties!!!
*popcorn and shirt sleeve*
Deep Thought = teh good in comparison to the badmo.
Teh really good. Teh sooper goooood.
Teh secks.
fin.
*raises hand shyly*
Couldn’t you achieve the same effect with, say, a good action or horror flick?
Manhating secks = best secks ever.
*imho*
Having said that, I’m with you. Can you spread the word?
My wife asks why I don’t want to spend more time with her. Uh, because you’re watching this Lifetime crap on TV!! Nothing makes that stuff tolerable.
The only redeeming feature for Lifetime is that they play Frasier and Will & Grace in the mornings. All of the other crap they have on is just so much fertilizer. And they need to bring back playing The Golden Girls.
My brother used to call Lifetime B*tch Network. I find it offensive to women. It’s offensive that they think that’s all women like to watch. Give me some damn explosions and knock of off with all the crying and hugging.
*envisions threesome with diss*
dies.
We love you for a reason, Janie.
This is it.
Here here.
Fuking right! Chuck Norris would be proud.
When we walked out of Transformers the other day one of my friends was complaining about how it was too confusing at the end and you couldn’t tell which robot was fighting who and I was like, “Does it matter? They were GIANT ROBOTS FIGHTING WITH BIG EXPLOSIONS!!!” All I needed.
You should also tell your friend that mental retardation can cause extremely confusing movie experiences. She should already know most every Transformer before she walks in, damnit! :/
Same technique used to convince all of us that Gerald Ford, a talented athlete, was a clutz.
the same technique used to convince all of us that jimmy carter was a good diplomat and clinton was virtuous…
Did the media really try to make Clinton look virtuous? If memory serves, the media loved to make points about what an immoral sleaze he was.
not anymore… remember all the speeches he gave in the 2008 election? the only people who still talk smack on clinton are people with memories and people who like a good blowjob joke…
No, not really. I’m 16 and still talk about it. It’s A- funny and B- hard to forget.
tyler, you (like me) still enjoy a good blow job joke… and if you’re sixteen right now you would have only been 5 when he was impeached…
I know, but I still remember it. and what happened, I haven’t forgotten
Well, I’ll give you that. But the same could be said for many former presidents as well. Carter is probably more popular now than he ever was as president. And Bush Sr. is getting much more respect these days than during his administration. And yes, many in the media have totally forgotten his past sins as well. And don’t get me started on how Reagan is a Republican god. I’ll admit to being one of those people with selective amnesia. Clinton’s immoral actions were part of why I switched parties around 2000. I switched back around 2004, though. LOL
so…who is the worst again?
And many of us didn’t “love” Bush. He reallyl started out great, and was doing a tremendous job on the war. But he made some really stupid and expensive things, too. He wasn’t perfect…Far from it. And, unfortunately, he opened the door to all these “bail outs”. But the fact remains that Obama is buying up private businesses (against the constitution) and putting them under federal controll, and he has, in 5 months, spent more than than ANY other president….more than the last several presidents combined!
”tremendous job on the war” WTF man
since when doing great at killing people is a quality
since when doing great at killing people is a quality
When the people the military are killing are trying to kill all of us.
Er, I mean, peace and love, duuuuuude.
yeah…. because the terrorists are everywhere and the Iraqui civilians, women and children included were coming over here to shoot you in the head…
War on Terrorism ≠ Iraq War
Ooooh! Totally OT, but HOW did you do the “not-equal” sign?
≠
Test.
Tease. Tellllll meee! *whines*
ROFLMAO!
Take off your shirt. Do it.
Tits or it won’t happen…. NO ONE TELL HER
Fine *fumes*
But only because in my mind you’re a hottie.
Type the following as one string without the spaces:
& # 8 8 0 0 ;
Lol…thanks! I was scanning through the source code for the page to figure it out while you posted that.
Look fast: ( • )( •)
Hope that works right or it’s reeeeaally going to look stupid.
‼
♂
♥
I know lots of them. Do you wanna play “strip codebreaker?”
Lol…I just googled and found a page with decimal character references for symbols! You actually know these? I’m impressed. I’m just resourceful, which ≠ smart, necessarily. Although in some cases it’s ≈!
Nice work! Resourceful AND sexy… ☼
I don’t know them all, I just remember a choice few.
And for fun, you can just do the ampersand, pound sign, a random number, and a semicolon… just to see what pops…
like… Ą or maybe ↕ or ʚ
Shit…. it worked!
For the record, the last one I did was 666…
Not to nitpick, diss, but the right “boob” is a little smaller than the left.
AAAHHHHHHHHH!!! ERIC!! NEVER DISS THE TITS!!!
*goddam married…. grumble*
@Eric: Nature’s not always perfectly symmetrical, either, you know! (Yeah, there’s an extra space in there somewhere.)
Oh wait…. tit the diss? Diss the diss?
Tit the tits?????
AAAAAHHH!
*splodie*
ROTFLMAO Yeah, I wasn’t sure if you realized what you said there, DT.
And diss, I wasn’t criticizing. Just making an observation. Like DT said, never ever say anything bad about breasts, even ASCII ones.
≠
♫
♥
Ω
₫
‽
♠ ♣ ♥ ♦!
Well, if you weren’t such an idiot, you would know that the Iraqi civilians were, by far, killed by other Iraqis and various flavors of terrorists such as Al Qeda in Iraq.
But, you are just drinking the kool-aid.
Amen.
There was virtually no terrorist activity in Iraq until AFTER we went in. Wanna know why? had a LOT to do with the fact that brutal dictator Saddam Hussein was in charge. While not condoning his actions, he kept that country under tight control.
I’m STILL not sure why the heck we went in there in the first place. The guy that attacked us was in Afghanistan the whole time.
Holy cr@p! Civilians in the middle east are trying to kill Americans?
FUNNY… I HADN’T NOTICED.
And exactly how many Iraqis were involved in 9/11 again?
Saving lives is what ‘doing a good job on the war’ means. As in saving our Troops lives and innocent people’s lives (as in preventing future 9/11 attacks).
But hey, I mean we could’ve just shook the dust off our shoulders from 9/11, left security as it was at airports, and told AlQida (sp) it was ok, no harm done! Ha, yea…even Obama after 9/11 would have gone to war.
If you can’t spell something, you can’t know much about it. Although that was kind of evident, spelling aside.
Do you remember that guy, Osama Bin Laden? Bearded guy? Yeah. He’s enjoying lamb kebab in Pakistan right now. Good job, G Dub.
Oh come on, he’s dead… No one could hide for that long with that much money on his head.
Hmm….didn’t somebody on here spot him rifling through their garbage cans recently (although they admitted it might have been a raccoon…)?
That was me. Sonuvabitch took my garden hose recently too. I think he’s living in my garage, which has been deserted since the last flood. Asshole.
If he’s dead, then who got the money?
-Snickers and throws mysterious head behind corner-
Who knows, SB? Not like it matters, right?
Yyyyummmmmm Snickers!!!!
So, you don’t like peanut butter, but you do like peanuts?
Hey, Snickers really satisfies.
(Hmmm…*changing name to Snickers*)
D.B. Cooper.
He was very sick… Not saying anyone got the reward, but you never know…
I personally think that they should have spent that money to re-build the twin towers, but in the shape of two giant middle fingers flipping the bird in the general direction of the middle east.
One giant F-you to the terrorists.
Hilarious.
hahaha. best idea i’ve heard all day.
even better job to clinton who had a chance to take osama out back in the 90s. but hey, let’s not bring up old sh!t.
Yeah and he should have done it, obviously. But at least he didn’t occupy a foreign country and call it a solution.
naw, he just bombed places we’d never heard of and called it diplomacy.
I guess that makes GW’s total incompetence okay then.
‘total incompetence’… so… which president blew up a chinese embassy? which president signed off on a hare brain scheme that cost the lives of eight service men in a foreign desert?
.
and don’t forget that congress signed off on the iraq war.
Bringing up the incompetence of others doesn’t make GW any less incompetent. As far as eight service men in a foreign desert, I’m pretty sure we lost more than that during the Bush years. I’ve done some reading on the 109th congress and I’m certainly not defending them.
total incompetence is a term that needs a definition. by trying to get you to compare bush to other presidents i’m trying to gauge the personal meaning of the term. you throw it out there like it’s a given, when in comparison all these presidents have screwed up majorly.
My condemnation of one person’s performance doesn’t equal support for another person’s performance. I am in agreement that most of our presidents have failed in some ways, however, I use total incompetence to describe Bush because I can think of nothing that has improved as a result of his presidency. Even Nixon did SOME good.
Bush = national scape goat.
Pres Bush = national letdown
If the terrorists (scuse me) insurgants would stop hiding in schools, mosques and neighborhoods to fight from, a lot fewer people would be killed. And a lot fewer civillians have been killed than ever before. Our troops have been VERY careful about that. Maybe too careful. Not that I want innocent blood shed, but it IS a war.
“Maybe too careful. Not that I want innocent blood shed, but it IS a war.”
Wow.
that’s pretty much how this is our country
The people who wrote the Constitution spent a lot of time and built a successful government.
But these liberals think they’re better.
so…who is the worst again?
William Henry Harrison.
Damn you, Millard Filmore!!!!!!! *shakes fist at sky*
Ok, you got me there. The Fugitive Slave Act is a hard… uh… act to follow.
A classic, for sure.
FILLMOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRREEEEE!!!!!!!
TTWWWWWWWIIIIIIIIIIIIIIXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wormstrum!
*sings Animaniacs* William Harrison, how do you praise? That guy was dead in thirty days!
*continues*
(*well, continues from an earlier point!*)
Tom Jefferson stayed up to write the Constitution late at night,
So he and his wife had a great big fight,
and she made him sleep on the couch all night!
*headdesk*
Declaration, not Constitution. Fail on me.
James Maddison never had a son and he fought the War of 1812,
James Monroe’s colossal nose was bigger than Pinocchio’s!
It isn’t communism yet, it’s socialism. he isn’t investing, he’s bringing things under govmt control, which is very inefficient
agreed
He isn’t investing in America…he’s taking it over. Buying out PRIVATE industries and businesses and putting them under the federal controll. Telling businesses how much money they can pay their executives, or what they are allowed to produce and sell to the public! That’s not just socialism, it’s fascism, too.
That’s not just socialism, it’s fascism, too.
Absolutely true. Anyone who says “but.. but .. fascism isn’t left wing” hasn’t ever studied what Mussolini and Hitler’s platform was.
Suffice to say, Benito Mussolini would feel right at home in today’s Democrat Party.
Hitler and Mussolini were fascists. And fascists are/were rightwing. They would feel right at home in the modern American Republican Party.
Claiming that American liberals and old school fascists are the same is just a Republican big lie.
It’s like the Klan claiming that it isn’t racist. Or Sarah Palin claiming that the Alaska Independence Party doesn’t have secession in it’s platform, when that’s the only reason they exist.
Hitler and Mussolini were fascists. And fascists are/were rightwing. They would feel right at home in the modern American Republican Party.
Once again, you are wrong. Read what Mussolini ran on, and read his platform, and you will hear it echo in modern Democrats.
And hear what every emperor and king ever decreed and you’d hear it’s echos in today’s conservative agenda.
Right, those emperors and kings, always wanting to decrease taxes on their subjects, always wanting more and more freedom, damn them!!
Yeah but the thing about Hitler, I mean the main reason people aren’t so keen on him was that he was a genocidal lunatic.
His financial approach took what was a bankrupt country and made it into a global super power in the space of a few years.
Agreed. I don’t want to have a debate on the man here, but my firm belief is this- Hitler was a genius, one of the smartest people of his time, despite the fact that he was a raving loony and a genocidal nut job. Once you take his morals and beliefs out of the equation, you get an incredibly intelligent, persuasive person who really knows how to run a country finance-wise.
Sociopath.
Me, or him?