or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › My Statement to Nations That Hate the US
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My Statement to Nations That Hate the US - Page 7

post #241 of 512
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>SDW2001,

Give me an extra big break. Everything you have said and your demeanor drips with close mindedness.

During republican rule the people of the United States have lost more personal freedoms than at any other time. Bush didn't need to tell me anything. Who stands up of for all these right wing agendas like taking away a woman's right to choose? The problem these days is the democrats are almost as bad. So we end up with milktoast candidates like we had last time.

Yes, from Watergate to the Contras I've seen it all. You know what? It stinks.

Listen bucko, I'd wager I've been around a lot longer ( 30 is still young to me which was almost 20 years ago, just about the average age of people on this forum ) than you so I don't need any lessons in right wing politics. I respect the opinions of people younger than myself until they try to tell me something I know is a bunch of horse sh*t.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

1. I totally disgaree with your statement regarding people losing their rights under republican administrations. I suppose FDR putting the Japanese into camps isn't taken into consideration.....we were at war then, too.

2. Regarding the abortion point: You, like most liberals, automatically assume that a women has the right to choose. Many conservatives (but not all, as you must know) say that women don't have this right, because it is taking the life away of sentient being. They call it murder. It isn't "taking away a woman's right to choose" to them, its preventing murder. This is the part of your post that disturbs me most, because you won't even acknowledge the debate, which is quite intense. To you, it is just "the republicans taking away a woman's right to choose".......as if we all agree that this right is inherent in nature, which not everyone does. The abortion argument is complicated, and I'm not going to get into my views on it right now, but it seems obvious you can see your side, and ONLY your side.

3. Your age point is fairly irrelevent, I think, to this discussion. I am grown adult with a college education and a full time job. I have gone through more in my life than many people your age. I also work with people your age all the time, and we treat each other as equal professionals. The age argument might work when your opponent in a debate is, say, 15 (no offense guys!), but when one reaches a certain point, we are all adults. I would also like to point out that many people your age do not even remotely agree with you, so once again it seems your entire "I'm older" argument is pointless. I would even venture to say that the majority of people in your age group are MORE conservative than you are, but that is just a supposition (though I think a fairly level-headed one.....most would agree that people tend to become more conservative with age, no?)

[quote]I respect the opinions of people younger than myself until they try to tell me something I know is a bunch of horse sh*t. <hr></blockquote>

Yes. Quite open-minded. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

And I respect the opinions of those older, until I decide what they tell ME is a bunch of horse sh*t.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #242 of 512
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>Hey there's nothing wrong with being young ( after all I was there once ) but, When I hear crap like what I hear coming from some of these guys it's like deja vous.

By the way I think it's great that there are young people like yourself who can still question. It gives me hope. But, as for the rest hasn't the human race learned anything from the past?

It's really quite disheartening to hear the same closeminded garbage that I heard when I was a boy. I mean one would hope for some progress instead of going backwards. But I guess these bad apples are always around.

But, here's to you, your kind, and the future.


[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</strong><hr></blockquote>


What I question is the likes of YOU. I question liberals who accuse people like me of doing the very thing they THEMSELVES are guilty of, namely telling anyone who disagrees with them that they are just "young, naive, or close-minded".

I suppose when I grow up I'll learn to be more like you. If you'll excuse me I have to go buy my peace flower now.

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

EDIT: You should know I question our government ALL THE TIME. I just question different things than you do. But I forgot, that's why I'm wrong.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #243 of 512
Thread Starter 
[quote]You wouldn't consider Cheney's comments the epitome of democracy now would you? <hr></blockquote>

I wouldn't consider them non-democratic either.

[quote]Yet, that is irrelavent to my point. Cheney criticized that very right to criticize the President during a time of "war." <hr></blockquote>

No, he questioned its wisdom and its appropriateness. And you obviously have no real understanding of what it means to go to war. But that is a point for later.

[quote]Democrats could enjoy politcal gain regardless of motive. To say that politics is not a part of true beliefs to polititians reflects a poor understanding of the political process. <hr></blockquote>

I suppose you and your college ass have a better understanding than I? Right. OK. And I think it wasn't smart for the democrats to criticize the President on this issue.....I didn't think it would work......and it, for the most part, didn't.

[quote]I should have clarified my statement to convey that when political pressure intensifies, Bush is willing to sacrifice some long and dearly held democratic principles. Like what? Dick Cheney's criticism of the First Amendment (which, ironically, is protected by the first amendment itself) Jeopardizing separation of Church and State- aka some "Faith Based Initiatives." <hr></blockquote>

1) I disagree that Bush drops his principles. In fact, I think he "sticks to his guns" more than any President in recent memory.

2) I am not aware of any criticism of the 1st Amend. by Vice President Cheney.

3) Your last point shows YOUR poor understanding of our laws. The separation of church and state concept was added added to the constitution to prevent the government from establishing an official religion of the state. It was NOT intended to remove religion from all public institutions. That is a common misconception. I fully support the faith-based iniatives. That program in NO WAY violates the constitution, IMO.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #244 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>
It's really quite disheartening to hear the same closeminded garbage that I heard when I was a boy. I mean one would hope for some progress instead of going backwards...</strong><hr></blockquote>

You don't make good arguments. It's just that simple. A person who disagrees with isn't by definition close-minded. You called me a knucklewalker. I'm not all that impressed with extent to which your mind is open to what others say.
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #245 of 512
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>

You don't make good arguments. It's just that simple. A person who disagrees with isn't by definition close-minded. You called me a knucklewalker. I'm not all that impressed with extent to which your mind is open to what others say.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Agreed. It is interesting that conservatives get the brunt of the "closeminded" accusations, when in fact liberals often call conservatives facists when they don't support their liberal agendas.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #246 of 512
God you guys are so full of yourselves.

Like I said before there is no point in arguing with someone who ether bends the facts or wants to selectively omit them so they fit their world view.

This : " I have gone through more in my life than many people your age. " and this: " I would even venture to say that the majority of people in your age group are MORE conservative than you are " just shows how little you know and how out of touch you must be with my age group. Of course you probably only associate with indviduals who are in tune with your viewpoint.

This is what I find really disturbing and just proves how polarized you are : " You, like most liberals, automatically assume that a women has the right to choose. Many conservatives (but not all, as you must know) say that women don't have this right "

" I suppose when I grow up I'll learn to be more like you. " No, I just hope you grow up.

One thing you learn as you get older is that having a lot of experiences in a short period of time is not the same thing ( and can be a negative thing ). Just like anything else it takes time to put it all together.

You did get one thing right however : EDIT: " You should know I question our government ALL THE TIME. I just question different things than you do. But I forgot, that's why I'm wrong ".

Yes, people do tend to become more consevative as they get older. This mostly comes from raising a family, providing for retirement, and less willingness to take chances. That doesn't mean they give up their ideals. The hippies become the yuppies and drive BMWs. But, at heart what they believe in is still there. Being a rebel ( like being a rockstar ) is mostly a young persons game.

I imagine you only question things when they involve going against the " conservative agenda ". It's about time you got that retoric back in your face.

I'm not going to get into the abortion thing with you as I'm sure you know exactly when the fetus stops being a piece of tissue and becomes a human being. Or maybe your'e one of those " it's always potential " idiots.
We also won't talk about the other side : unwanted children and the tragic circumstances of their up bringing. Some say we in part are growing our future disfunctional members of society that way.

Oh and Spaceman this makes two of us : " I'm not all that impressed with extent to which your mind is open to what others say ".

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #247 of 512
You funny 'conservatives' and 'liberals'! You and your 'agendas'!
post #248 of 512
Really.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #249 of 512
Yes, Really! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
post #250 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by Ruhx:
<strong>

I have to say i love this, "anyway one chooses" i believe that the point was the Time not the Way that they did it. You can take it out of context all you want but it was a defense against unethical political grand standing.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> Rehashing points I refuted gets you nowhere.

[quote]Originally posted by Ruhx:
<strong>
He was speaking against the criticism because it had already happened. He took an Ethical stand against it. I completely agree with it, they should not have tried to sway votes when standing by the current leader was more important. Ethics.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Irrelevant. Once again, they could have political gain regardless of motive.

[quote]Originally posted by Ruhx:
<strong>
Last please stop speaking of open mindedness as if you have some handle on it. The fact that you discount things like ethics, and politicians using trying times to get elected shows you to be more closeminded in this.</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> Naive. Everything is political.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>
post #251 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>2. Regarding the abortion point: You, like most liberals, automatically assume that a women has the right to choose. Many conservatives (but not all, as you must know) say that women don't have this right, because it is taking the life away of sentient being. They call it murder. It isn't "taking away a woman's right to choose" to them, its preventing murder. This is the part of your post that disturbs me most, because you won't even acknowledge the debate, which is quite intense. To you, it is just "the republicans taking away a woman's right to choose".......as if we all agree that this right is inherent in nature, which not everyone does. </strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> The Supreme Court has given us the "right to choose." Until they rule otherwise, we have that right.

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>
The abortion argument is complicated, and I'm not going to get into my views on it right now, but it seems obvious you can see your side, and ONLY your side.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Poor Sport. I see your side fine. If it is so obvious then show us.
post #252 of 512
Heh.

It starts off as a "Statement" to various nations (INCREDIBLY arrogant, but at least acknowledging there ARE nations outside the US) and ends up as American in-fighting. Who sez the US is self-absorbed?

Yeh, I'm trolling.
meh
Reply
meh
Reply
post #253 of 512
Outsider,

I'm hoping you didn't misunderstand that I was agreeing with you. This agenda thing is really stupid. Conservatives or liberals can be correct or not at any time. We are really talking about people. A person has an equal potential to be right or wrong at any time. Even myself.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #254 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>
I wouldn't consider them non-democratic either.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> You sly bastard. The comment itself was undemocratic. The circumstances in which he said it were democratic.

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>
And you obviously have no real understanding of what it means to go to war.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Irrelevant.

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>
I suppose you and your college ass have a better understanding than I? Right. OK.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Age is irrelevant, to a point. I do not believe that point is after college.

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>
And I think it wasn't smart for the democrats to criticize the President on this issue.....I didn't think it would work......and it, for the most part, didn't.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Fair enough.

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>
1) I disagree that Bush drops his principles. In fact, I think he "sticks to his guns" more than any President in recent memory.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

He seems to have reversed more campaign pledges than can be counted on one hand.
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

2) I am not aware of any criticism of the 1st Amend. by Vice President Cheney.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

True, the criticism was indirect.

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>
3) Your last point shows YOUR poor understanding of our laws. The separation of church and state concept was added added to the constitution to prevent the government from establishing an official religion of the state. It was NOT intended to remove religion from all public institutions. That is a common misconception. I fully support the faith-based iniatives. That program in NO WAY violates the constitution, IMO.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

In your opinion? It either violates the Constitution or does not.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>
post #255 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>

You don't make good arguments. It's just that simple. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Do not personally attack him. If his arguments are weak, then attack them.
post #256 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by Harald:
<strong>Heh.

It starts off as a "Statement" to various nations (INCREDIBLY arrogant, but at least acknowledging there ARE nations outside the US) and ends up as American in-fighting. Who sez the US is self-absorbed?

Yeh, I'm trolling.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Stereotype?
post #257 of 512
Â*Â*Â* Â*Â* Â*Â* Â*Â* Â* Â* Â*Â*
------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:

You don't make good arguments. It's just that simple.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

" Do not personally attack him. If his arguments are weak, then attack them ".

It sounds like you might just make a good attorney.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #258 of 512
Thread Starter 
[quote]...just shows how little you know and how out of touch you must be with my age group. Of course you probably only associate with indviduals who are in tune with your viewpoint. <hr></blockquote>

No, I just happen to know many people your age that have opinions contrary to yours. You make it sound as if when I get older, or when ONE gets older, he/she will come around to your way of thinking. Bullshit. Complete bullshit.

[quote]No, I just hope you grow up. <hr></blockquote>

The implication you make that I am immature is based on nothing but the fact that we disagree. This comment has no reason to be made.

[quote]One thing you learn as you get older is that having a lot of experiences in a short period of time is not the same thing ( and can be a negative thing ). Just like anything else it takes time to put it all together. <hr></blockquote>

Agreed, though you don't really know what I am talking about speciffically, and you also don't know my age to begin with. Basing the whole argument on age is ludicrous for those two reasons.

[quote]I imagine you only question things when they involve going against the " conservative agenda ". It's about time you got that retoric back in your face. <hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> No, I question many things. The above statement is patently false. What is the conservative agenda, in your opinion? I'm sure you would say it has something to do with "taking away our rights" or "paying back big oil" or "war mongering".

[quote]Or maybe your'e one of those " it's always potential " idiots. <hr></blockquote>

Well, you are the one who brought up the abortion thing...not me. And, it was me who said that I wouldn't get into it WITH YOU. So, saying "I'm not going to get into it with you" in your next post is a fairly deceptive comment. In any case, if I was one of the people that believed that life begins at the moment of conception (and I have already said I won't divuldge my beliefs on this issue) it wouldn't make me an "idiot", it would just mean that I DISAGREE with you. Or, is that not allowed?

[quote] Conservatives or liberals can be correct or not at any time.<hr></blockquote>

Agreed, but people still have agendas and positions.


Now, Harald writes:

[quote]INCREDIBLY arrogant, but at least acknowledging there ARE nations outside the US <hr></blockquote>

My statement is not arrogant at all. You mean you disagree that certain nations hate us for our money and power? Really? I would be very surpised if that was the case. I didn't say they all did.....just SOME. If you honestly think your opinion through and still disagree, I can live with that. As far as the "at least he acknowledged other nations exist" comment.....that is just stupid. Of course I understand that we are not the only nation in the world. But, I also know that we are the most developed economically and militarily.

And, sjpsu writes:

[quote]He seems to have reversed more campaign pledges than can be counted on one hand. <hr></blockquote>

:eek: :eek: :eek:

What? Which ones? He lowered taxes, increased military spending and allocations for housing, passed education reform.....the list goes on. What promises has he broken? Do you consider a compromise a "reversal'? I don't. Remember, you said CAMPAIGN PROMISES....not "items you agree with". I can't think of one campaign promise he has broken. Please name ONE! The fact is you don't know what to do with a President that actually DOES what he SAID HE WOULD DO. Remember, Clinton said he would LOWER taxes when he got eledcted in '92.....and then passed the biggest tax increase in history. (Don't even TRY to argue that......it is a DOCUMENTED FACT).

[quote]True, the criticism was indirect. <hr></blockquote>

No, this is how YOU interpreted it. To say Cheney is "criticizing the 1st Amend. " is a bit extreme. He said he thought criticizing the President on war issues was unwise. I agree.

[quote]In your opinion? It either violates the Constitution or does not. <hr></blockquote>

What are we expressing here? Aren't we expressing our opinions? At least I haven't bought into the "get religion out" crowd's propoganda about separation of church and state. EVERYONE here is expressing an opinion....you included. And in MY OPINION the faith based iniatives are a wonderful program that DO NOT, IN ANY WAY, violate the separation of church and state.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #259 of 512
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>

Do not personally attack him. If his arguments are weak, then attack them.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Umm........I'm pretty sure that is what he did, since his post was about the arguments being weak.
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #260 of 512
Thread Starter 
I won't be around until tomorrow morning after I post this, so defending myself against three people at once will have to wait until then. scott_h_phd, want to join the fun?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #261 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>
"Do not personally attack him. If his arguments are weak, then attack them ".

It sounds like you might just make a good attorney. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Why are you addressing this to me? Jimmac was the one who called me a knucklewalker. He wasn't countering any arguments. He was just attacking me. And I was prepared to let it slide but then he started whining about close-mindedness of others. It's more than a little too much.
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #262 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>
Oh and Spaceman this makes two of us : " I'm not all that impressed with extent to which your mind is open to what others say ".</strong><hr></blockquote>

MAKE AN ARGUMENT!!! Name-calling and bitching about PMs and telling me over and over again about how you think different just doesn't even come close to "cutting it". Thinking different isn't a virtue all by itself. You've given me nothing to consider. And then when I remain unpersuaded, you attack me as close-minded.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</p>
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #263 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong> And in MY OPINION the faith based iniatives are a wonderful program that DO NOT, IN ANY WAY, violate the separation of church and state.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

In the former statement, you opine that they do not violate separation of church and state. While in the latter statement, you state that they do not violate the separation of church and state and further clarify your opinion in commenting on whether or not you like the program.

The latter statement is certainly different than original one. The distinction lies where in the former statement you base an argument on personal judgement, or opinion, while in the latter one you state it like it is based on fact. (Although, you did not support it at all)

[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:<strong>
What? Which ones? He lowered taxes, increased military spending and allocations for housing, passed education reform.....the list goes on. What promises has he broken? Do you consider a compromise a "reversal'? I don't. Remember, you said CAMPAIGN PROMISES....not "items you agree with". I can't think of one campaign promise he has broken. Please name ONE! The fact is you don't know what to do with a President that actually DOES what he SAID HE WOULD DO. </strong><hr></blockquote>

[quote]<a href="http://www.ictsd.org/html/weekly/27-03-01/story3.htm" target="_blank">ICTSD Bridges Weekly Trade News Digest</a>:<strong>

The EU criticism came in response to a letter from President Bush to Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska last week in which Bush reverted a campaign pledge by saying that he would not seek to impose mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide (CO2) at US power plants as caps on CO2 would force a shift from coal to natural gas which he claims would lead to higher electricity prices.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

[quote]<a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2001/03/15/fp2s1-csm.shtml" target="_blank">Christian Science Monitor</a><strong>

By deciding not to regulate power-plant emissions of carbon dioxide, the president this week sided with some of his most ardent backers in the business community and reversed a campaign pledge.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

One.
post #264 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

Umm........I'm pretty sure that is what he did, since his post was about the arguments being weak.
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

Substantively, please. "Your arguments are weak" personally attacks him and contributes nothing to discussion. However, if you said "This is why your arguments are weak" and go on to explain why in the context of the issue, then you can get away with a little personal nudges here and there.
post #265 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>
Substantively, please. "Your arguments are weak" personally attacks him and contributes nothing to discussion. However, if you said "This is why your arguments are weak" and go on to explain why in the context of the issue, then you can get away with a little personal nudges here and there. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Contributes to the discussion? What discussion? Calling someone a redneck or a knucklewalker isn't a discussion.
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #266 of 512
[quote]<a href="http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2002/02march/march02lines.html" target="_blank">Multinational Monitor: Bush's Yucca Reversal (Scroll down to third story)</a><strong>
Bushs reversal caused Senator Harry Reid, D-Nevada, to call Bush a liar and join the GAO in a lawsuit asking the courts to force Cheney to release information related to energy policy meetings with industry executives.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Two.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>
post #267 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by spaceman_spiff:
<strong>
Calling someone a redneck or a knucklewalker isn't a discussion.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Agreed.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</p>
post #268 of 512
[quote] <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry022102.shtml" target="_blank">RIch Lowry on Bush on National Review Online</a><strong>If Bush signs something close to the current version of Shays-Meehan he will be committing his first bona fide, no-doubt-about-it, can't-be-spun flip-flop and broken campaign promise.</strong> <hr></blockquote>

Three.
post #269 of 512
[quote]<a href="http://www.clw.org/control/budgetflip.html" target="_blank">Bush Flip-Flops Again, Cuts Funding for Nonproliferation Programs </a><strong>
In another clear reversal of a campaign promise, President Bush reportedly plans to slash fiscal year 2002 Department of Energy funding for nonproliferation programs with Russia.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Four.
post #270 of 512
Spaceman & SDW2001,

I have never said getting older will make you more liberal but, your perspective will change. The way you see things will change. If you don't believe me give it time. But, I never said it would make your opinions the same as mine.

By the way even at 30 I wouldn't have believed me ether.

Spaceman you lost ANY willingness on my part to discuss things in a open manner the minute you called me a troll. That showed me you didn't want to discuss, you just wanted to win. So I guess if you don't like name calling you shouldn't have casted the first stone. For those of you who missed this part SPACEMAN-SPIFF sent me a private message to stop trolling because I didn't agree with his point of view. You know, the same way he accused BRussell of policing his posts.

Once again I have a life and talking to you two is a big waste of time. Sometimes though you say things I just have to reply to.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #271 of 512
I always thought as you get older you get more conservative. Young ones tend to be more liberal. So at your mid 30's you will have a perfect balanced view of the world. Therefore only 30 somethings should rule the world. Problems solved!
post #272 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> Naive. Everything is political.

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: sjpsu ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> good god i am laughing so hard! You think recognizing more than one point is naive. Rehashing? no making clear your short comings of course they're irrelevent you can't see them <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: Ruhx ]</p>
post #273 of 512
^ You clearly don't get it.
post #274 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>^ You clearly don't get it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> Again oh person of oneness, enlighten me with your unfathomable wisdom on this. It's only irrelevant if it is on a completely different topic when you are speak in terms of opionon. Are all opinions valid? Nope, in fact I do not think most of yours are. But irrelevent, no and i am loth to see what the people of this country are coming to and you represent, thankfully, a very extreme few.
post #275 of 512
^ You wouldn't understand.... <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
post #276 of 512
Recent Exchange on Crossfire:
Guest-"Karl Rove isn't trying to politicize the war..."
Begala- "He's a political strategist!" lol
post #277 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:
<strong>^ You wouldn't understand.... <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

You know what sjpsu, you can not insite me with an i know more than you attitude nor will your kind ever intimidate anyone. So you loss out on all points and without defense fall back to "i can not understand what your saying because it does not fit into my tiny view of the world around me" and call it "irrelevant". Thankfully the irrelevance falls into the "this board won't make a bit of difference in the world" category.
post #278 of 512
He didn't say you can't understand he said you wouldn't understand. There's a big difference.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #279 of 512
[quote]Originally posted by jimmac:
<strong>He didn't say you can't understand he said you wouldn't understand. There's a big difference.</strong><hr></blockquote>

No he/she didn't, I said it about him/her. I read and fully understand his/her points, and see other facets to them. His/her points appall me with there incredibly narrow view and bitting commentary on the ability of another to think due to their lack of agreement. With a touch, just a touch, of wisdom this person could see at least one facet of the points he/she is making and gain some perspective. Hopefully that would lead to more understanding of some of the other facets and more perspective, and not a phobic panic cause him/her to become even more narrow. But first he/she must recognize them. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
post #280 of 512
SDW, it would have been cool if you said something like this:

My Statement to Nations that Hate the US: Right back at you, bitches!

Short and SWEEEET!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › My Statement to Nations That Hate the US