[quote]<strong>No, my point is that you're avoiding addressing what the guy actually said.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Did I comment on the speech? Did I say he has no right to talk because he's in the KKK? Think hard about it and then answer.
I'm responding to your childish Bush-bashing.
[quote]<strong>Comparing racism to alcoholism was INTENDED TO BE A SPURIOUS. This was the point of my argument. Do you see? I never intended it to be a serious comparison.</strong><hr></blockquote>
There has to be weight behind it to keep it from just being a non sequiter. Yours had no weight.
Racism is something that has to do with political view and the way you view the world. Alcoholism is an addiction to a substance. I know what you were trying to do I'm just saying it was a horrible reach and a failure.
[quote]<strong>Just admit you're pissed off with me for what I said about George. That's OK. Don't try and start getting all moral with me. You're doing too much of that right now. It's annoying.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sorry for getting moral in the fact of rampant anti-US ranting. I'll cower and agree with you so as not to offend you next time.
<strong>I can sit happy with the resolute knowledge that my nation does more for the international good than every person who goes on lengthy diatribes about its evil combined.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
And there you have it all in a nutshell. What you see as good, others see only as selfserving imperialism. Just to use your own example, nobody puts more conditions on aid than the US.
Bad conditions, like forcing the countries you aid into buying American genetically manipulated food.
<strong>And there you have it all in a nutshell. What you see as good, others see only as selfserving imperialism. Just to use your own example, nobody puts more conditions on aid than the US.
Bad conditions, like forcing the countries you aid into buying American genetically manipulated food.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Then don't take it.
But I guess doing nothing is better, eh? Europe sure as hell puts out a lot of humanitarian aid compared to the U.S. right?
I realize you're going to spin everything to be negative because the fact that you are anti-US precedes all of it. So everything is colored in that way. That's not new for you so it's ok.
But I guess doing nothing is better, eh? Europe sure as hell puts out a lot of humanitarian aid compared to the U.S. right?
I realize you're going to spin everything to be negative because the fact that you are anti-US precedes all of it. So everything is colored in that way. That's not new for you so it's ok.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, I can only speak for my country, which gives more aid per capita than any nation in the world. Without conditions like the above.
See, my horse is even higher than yours, be glad there are only 4 million norwegians in the world.
I'm not anti-US. I love the US, I just have a problem with your foreign policies.
In fact, I'm gonna go eat a californian styled burger right now, before I go watch an american band, Brand Nubian, later this evening.
But I guess doing nothing is better, eh? Europe sure as hell puts out a lot of humanitarian aid compared to the U.S. right?
I realize you're going to spin everything to be negative because the fact that you are anti-US precedes all of it. So everything is colored in that way. That's not new for you so it's ok.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have no room for all the anti-America Europeans. They need to do something about all the things they moan and groan about instead of just complaining about any and everything.
Again, equating racism with alcoholism. Have at it pal. I won't stop you.
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</strong><hr></blockquote>i fyou can't admit to the simple rhetoric relationship between discounting a speech due to someone's past and discounting somoe's ideas because of their past then you're willfully clinging to an idiocy . . .
let go and admit that it has nothing to do with the validity of his speech
if there were racialist ideas in the speech then I would think that it mattered . . . but nnow it does not
[quote] Racism is something that has to do with political view and the way you view the world. Alcoholism is an addiction to a substance. I know what you were trying to do I'm just saying it was a horrible reach and a failure. <hr></blockquote>
Now THIS is a good point.
But for the record I'm not anti-US. I use American slang, %90 of my records are American, I watch American films, and... I live in Britain. Let's try not to be too much of a hypocrite, eh?
I am, however, opposed to American foreign policy, I objected very strongly to the raids on Sudan at the time, and I believe that George Bush is [see above.]
I also believe that to compare this war with what GB sr and what Bill Clinton did is pretty dumb, seeing as last time Saddam actually invaded another state and this time we're proposing to invade him, oust him and impose a military government with no evidence at all that he's done what he's supposed to have done and against international consensus.
I've done no work today at all and I have to now. It's 5:30pm here.
I could only find <a href="http://www.ssb.no/vis/emner/12/01/10/uhjelpoecd/main.html"; target="_blank">norwegian statistics</a>, but even though the US contributed 11,4 billion dollars in foreign aid in 2001, making it the worlds largest aid-contributer, this only constitutes 0,11 percent of the GNP, or 40 bucks pr. american head.
Norway gave 1,3 billion dollars in aid in 2001, equating 0,83 percent of the GNP or 289 dollars pr. person.
Only Denmark tops this with 1,03 percent of their GNP, or 302 dollars per head.
France, Germany, Denmark and Norway alone (of European countries) contribute more Aid together than the US, with over 100 million less people.
So still no one can refute the points in Byrd's speech? He was a racist in 1947? OK, I'm still not sure what that has to do with international politics in 2003.
That's because it has nothing to do with it.
Keep going around in circles, but it doesn't destroy Byrd's point. It just makes some people around here look like chickens with their heads cut off. And others just simply look like chickens because they've tried to make a point and disappeared without defending it in the least.
... if there were racialist ideas in the speech then I would think that it mattered . . . but now it does not</strong><hr></blockquote>
Racists often talk about matters not related to racial matters. So what? I get to choose who I listen to just like anyone else. Sorry but the messenger often matters - sometimes even more than the message. Happens all the time. To deny that is to willfully cling to an idiocy.
Furthermore, I was hell on Trent Lott too. Why would I be any easier on Byrd?
If you can name some terrible things that Bush has actually done that'd be great.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
1. fabricated IAEA report as ultimate justification for war.
2. praised extra-judicial murders during his state of the union address
But there are even bigger issues:
the Bush Admin has destroyed any possibility of the US being regarded as a benevolent nation. This will be very bad for us when our superpower status wanes.
My point wasn't that alcoholism and racism are similar but that by latching on something irrelevant to the guy's speech you were finding a handy 'out' to avoid discussing its substance.
I must admit also that I just plain enjoy having a crack at President George Bush. This is probably because he's a short-sighted, foolish, internationally illiterate fist-swinging adolescent dickhead whom the whole planet detests apart from the minority of the American electorate who voted for him and those who saw him on TV with his arm around a fireman when he finally had the guts to face the nation after 9/11 and decided that in a crisis, any short-sighted, foolish, internationally illiterate fist-swinging adolescent dickhead would do.
But this is off topic. Pardon me.
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: Hassan i Sabbah ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
You left out low intelligence. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
" Sorry but the messenger often matters - sometimes even more than the message. Happens all the time. To deny that is to willfully cling to an idiocy. "
But you're doing this right now by supporting that dummy in the white house.
Sorry spacey ( by the way was that you I saw on SOFII ? ) but, just because someone made a mistake a long time ago doesn't mean he can't have a point now. Besides like usual you're talking about an issue to discredit him not what he said. It sounds like your point is weak.
Comments
Did I comment on the speech? Did I say he has no right to talk because he's in the KKK? Think hard about it and then answer.
I'm responding to your childish Bush-bashing.
[quote]<strong>Comparing racism to alcoholism was INTENDED TO BE A SPURIOUS. This was the point of my argument. Do you see? I never intended it to be a serious comparison.</strong><hr></blockquote>
There has to be weight behind it to keep it from just being a non sequiter. Yours had no weight.
Racism is something that has to do with political view and the way you view the world. Alcoholism is an addiction to a substance. I know what you were trying to do I'm just saying it was a horrible reach and a failure.
[quote]<strong>Just admit you're pissed off with me for what I said about George. That's OK. Don't try and start getting all moral with me. You're doing too much of that right now. It's annoying.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Sorry for getting moral in the fact of rampant anti-US ranting. I'll cower and agree with you so as not to offend you next time.
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: groverat ]</p>
<strong>I can sit happy with the resolute knowledge that my nation does more for the international good than every person who goes on lengthy diatribes about its evil combined.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
And there you have it all in a nutshell. What you see as good, others see only as selfserving imperialism. Just to use your own example, nobody puts more conditions on aid than the US.
Bad conditions, like forcing the countries you aid into buying American genetically manipulated food.
<strong>And there you have it all in a nutshell. What you see as good, others see only as selfserving imperialism. Just to use your own example, nobody puts more conditions on aid than the US.
Bad conditions, like forcing the countries you aid into buying American genetically manipulated food.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Then don't take it.
But I guess doing nothing is better, eh? Europe sure as hell puts out a lot of humanitarian aid compared to the U.S. right?
I realize you're going to spin everything to be negative because the fact that you are anti-US precedes all of it. So everything is colored in that way. That's not new for you so it's ok.
<strong>
Then don't take it.
But I guess doing nothing is better, eh? Europe sure as hell puts out a lot of humanitarian aid compared to the U.S. right?
I realize you're going to spin everything to be negative because the fact that you are anti-US precedes all of it. So everything is colored in that way. That's not new for you so it's ok.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, I can only speak for my country, which gives more aid per capita than any nation in the world. Without conditions like the above.
See, my horse is even higher than yours, be glad there are only 4 million norwegians in the world.
I'm not anti-US. I love the US, I just have a problem with your foreign policies.
In fact, I'm gonna go eat a californian styled burger right now, before I go watch an american band, Brand Nubian, later this evening.
<strong>
Then don't take it.
But I guess doing nothing is better, eh? Europe sure as hell puts out a lot of humanitarian aid compared to the U.S. right?
I realize you're going to spin everything to be negative because the fact that you are anti-US precedes all of it. So everything is colored in that way. That's not new for you so it's ok.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have no room for all the anti-America Europeans. They need to do something about all the things they moan and groan about instead of just complaining about any and everything.
Fellowship
<strong>Well, I can only speak for my country, which gives more aid per capita than any nation in the world. Without conditions like the above.
See, my horse is even higher than yours, be glad there are only 4 million norwegians in the world.
I'm not anti-US. I love the US, I just have a problem with your foreign policies.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Could you provide some facts? Just curious, not trying to flame.
<strong>
Again, equating racism with alcoholism. Have at it pal. I won't stop you.
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</strong><hr></blockquote>i fyou can't admit to the simple rhetoric relationship between discounting a speech due to someone's past and discounting somoe's ideas because of their past then you're willfully clinging to an idiocy . . .
let go and admit that it has nothing to do with the validity of his speech
if there were racialist ideas in the speech then I would think that it mattered . . . but nnow it does not
Now THIS is a good point.
But for the record I'm not anti-US. I use American slang, %90 of my records are American, I watch American films, and... I live in Britain. Let's try not to be too much of a hypocrite, eh?
I am, however, opposed to American foreign policy, I objected very strongly to the raids on Sudan at the time, and I believe that George Bush is [see above.]
I also believe that to compare this war with what GB sr and what Bill Clinton did is pretty dumb, seeing as last time Saddam actually invaded another state and this time we're proposing to invade him, oust him and impose a military government with no evidence at all that he's done what he's supposed to have done and against international consensus.
I've done no work today at all and I have to now. It's 5:30pm here.
I could only find <a href="http://www.ssb.no/vis/emner/12/01/10/uhjelpoecd/main.html"; target="_blank">norwegian statistics</a>, but even though the US contributed 11,4 billion dollars in foreign aid in 2001, making it the worlds largest aid-contributer, this only constitutes 0,11 percent of the GNP, or 40 bucks pr. american head.
Norway gave 1,3 billion dollars in aid in 2001, equating 0,83 percent of the GNP or 289 dollars pr. person.
Only Denmark tops this with 1,03 percent of their GNP, or 302 dollars per head.
France, Germany, Denmark and Norway alone (of European countries) contribute more Aid together than the US, with over 100 million less people.
and then there is the conditions of aid:
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/26/international/26PREX.html?ex=1039326769&ei=1&en=d89b8da102c7d6ee " target="_blank">Bush Plan Ties Foreign Aid to Free Market and Civic Rule</a>
(I'm not saying Germany and France are not bad in this apartment...)
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: New ]</p>
That's because it has nothing to do with it.
Keep going around in circles, but it doesn't destroy Byrd's point. It just makes some people around here look like chickens with their heads cut off. And others just simply look like chickens because they've tried to make a point and disappeared without defending it in the least.
<strong>
If you can name some terrible things that Bush has actually done that'd be great. </strong><hr></blockquote>
He's tried to instill a doctrine of pre-emption in war.
Now, can anyone tell me why Byrd's speech is irrelevant?
<strong>
... if there were racialist ideas in the speech then I would think that it mattered . . . but now it does not</strong><hr></blockquote>
Racists often talk about matters not related to racial matters. So what? I get to choose who I listen to just like anyone else. Sorry but the messenger often matters - sometimes even more than the message. Happens all the time. To deny that is to willfully cling to an idiocy.
Furthermore, I was hell on Trent Lott too. Why would I be any easier on Byrd?
<strong>
If you can name some terrible things that Bush has actually done that'd be great.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
1. fabricated IAEA report as ultimate justification for war.
2. praised extra-judicial murders during his state of the union address
But there are even bigger issues:
the Bush Admin has destroyed any possibility of the US being regarded as a benevolent nation. This will be very bad for us when our superpower status wanes.
<strong>
One of our "tolerant" liberals decides to vomit all over the boards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just replying in kind.
<strong>
Bush didn't make this speech. Interesting how you equate being an alcoholic with belonging to the KKK, though.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's called " mud slinging ". It's just replying in kind. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>
My point wasn't that alcoholism and racism are similar but that by latching on something irrelevant to the guy's speech you were finding a handy 'out' to avoid discussing its substance.
I must admit also that I just plain enjoy having a crack at President George Bush. This is probably because he's a short-sighted, foolish, internationally illiterate fist-swinging adolescent dickhead whom the whole planet detests apart from the minority of the American electorate who voted for him and those who saw him on TV with his arm around a fireman when he finally had the guts to face the nation after 9/11 and decided that in a crisis, any short-sighted, foolish, internationally illiterate fist-swinging adolescent dickhead would do.
But this is off topic. Pardon me.
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: Hassan i Sabbah ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
You left out low intelligence. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>
I do, please explain how you come to that conclusion.</strong><hr></blockquote>
" We're gunna smoke em out ". <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
But you're doing this right now by supporting that dummy in the white house.
Sorry spacey ( by the way was that you I saw on SOFII ? ) but, just because someone made a mistake a long time ago doesn't mean he can't have a point now. Besides like usual you're talking about an issue to discredit him not what he said. It sounds like your point is weak.
[ 02-26-2003: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>