| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/16 |
| 2004/5/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29975 Activity:insanely high |
5/3 Controversial Tillman cartoon (i.e., idjut liburals can draw)
http://www.ucomics.com/tedrall
\_ This guy is an idiot, I think most conservatives (and liberals)
would agree.
\_ as a liberal, i agree. however he also can't draw for shit.
personally even if i *like* someone's message(not that i like
this guy's message), if they can't draw for shit they have
not business being on the comics page. Here's a liberal who
actually knows how to draw:
http://www.ucomics.com/boondocks
and another:
http://www.andysinger.com
and another:
http://www.ucomics.com/doonesbury
\_ agreed. A little tact could have gone a long way. -- liberal
\_ It's not only tact. He had the guy saying, "Will I get
to kill Arabs?". This is just plain bad. -another libural
\_ Why? He could have joined the CIA, FBI, or Homeland
Security in order to fight terrorism. He joined the Army
with intent to become a Ranger, who get to play judge,
jury, and executioner on people they feel are terrorists.
\_ No. By the time Rangers or regular 11B's are called in,
someone else has alreday played judge and jury. Even
Spec Ops guys are usually called in only after the big
decisions have been made by some grey-haired guy in an
office.
\_ No. Ranger training is geared towards jump missions
and taking over air ports and other air related
activity. Anything after that falls under standard
special forces training that anyone in the military
can get if they're a notch above the cut.
\_ I don't understand why people have to insult people even
when they do something cool. Why make fun of this guy? Why do
republicans try to tear down Kerry's Vietnam record? It's
petty. Why did Doonsebury try to make fun of Bush's visit to
Iraq? When someone does something cool, let 'em have it.
Sheesh.
\_ The point of contention is that he incessantly portrays
himself as a Vietnam war hero. But you can't have it
both ways - yes he went and deserves credit but his
subsequent actions were despicable, to put it nicely.
\_ How is "despicable" putting it nicely? What sort of hate
filled vitriol would be "calling it as it is"?
\_ You know, the above discussion leads me to believe it's not that
controversial a cartoon -- basically nobody likes it, and they are
all right. Re: republicans trying to tear down Kerry's record, I
think even Limbaugh is giving him due credit. (When was the last
time Bush got credit for anything from the other side? Did he
truly accomplish nothing?)
Perhaps Kerry might have gotten a little bad press about that whole
medal throwing thing, since some people view that as trying to sit
on two stools at once. -- ilyas
\_ What should Bush seriously be given credit for? Afghanistan seems
to be the main thing that most people agreed on. Bush has gotten
a lot of credit in the press about "leadership" with the 9/11
stuff, besides the background rumblings about intelligence
failures, which in the end is true, if the buck stops at the top
then Bush's administration is responsible for failing to prevent
9/11, although obviously not from some egregious personal wrong-
doing. He gets rightfully criticized for foolish political stunts
like the mission accomplished thing. And you can't expect "the
other side" to cheer for republican policy items, although he
is certainly 'given credit' for those. About Iraq, actually I
felt that a lot of people approved of his tough stance towards
Saddam, myself included, however this feeling dissipated when I
watched the subsequent farce unfold.
\_ Don't forget Lybia. If you are an economist of a certain
stripe you also think "tax cuts cause recovery", so you
would probably attribute the recovery to Bush's insistence to
cut, cut, cut. At any rate, it seems pretty clear Bush did
some good. My point is that he gets no credit for the good
he did, which is unfortunate. Actually I think all the
anti-Bush bile is having a counterproductive effect (if you
want to get Bush out of office). -- ilyas
\_ I tend to think of Lybia in the same way I think of the
Berlin Wall coming down: it was in the works, and it was
just a matter of time. For the sitting President to take
responsibility for it is rather disingenuous. And as for
Afghanistan, props to Bush for pursuing the removal of the
Taliban, and props for finding Karzai, but a bakers-
dozen of wtfs for not finishing the Taliban off and for
withdrawing all military and most financial support for
the new govt. Seriously, wtf?
\_ Libya was in the works? In what sense? Do you say the
same for Syria which has just started to cooperate? Will
you say the same for Iran if there's an uprising and
the crazies are kicked out and replaced by some sort of
republic/democracy? The world doesn't get better
without people trying to make it better. Bad people
don't just quietly go away. They need to be threatened
or killed to make changes.
\_ Libya, not Lybia!
\_ I thought it was Libia.
\_ Very true. It's not controversial. It's just bad. Has anyone
seen any interviews with Tillman or the like beforehand? I'd
be surprised that a story like his slipped past sports journal-
ists unnoticed. I'd be very interested to hear Tillman's own
point of view on why he would enlist. As for Bush's accomplish-
ments, the only things I've seen that have approached notability
are things which later proved to be all lip service and no funds
(Education, Jobs Training, AIDS Research, Terrorism Funding,
Military Funding, etc.). Kerry got bad press over throwing
the medals (and just about every single charge of waffling
I've seen) because there are plenty of hack journalists more
than willing to trim stories to fit their talking point du
jour. --scotsman
\_ No, Kerry got bad press because he earned it.
\_ Kerry did significantly more than throw his (actually someone
else's depending on the day of the week) medals over a fence.
He was in the vanguard of leftists undermining of the Vietnam
war effort. He and his ilk are why a free Hanoi subsequently
fell and the millions fled on rafts. All of his treasonous
behavoir is well documented if you would bother to investigate:
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry
\_ "free Hanoi"? You are a moron.
\_ thanks for adding so much to an otherwise intelligent
discussion. -!the person you're replying to.
\_ huh huh ... you call the above an intelligent
discussion? you are a moron. |
| 5/16 |
| 2004/5/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29961 Activity:very high |
5/3 "I went down to Tier 1 (the cellblock where much of the abuse is said
to have occurred) and when I looked down the corridor, I saw two
naked detainees, one masturbating to another kneeling with its mouth
open," he is quoted as saying. "I thought I should just get out of
there. I didn't think it was right, as it seemed like the wrong thing
to do. I saw Staff Sergeant Frederick walking towards me, and he
said, `Look what these animals do when you leave them alone for two
seconds.'" -NY Times
... quoted General Taguba as saying the military police and
intelligence officials had committed "sadistic, blatant and wanton
criminal abuses," including sodomizing a prisoner "with a chemical
light and perhaps a broomstick." -NY Times again
In the report, Taguba also noted that "many individual soldiers" and
some units in the 800th had "persevered in extremely poor conditions"
and upheld "Army values." For instance, he commended a Navy dog
handler who "knew his duties and refused to participate in improper
interrogations despite significant pressure from military
intelligence personnel at Abu Ghraib" and two Army military policemen
who he said blew the whistle on abuses. -LA Times
\_ Why there shoud be no gays and women in the military. All
the photos show is hazing, poor Muslim babies.
\_ so what's your point?
\_ everyone knows the photos, but not the above
http://cnn.com on Sunday was all about the rescued contractor (Hamill)
\_ everyone? All of this has been all over. Even Fox was
broadcasting it. What are you reading that didn't carry it? |
| 2004/5/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29948 Activity:very high |
5/1 Heh, your guy can't even get his story straight! hehe,
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040510-632009,00.html
\_ How about putting an old Republican Guard general in charge
of Fallujah? Talk about the Mother of Flip Flops.
\_ Here's someone who missed the message. -op
\_ maybe because it's totally unclear? who is "your guy?"
in case you haven't noticed, the motd has a plurality of
libertarians with a smattering of anarchists, democrats,
communists, far-right republicans, moderates and some
buchannan nuts.
\_ Clinton gave sworn testimony behind closed doors. Bush and
Cheney gave unsworn testimony behind closed doors. I'll take
sworn over unsworn any time. |
| 2004/4/30-5/1 [Science/GlobalWarming, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13506 Activity:high |
4/30 Commie, America hating Scientific American weighs in
on the Bush Administration's science policy:
http://csua.org/u/74x
\_ More like Scientific UnAmerican!
\_ Some ppl take this freedom of speech thing too damn
far! where's the patriot act when you need it?
\_ Soon, baby. |
| 2004/4/30-5/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:13503 Activity:nil |
4/30 on average, motd is posted by at most 3-5 different people a day.
I make this conclusion based on the fact that for the past 2 weeks,
I actually wrote 1/3-1/2 of the posts. It's actually quite sad.
\_ Someone is being nice enough to post a job listing. If you don't
like recruiters, fine: Just don't apply for the job. Don't prevent
other people from applying.
\_ For you or for the motd?
\_ For him, I guess. I, and I hope most people, only post to
the motd once or twice a day.
\_ Obligatory "One person writes 1/3-1/2 of the posts? Now it makes
sense!"
\_ there are at least 10 users who sign their posts. i know of several
ppl who post but dont sign their posts. Of the anonymous posters,
several personas (could be the same person?):
Anti-Semite, Jew, Arab, NeoCon, TrueCon, Libertarian #1-N, Liberal,
Bleeding Heart Liberal, Con who hates Bush, Deaniac, Kucinich Freak,
Taiwan (pro and con current govt), the several users getting
married, divorced, single, wnat to get laid, etc.
\_ Bastard! You forgot me!!! --Nader '04!
\_ wait! I want to get laid! That one must be me!
\_ i'm trying to figure out who i am.
\_ The motd is no place to search for self-enlightenment. |
| 2004/4/30-5/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13495 Activity:low |
4/30 For you anti-bush liburals (yes I know that's redundant), there are
two good opinion pieces on http://nytimes.com today in EDITORIALS/OP-ED.
\_ Why do you hate America? ED! ED IS THE STANDARD! _/
\_ HATE! HATE IS THE STANDARD!
\_ PLEASE! What does this mean? Why do you keep posting this?
I don't get it but I'd like to get in on the joke.
\_ USE LINUX!
\_ USE L1NUX!
\_ RIDE B1KE!
\_ it's a question used to get liburls off-balance
\_ It's a kind of jab at the whole "my country right or wrong",
"support our president or you're unpatriotic" mentality.
\_ Yeah, I think someone's trying to make the "PLEASE!"
segment into a similar kind of catchphrase. |
| 2004/4/29 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13471 Activity:nil |
4/29 http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1792200 A University of Massachusetts student has openly criticized Pat Tillman, calling the former NFL player a Rambo-like idiot in the school paper. The column in question was submitted by graduate student Rene Gonzalez and published Wednesday in the Daily Collegian. It was titled "Pat Tillman is not a hero: he got what was coming to him." \_ it goes without saying that Gonzalez is an ass, and Tillman's death is a tragedy (along with everybody else who's getting blown away). But really, do we have to call it the Pat Tillman Freedom Plaza? I don't like mixing up "Counter-Terrorism" with "Freedom". It's not our freedom that's being fought for in Afghanistan or Iraq, it's our security. \_ My prediction: They will rename the Patriot's stadium "Patrick Tillman Memorial Stadium" on opening day of the NFL season. George W Bush will preside over the ceremony, complete with 100s of American flags and a fireworks display. \_ Why is Gonzales an "ass"? He might very well have a point, and I don't blame him given the intelligence of most of our military. \_ Look, an American soldier just died on a road in Afghanistan. You can question his sanity about giving up a multimillion dollar contract to join the army, but now is not the time to speculate groundlessly that he was there because of Rambo or nationalism. Tillman died doing something honorable, and his family doesn't need any petty sniping from an ass like Gonzalez who's just speculating about Tillman's motives. \_ "You know he was a real Rambo, who wanted to be in the 'real' thick of things. I could tell he was that type of macho guy, from his scowling, beefy face on the CNN pictures. Well, he got his wish. Even Rambo got shot in the third movie, but in real life, you die as a result of being shot. They should call Pat Tillman's army life 'Rambo 4: Rambo Attempts to Strike Back at His Former Rambo 3 Taliban Friends, and Gets Killed." -R. Gonzalez \_ Gonzalez is a putrid scumbad. |
| 2004/4/29 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13469 Activity:nil |
4/29 Bush To Iraqi Militants: 'Please Stop Bringing It On'
WASHINGTON, DC--In an internationally televised statement Monday,
President Bush modified a July 2003 challenge to Iraqi militants
attacking U.S. forces. "Terrorists, Saddam loyalists, and
anti-American insurgents: Please stop bringing it on now," Bush said
at a Monday press conference. "Nine months and 500 U.S. casualties
ago, I may have invited y'all to bring it on, but as of today, I
formally rescind that statement. I would officially like for you to
step back."
\_ really? Link please?
\_ This could only be the onion. -- ulysses
\_ Gotta love The Onion. But I think the article the other week about
the libertarian who had to reluctantly call the fire deparment to
save his house was better. |
| 2004/4/29 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13453 Activity:insanely high Edit_by:auto |
4/28 Since when does an act of Congress trump a Constitutional Amendment?
How does giving the President War Powers somehow negate the Sixth
Amendment?
http://csua.org/u/742 (Bill of Rights, in case you need a refresher.)
\_ That's your big gripe? I'm more concerned with the 16th and the
abuse which created our socialist system.
\_ Impressive. In two lines, you changed the subject from the
president and congress subverting the constitution to how the
constitution itself infringes on your freedoms. I give 9/10.
\_ Nice non sequiteur. Go back to http://freerepublic.com.
\_ It is completely on topic. Just because my sub-topic was
more interesting and has a greater effect on the people of
this country is no reason to get jealous.
\_ bad troll, no cookie.
\_ clueless child, see discussion below that you're
incapable of understanding.
\_ The President is being given the right to jail anyone who
disagrees with him without a trial, and the press is being
warned not to criticize the Administration, but you think
Income Tax and socialism are the real evils? Well, hold on to
your hat, liebchen, because Socialism and Fascism are about to
unite in a big way here.
\_ Yes, income tax was the beginning of training people that the
Federal Government was Big Daddy and we all had to do what
Daddy says and Daddy will take care of us. If it wasn't for
generations of brainwashing your issue wouldn't exist because
no one in government would even dare propose such a thing. But
now that everyone is properly trained and/or cowed by the
truly enormous power of the FG through illegal taxation, the
things you're seeing now are easily swallowed by an ill
educated, mindless, government created socialist system. You
sound as though you think we were free until after 9/11. We
haven't been free since before your grand father was born.
\_ So tell us how YOU would have paid for WWI. We're waiting.
\_ why are you letting this guy change the subject, which
is Bush's abuse of executive power, and the Supreme
Court's acceptance of that abuse?
\_ Okay, cool, I'll grant you your point. Now, before we
succumb more inextricably to the twin evils of socialism
fascism, let's pool our resources to prevent the Pres.
being granted the ability to rescind the 6th Amendment,
and limit Congress' ability to grant him that power.
\_ The next time you have a medical problem, you can curse
socialism all the way to the hospital because you used
a government funded 911 service. Do wacko libertarians
really want to go back to an era of no government services?
You do know that a lot of the infrastructure you depend on
is built and maintained by the government, right?
\_ obThePrivateSectorCouldDoItBetter
\_ The Rich have always been free. The poor have always
been in chains.
\_ It's quite simple, really. If you haven't been charged with a crime
the sixth amendmant doesn't apply. If you're in Guantanamo, you're
simply suspected of being a prisoner of war. Since they're being
held by the military in time of war, the protections of the fifth
amendmant don't apply. You simply don't appreciate the lengths this
administration is willing to go to to protect your freedom.
\_ Ignorance is Strength! |
| 2004/4/29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13451 Activity:insanely high Edit_by:auto |
4/28 GOP'ers: How does the party's platform on Native Americans jibe with
the current California initiative to tax the Indian casinos?
http://csua.org/u/743 (GOP Platform, search for Native Americans)
\_ Uh... 100%? I see no problem with taxing those doing extremely
well with their casinos. The poor tribes (those without casinos)
get almost nothing from the rich tribes. I can go on at some
length on the topic but really I don't see any non-jibing. How
much do you really know about tribes in CA vs. tribes in other
states and exactly what we owe or do not owe any of them? What do
you really know about the rich vs poor tribes, conditions on the
different reservations or anything else? You need to pick a topic
you're much better informed about if you want to poke a stick in
someone's eye and make some trolling motd political points.
\_ GOP Platform says:
"Political self-determination and economic self-sufficiency
are twin pillars of an effective Indian policy." and
"High taxes and unreasonable regulations stifle new and
expanded businesses and thwart the creation of job
opportunities and prosperity."
Explain to me how taxing Indian casinos jibes with these two
planks of the GOP platform. And you can take your ad hominem
and shove it up your ass.
\_ ITYM "jives"
\_ dict jive
dict jibe
you are incorrect. |
| 2004/4/26 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13378 Activity:nil |
4/26 I am not a liberal, but I am wondering about the relationship between
GWB and Condi Rice. I have come across opaque reference to the "very
close/special personal relationship between them" several times in
mainstream news articles. Then comes the famous slip:
http://tinyurl.com/2vxv5
that even made its way to freerepublic (as of now). What's your take?
\_ Dr. Rice's warmongering is, imho, criminal and it is my hope
to see her on trial at the Hague in some distant future. Having
said that, I'm disappointed with the innuendo surrounding her
professional/personal relationship with Dubya (for the record
-- they are NOT having an affair!). One of the dubious pleasures
of observing a black woman with real power & visibility was
assuming Dr. Rice was treated as an individual and not subjected
to the usual racial stereotypes of black women as hypersexual
dynamos (a NY Times article about her choice of hosiery aside).
Guess I didn't hold my breath long enough. --elizp, a fly Pinay
\_ I've made stupider slip ups in casual conversation, that
consisted of no more than "I was talking to [insert random
person handle here] the other day..."
\_ Condi isn't married, that makes the "husb-- President" comment
a bit odd.
\_ Umm.. no it doesn't. Before I was married a once call a
female friend of mine "my wife." I meant to say "my
friend" but some how the wrong word got out.
\_ I would expect Bush to make a slipup like that, but we
probably wouldn't notice it hidden amongst the other 5
slipups in whatever sentence he was uttering at the time.
\_ Where is that picture of Bush kissing Rice on the neck and her
eyes half closed in ecstasy? I keep posting it, but some Bush
droid keeps censoring it. I can't find the URL now.
\_ Here you go:
http://www.radioholes.com/images/rh0002.gif
\_ That's on the cheek, you tease.
\_ http://www.culturekitchen.com/archives/000647.html
\_ I think Condi is hot! You may see her in a contest against
Hillary. |
| 2004/4/23-24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:13364 Activity:nil |
4/23 Thorough insight into Clark's career and American politics. (long)
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?031117fa_fact |
| 2004/4/22-23 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/India, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13337 Activity:low |
4/22 The report is out on the Jack Kelly affair. (This link is a summary).
http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-04-22-seigmain_x.htm
Although spicing up stories with made-up stuff is bad, it is really
a fault of the readers themselves who crave for it. A far more
serious problem is that media are dictating what news is fit to print
and which facts they will report/exaggerate/ignore/understate.
Interestingly, the latter is not being discussed in the media.
\_ But he's not black! So it doesn't matter!
\_ Hi Rush!
\_ "The media" already spends far too much time staring at its own
navel. You must not pay that much attention to things like
The Atlantic or the New York Review of Books. Don't like
the news? Go make some of your own...
\_ I think if you asked newspaper readers what mattered more to them,
accuracy of entertainment value, they'd pick accuracy. But since
most readers don't know enough about the subject matter to judge
accuracy, they can only judge an article on entertainment value.
\-Dont worry about Jack Kelly ... he has a solid career in
the BUSH CO press office --psb ...
In addition, there appears to be no basis for a
2002 Kelley story that said U.S. forces in
Afghanistan found evidence linking two
Chicago-based Islamic charities to al-Qaeda. |
| 2004/4/22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, ERROR, uid:13328, category id '18005#2.5' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13328 Activity:nil |
4/21 http://washingtonpost.com has a very interesting story on the front page now storying the decapitation strike, as excerpted from Plan of Attack. \_ What is csua login for WP? \_ I don't get it... Bush want to decapitate Saddam first, then get rid of anyone in the Baapst party? |
| 2004/4/21 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13309 Activity:nil |
4/21 OSC on how Bush did or did not cause 9/11!
http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2004-04-11-1.html
\_ See, this is why OSC gets a rep for being a crank. It's possible
to understand that Osama bin Laden and al Qaeada were responsible
for 9/11 AND see that the Bush Administration failed to do
enough to prevent 9/11. OSC needs to learn a non-binary approach
to the world. /
What happened to your moral clarity? _/
\_ Ooo, ooo! What would you have done to stop 9/11 as the new
president of the US with no idea it was coming?
\_ We've done this before. See kchang's archives:
http://csua.com/?entry=13137
\_ Ah yes, Nothing interesting, reasonable or remotely
intelligent was posted. Go motd!
\_ Kettle, pot, black. Plonk.
\_ Umm.. I was making a point that a lot of people
pass the blame, but nobody has any ideas.
\_ Yes, and you made the point through demonstration
just now. Nicely done.
\_ Shooting down hijacked airplanes could have
been made a government policy. So many
off course planes in the last 10 years
were intercepted by the Air Force, there
really is no good excuse why the second
WTC flight was not shot down.
\_ why does anyone care what a hack sci-fi writer has to say about
politics?
\_ Because he wrote Ender's Game and people somehow think that
makes up for the drivel he's written since then.
\_ Ender's Game might be fun for kids and game geeks, but it's
really not a very good book. -tom
\_ He has written a number of good books since than, and
some crap too. I read his opinion pieces because they're
online, and usually different than what I hear elsewhere.
I don't always agree, but it's usually a fairly
intelligent take on things.
\_ Note: Different is properly followed by from. Different
to, for different from, is a common English
colloquialism. Different than is quite
inadmissible. (dict different)
\_ Thank you Professor Higgens
\_ You are welcome, my lady
\_ The success of Ender's Game (and his other books) have something
to do with his ability to express himself well, and (IMO) to talk
about the truth of the human condition. That being said, his
hobbies are history and especially military history, and I find
his comments to be well-studied. -emarkp
\_ Yeah, and the next political commentator will be
Danielle Steele. -tom
\_ emarkp is being disingenuous. The real reason he likes Card
is that Card is a Mormon like him. BTW, haven't we already
discussed this to death on the motd before?
\_ Oh my gosh! It's a Mormon conspiracy! Sorry dude,
that's the dumbest freaking thing I've heard in a long
time.
\_ You corrected my spelling and then made a serious
grammatical error. Who's the dumbass?
\_ You assholes did not correct anything. You
interrupted posts to show what could be done to
correct them. Posts fixed, idiocy removed.
\_ one's a typo, the other shows bad spelling.
\_ Not the same person either.
\_ Did he say anything about not disbanding the Iraqi army? If
so, he is already ahead of Bush Jr and his advisors.
\_ Dear Mr. Card,
I am sorry that you were not born in a time when America had
stand-up enemies to fight (like the Nazis). I, too, wish that America
had an enemy that would unite us in a universal morality, an enemey
that we could point to as a negative reflection of everything that we
stand for. Then we could point to that great enemy and say, We are
the opposite of that. We could declare ourselves the good and the
right in the face of utter evil.
Unfortunately, all of our enemies these days exist on the
fringes of morality. Many of them are our children come back to
haunt us. Few of them have the military might or geopolitical will to
inspire much more than a street-to-street city gunfight or individual
suicide bomb attacks. None of them are the bogey-men we need to truly
galvanize the nation (and the world) into the world-wide benevolent
dictatorship that we need.
Neither do we have the leadership to truly lead us in a
benevolent world-wide dictatorship dedicated to the betterment of
humanity. There are no wise Hegemons to bring us to a new
Enlightenment; no Hari Seldons have stepped up to guide us to our true
potential as the rightful rulers and benificent caretakers of our
planet and our quadrant of space. No, our leaders, both Republicans
and Democrats, are much more interested in the short-term gain in
power of the next four years and the long-term acquisition of profit
for the foreseeable future than they are in the betterment of mankind.
Our leaders have allowed themselves to be led by past grudges and
debts of honor to follow bad counsel from weak and self-serving
sycophants.
It is right and good to want a strong, united America. It is
wrong and bad to mistake brutality for strength and sheepish
acquiescence for loyalty. It is criminal to turn a blind eye to
corporate greed and war profiteering especially when it is done in the
name of building democracy. We owe it to ourselves and the America
we dream of to open our eyes and see the wrong done in our name as
well as the good. Only by doing this do we have any hope of seeing
that America come to pass.
Yours,
erikred
\_ Funny you use Nazis. They were on the fringe of morality in
their time. Evil always trys to make itself look moral.
\_ that is the problem, the word "evil." Nothing is black n
white, there is no such thing as absolute evil. You need
to learn that, eventhough most people learned that at age of 4.
\_ I wonder how many victims of violent crimes are moral
relativists. I wonder how many people who saw their children
tortured and killed in front of their eyes agree with you.
Moral relativism is a product of a safe and prosperous age.
It was easy to believe in evil when you had to face it every
day. -- ilyas
\_ Evil exists but it's not a phantom force floating around.
It's simply the case when people decide not to respect the
rights of others in the pursuit of their own goals. Nazi
Germany did some evil things, but then so did the USA, Russia,
and Israel. Nations generally have more reasonable rationales
for their actions than sadistic psychos whose "goals" are
merely enjoying the infliction of suffering and pain. It seems
to be the norm historically that cultures have different
standards of ethics towards outsiders, often glorifying the
destruction of other tribes.
\_ I must respectfully disagree. - Cthulhu
\_ I must disagree also - George W. Bush
\_ w00t!
\_ No, there really are people who will just cause pain, or
steal, or do any other number of ethically repugant
things for fun or profit. If they want to do it on a
large scale, they will rationalize it with pretty words,
but it's still evil. Besides, it there's no such thing
as universal morals, why don't we just nuke thw whole
middle east and be done with it? |
| 2004/4/20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, ERROR, uid:13291, category id '18005#5.94375' has no name! , ] UID:13291 Activity:nil |
4/20 Latest Zogby presidential race polls:
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=821
\_ Why do you hate America?
\_ MASS GRAVES!
\_ GASSED JEWS!
\_ Hi ilyas. |
| 2004/4/20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13282 Activity:nil |
4/20 Mr. Ashcroft's Smear [in the 9/11 hearings]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25813-2004Apr19.html
\_ For those who can't be bothered to log into the Washington Post:
/csua/tmp/ashsmear
\_ This whole committee is a political sham and everyone knows it.
\_ Well, as far as Congress members, only a couple
Republicans have said that
\_ What good would a political sham be if all the
politicians admitted it was a sham? |
| 2004/4/19 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13269 Activity:nil |
4/18 Saudis want Kerry to win, raise oil prices.. hmm. this
means I definately will vote for Bush
\_ I need first learn spelling and gramar also
\_ Bush no care grammer, Bush everyday man
\_ Ironic since Republicans were pissed recently about foreigners
rooting for Kerry and that only Americans should decide our
President.
\_ Also ironic since an article on CNN that directly contradicts this
baseless assertion keeps getting censored:
http://money.cnn.com/2004/04/19/news/international/election_saudi
\_ CNN has a new article on the front page where the
Administration refutes this.
\_ And we all know how this Administration ALWAYS tells the
truth.
\_ Bush wants to keep oil prices down to keep the economy
humming, exerts pressure on Saudi Arabia. Election
effects are a side effect; Saudis fall in line to
Bush's strong leadership. Saudi rep misspeaks when he
says the primary purpose is the election.
\_ Keep towing that line!
\_ Apparently 51% +/- 4% of Americans do, and if
this trend holds, Bush will be your President
for 2004-2008.
\_ If the upcoming election for president
were held today, for whom would you
vote?
John Kerry (D) 49%
George W. Bush (R) 45%
Undecided 6%
Source: Knowledge Networks / Program
on International Policy Attitudes
\_ Check http://cnn.com and http://washingtonpost.com for
new data, boy-o
\_ that's dated 4/19.
\_ I am surprised to see that. Anyway,
so are the CNN/USA Today/Gallup and
the Washington Post polls, and
they're much more well known. The
other one I found on some strange
Canadian site via google.
\_ Looks pretty even to me:
http://www.pollingreport.com
\_ That's because the page is
showing the Zogby data, which
is the only major one that
shows Kerry ahead, and is
also current to 1 week.
Even so, CNN/USA Today/Gallup
and Wash Post > Zogby
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm
\_ What happened to "I predict that Bush will
win California and the presidency in a
landslide" of three months ago? How's that
prediction working out for you?
\_ It's "toeing the line".
\_ So why not do it 6 months ago? a year ago?
http://www.ioga.com/Special/crudeoil_Hist.htm
\_ LEADERSHIP STRONG! |
| 2004/4/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Recreation/Celebrity/WilliamHung] UID:13264 Activity:nil |
4/18 William Hung is the illegitimate love child of George W. Bush and an
unnamed backwoods Arkansas crack dealer.
\_ urlP?
\_ Come on man- put 2 and 2 together. They're both awkward in
public. They both have weird-looking eyes. And they both act
as though they have no idea of what most of the planet thinks
of them. Bush wasn't AWOL from the National Guard- it was
paternity leave. I'll leave the reverse photoshopping to you;
we'll get Larry Flint to put up wanted posters throughout the
Appalachians.
\_ w00t! |
| 2004/4/18 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13257 Activity:nil |
4/18 New words for old things:
Spanish Rice = Freedom Rice (now that's ironic)
Spanish Harlem = Spanish Harlem (Republicans don't care about Harlem)
Spanish Eyes = PATRIOT Eyes
Spanish Moss = Bush Moss
Spanish Armada = Spanish Armada (they lost)
Spanish Galeon = Sunk Ship
\_ "hey, baby, want to try some freedom fly?"
\_ President = Half-literate Child King
\_ w00t!
\_ Cute. |
| 2004/4/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13196 Activity:nil 61%like:13197 |
4/14 What media bias? (different article, different topic, same theme)
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38026 |
| 2004/4/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:13183 Activity:high |
4/13 Books many motd residents probably need. (About the Bush cabinet,
good and bad)
http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2004-04-04-1.html
\_ Card is a total ass and buffoon.
\_ He could learn a lot from you. -- ilyas |
| 2004/4/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13182 Activity:high |
4/13 I'm listening to Dubya on Real right now (via http://washingtonpost.com). Has he ever held a press conference where he's opened the floor to questions from the press, on such substantive questions? \_ He sounds like he knows the questions in advance. \_ In one of his answers just now, it sounds like this is not true \_ He's faking it. \_ Did all the reporters laugh because they knew he was lying / joking? \_ It is all scripted in advance. "I'm not too quick on my feet." -GWB \_ clearly false. \_ Anyway, fine, I'll say it. Bush sounded like a real moron in there, but he did have a good closing, which suggests (like he said) he's a strong leader and knows what he's talking about, but just needs better communication skills. \_ you sound religiously attached to the guy. \_ he just called gwb a moron. that isn't attached in any way. *you* sound like a blazing idiot. \_ Actually, he said gwb SOUNDED like a moron. You really need to hold off on the premature ad hominem, it can make you sound silly. -- random third guy \_ okay, I am the original poster, and the correct interpretation is that I did think he sounded like a real moron, and I was just trying to put myself in the shoes of the ~ 50% of the Americans who support him. \_ All that says is he has good speachwriters. Closing is easy, \_ All that says is he has good speechwriters. Closing is easy, being able to actually think on the spot is hard. As he showed. \_ I'm sure you'd be happier with Leno or Letterman as Pres. They'll give you the zippy one liners you crave in your leadership. \_ thinking does not mean able to give one liners, just as having good speechwriters does not mean you are a strong leader. \_ For all you liburals (like myself) who are looking for a fix of ridiculing of Dubya outside the motd, go to http://washingtonpost.com and click "Post your comments". \_ Please post a nice stream of the press conference if you find one, specifically, the Q&A session. Thanks. \_ He's come a long way from his first press conference; I'd guess his handlers/coaches have been working hard with him to get the power phrases down. At one point, he stumbled really hard and even mentioned the dead and their families, and you could almost see panic in his eyes as he scrambled to get back to his power phrases; when he got back to them, you could see him visibly relax. The reporters hit him with some pretty good questions, and it was obvious (on TV anyway) that he was sidestepping. This was no crushing defeat, but it also wasn't a victory for him. |
| 2004/4/12 [Politics/Foreign, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29916 Activity:nil |
4/11 Bush foreign policy
http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/funds/supermodels/10151634.html |
| 2004/4/12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13137 Activity:low |
4/11 Read the Presidential Daily Briefing for yourself:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4710772
\_ Yeah, but this was during Bush's vacation. I know I don't pay
attention to stuff on vacation.
\_ If any of you were President at the time what would you have done
differently that wasn't already being done and why would you have
done so without hindsight to guide you?
\_ I'd've solidified no-fly-zone policies nationwide, and I would
have made it clear that shooting down a passenger plane or three
is preferable to the use of planes as bombs. I would have
made it clear that any lack of communication between the FBI,
CIA, and NSA not having to do with Congressionally legislated
limitations would result in the immediate termination of the
various directors involved. These are old problems, and they
should have been dealt with.
\_ No fly zones? Wouldn't have helped. A national order on
shooting down planes? You wanted to be impeached? You wanted
the various 3 letter agencies to communicate with each other
in VIOLATION OF THE LAW and bring the privacy nuts down on
your head? Okey dokey! So you'd be about as effective as my
dog as President. Probably less so. My dog is very cute.
\_ How wouldn't no-fly zones have helped? How does having a
policy on when it's acceptable to shoot down a plane
become an impeachable offense? What part of "any lack
of communication between the FBI, CIA, and NSA not having
to do with Congressionally legislated limitations" is
in violation of the law? When will you stop fellating
your dog and post something intelligent?
\_ I'd have ignored it since they haven't killed enough people
to be significant. When they pass the magic total, I'll use
it as an excuse to create an American hegemony in the Middle
East. Perferably one with lots of oil.
\_ I'd also cut anti-terrorism funding because we all hate
swatting at flies.
\_ Magic total = 911 people?
\_ Contestant number 3, are you the son of a former
President? |
| 2004/4/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13134 Activity:high |
4/11 Bush knew! He's going down! Kerry'04!
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=3558
|_ restored after you can't deal with the truth
\_ go fuck yourself. |
| 2004/4/10-12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:13127 Activity:high |
4/10 Good balanced article on Economist. US still has a window of
opportunity to make things work in Iraq.
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2572254
"It was one of the worst weeks so far. But it would still be
wrong to write Iraq off"
\_ I'd like to point out for the umpteenth time that NOBODY-- not
even the Berkeley liberals-- wants the US to "write Iraq off".
We are opposed to the flimsy justification for this war, and the
continued mishandling of it.
\_ how do you figure it should be handled at this point? please
don't say "bring in the UN!". they were already there and Kofi
pulled them out after a single bombing after their local
directors ignored their own security people's advice.
\_ Turn the country over to the UN or some other multinational
co-alition, maybe the Arab League.
\_ Duh, where have you been? I just told you the UN turned
tail at the first sign of trouble. Do you read? Watch the
news? Anything? Or do you just make this shit up as you
go? The Arab League? Ah, yes, genius plan! We're there
right now trying to create a democracy of some sort and you
want to turn it over to the most oppressive dictators in
the modern world. Stick with html and java.
\_ You haven't been walking around campuses recently, or gone to
Berkeley-style bookstores of a certain variety, I take it?
And not seen those 'BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW!' posters?
This is in LA, btw, not Berkeley. Berkeley is likely a lot
worse. I could have sworn I saw the same guys with the
'END IRAQ SANCTIONS NOW!' posters just a year ago. -- ilyas
\_ I live in a town where democrats outnumber republicans
13 to 1, with several universities within a couple miles.
all my freinds are democrats or greens or way out leftists
of some other type, and no one i know thinks we should just
pull out, and i have seen no signs to that effect. perhaps
LA is just full of stupid ass tools? why the fuck else
would they have decided to live in LA?
\_ Look, dude, I am happy that your far out leftist friends
are more reasonable, but your "NOBODY" claim is simply
false, I would say to the tune of 5% of the population
(at least). In fact, next time I am at UCLA, I am
going to take a little informal poll, and report back.
-- ilyas
p.s. One of them is Governor Stupid Ass Tool to you.
\_ 5% of the population believes that the govenment
is controlled by space aliens, too.
\_ We're working hard to convince the rest of you before
They take over everything and we all perish into the
food vats or as hosts for their symbiotes!
false. -- ilyas
\_ I've seen them in Berkeley, and wasn't that half of
Kucinichi's (sp?) platform?
\_ poor bastard... how does he expect anyone to vote for
him when they can't even spell his name. if he was
smith or jones or jackson he'd be ok.
\_ Seriously. That's probably a factor. I mean,
Kucinichi's (sp?) platform?
Kelly vs Bush?
\_ Actually, if and when the window of opportunity above closes,
it's time to get out. not getting out would just be prolonging
the pain.
\_ Agreed. It's not foolish or cowardly to realize that it's
possible for us to screw this situation up past the point
where our presence is in any way helpful. That point may
not be now, but we need to consider it as a possibility.
\_ It's always helpful to someone. The point so far has been
that on balance, it was never helpful to America to do this.
Nothing about the current situation is really much different
than many imagined.
\_ Not to take sides in this debate, or anything, but I
really don't think it is possible to evaluate the effects
of sweeping foreign policy changes after so little time
has passed. While it is true that the outcome in Iraq
is important, the fact that America now has a much more
aggressive doctrine of preemption (for example) will also
have effects. In twenty years it will be obvious whether
the Bush Doctrine was a bad idea. Calling it a failure
now falls under the heading of "I hate Bush" criticism.
To the poster below: whatever else may be true, pulling
out this very instant is certainly stupid, considering
how much it will save, and how much it will lose. There
will be no pullout certainly until November for obvious
reasons, and probably not for a few years. I think
the final toll will be a few thousand american lives, and
a whole lotta deficit. -- ilyas
\_ What is our agressive policy supposedly trying to
preempt? Disagreement with the United States? Because
it sure as hell has nothing to do with terrorism.
\_ What our aggressive policy is trying to prevent is
state-sponsored terrorism. Whether Iraq actually
sponsored terrorism is not even relevant. What is
relevant was the reason why we are in Iraq. Now
suddenly, the world realizes America has a really
itchy trigger finger for stuff like that, and will
think twice about it. Syria, for instance, is scared
shitless, they were doing nothing but conceding as of
late. In fact, domestic dissent on the Iraq war is
a natural sideeffect of democracy, but it weakens the
effect of the policy insofar as it makes America less
likely to engage in future wars of this type. In
case of Iraq, there was also a gamble to place a seed
of democracy in the middle east, using the common
observation that democracy is virulent, and
prosperity follows democracy. It was a gamble because
creating democracy from scratch is difficult, all
democratic european states went through a long period
of bloodshed before democracy was established for
good. -- ilyas
\_ "established for good". Really, that should be
"established for the moment". Democracy is
fragile and must be tended, not taken for granted
as the western Europeans and so many Americans do.
As far as the Bush Gamble goes, only time will
tell. Historians will look back and children will
either be taught that he was the most brilliant
foreign policy President in generations or the
worst. It is too soon to tell now.
\_ "Now suddenly, the world [...] will think twice
about it." Or they won't. It's equally possible
that countries will realize that the only to
protect themselves from aggression is to develop
their own WMD. I don't understand why above you
say that we need 20 years to evaluate the
success of the Bush Doctrine, and then you go
and claim that the Bush Doctrine has been
successful.
\_ I don't claim that it is successful. I was
merely giving possible reasons for the Bush
the Bush Doctrine was a bad idea. Calling it a failure
now falls under the heading of "I hate Bush" criticism.
Whatever else may be true, pulling out this very instant
is certainly stupid. - ilyas
To the poster below: whatever else may be true, pulling
\_ The right people at the top of what to accomplish what who wants?
a natural sideeffect of democracy, but it weakens the
effect of the policy insofar as it makes America less
likely to engage in future wars of this type. -- ilyas
Doctrine. Whether they are good reasons or
not remains to be seen. -- ilyas
\_ Developing WMD as a defense against the US at
this point in history would be pure suicide.
Only the most insane of leaders would think
like this. Witness North Korea for an example
of insanity. Without a dramatic shift in
power due to leapfrogging non-US technology or
the complete economic collapse of the US, the
currently non-WMD would only do as you suggest
if they were completely irrational. It's a
losing policy for any nation as the world
stands now. As far as the BD goes, no one here
has claimed success. Where do you get this
stuff from? Do you not read? Do you knee
jerk into anything that doesn't bash Bush must
be pro-Bush? We're having a nice little chat
here, please don't fuck it up with blind
partisanship.
\_ It's not stupid to support a pullout at this point. The
Washington Post has at least one very long article on the Falluja
This is in LA, btw, not Berkeley. I shudder when I think about
Berkeley... -- ilyas
Kucinichi's (sp?) platform?
it's time to get out. not getting out would just be prolonging
the pain.
out this very instant is certainly stupid, considering
how much it will save, and how much it will lose. -- ilyas
\_ It's not stupid to support a pullout at this point. The
Washington Post has at least one very long article on the Falluja
problem. I just get the impression that we're shitting ourselves
into a deeper and deeper hole; we don't have the right people
at the top to accomplish what they want.
war with each other for Europe's benefit. The lines are entirely
artificial and detrimental to the cause of peace and anyone's
security. If anyone had the balls to just admit the Europeans
fucked most of the rest of the world and just redraw the lines a
whole lot of ugliness would simply evaporate over night.
\_ Good idea, all we have to do is also invade Iran, Syria, and
Turkey so we can erase all current lines and redivide!
(Although, I agree with out in a perfect world sense.)
problem. I just get the impression that we're shitting ourselves
into a deeper and deeper hole; we don't have the right people
at the top to accomplish what they want.
\_ The right people at the top of what to accomplish what who wants?
\_ Does anyone remember how many troops we *still* have in the Kosovo
region? They were supposed to be out after *one year* from the
time they first entered the area. All these people all over the
place hate each other so much. Most of these situations were
created by European colonialism. The Europeans *intentionally*
divided tribes and put halves of traditional enemy tribes together
for the express purpose of making sure these places were always at
war with each other for Europe's benefit. The lines are entirely
artificial and detrimental to the cause of peace and anyone's
security. If anyone had the balls to just admit the Europeans
fucked most of the rest of the world and just redraw the lines a
whole lot of ugliness would simply evaporate over night.
\_ Good idea, all we have to do is also invade Iran, Syria, and
Turkey so we can erase all current lines and redivide!
(Although, I agree with out in a perfect world sense.)
\_ No invasion would be necesssary in most cases. A lot of the
current wars going on are because the original tribes are
trying to reform across borders. The Tutsi/Hutu thing was a
good example of that. One tribe managed to take control of
the government and used it to attempt to genocide the other
from within their borders. After 500,000 to 800,000 dead, it
sure looks like a better plan to bring everyone to the table
to redraw borders peacefully rather than by the gun or the
machete. |
| 2004/4/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:13117 Activity:nil |
4/9 did the bush administration actually say that we would be greeted as
liberators or is that hippie propoganda? also, if it is true, what's
the conservative response to that claim? is it that the vast majority
of iraqis are happy for what we did? sorry for trolling, but i don't
follow the news closely enough to remember what was actually said.
\_ http://www.dailykos.net/archives/002162.html
\_ You and everyone else.
\_ it's a "small group of criminals and thugs" who are causing
trouble right now
\_ C'mon now, you can type "greeted as liberators" into google
for yourself and find out. |
| 2004/4/8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13099 Activity:nil |
4/8 I'm George Bush, and I approved this message.
\_ Thanks for following the format rules this time.
\_ "approved of"? |
| 2004/4/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13093 Activity:nil |
4/8 It upsets me that CNN has the most pro-Administration headline:
CNN: Rice delivers tough defense
Washington Post: Rice Defends Bush Anti-Terror Efforts
NY Times: Rice Defends Administration's Performance Before 9/11 Attacks
LA Times: Rice Defends Pre-9/11 Antiterror Policies
Fox News: 'If We Had Known ...'
Boston Globe: Rice: US not on 'war footing' at time of 9/11 attacks
I guess this is how you ensure your reporters remain embedded and how
you maintain "access". The David Letterman fiasco with the sleepy kid
is another data point suggesting CNN bias.
\_ Yahoo News routinely changes its headlines several times a day for
news articles. Maybe the other media companies do the same thing.
Then it'd just be which headline you happen to see at the time. |
| 2004/4/8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13088 Activity:very high |
4/7 Condi Rice paraphrased. "It's not our fault. We didn't know exactly
what was going to happen so we couldn't do anything to prevent it.
It's Clinton's fault."
\_ Truth hurts, huh? Read the transcript for yourselves instead of
getting the mindless motd leftist rehash:
http://wid.ap.org/transcripts/rice.html
http://wid.ap.org/transcripts/rice.html
\_ Truth? From a series of subjective statements by one woman,
in the face of numerous subjective statements by several other
people? Yes, that'll get us to the bottom of this.
\_ Better subjective statements by the person under discussion
than subjective rehashes by others. I think the above
poster makes a good point. Thanks for posting the link.
You hear a lot of lies watching CSPAN, but IMHO that's a lot
better than hearing a brief, badly understood, spun version
of the lie by some reporter on one of the "real" networks.
\_ You're right, primary sources are better than secondary
sources. Unfortunately, it's now devolved into "She said,
people? Yes, that'll get us to the bottom of this.
he said." It's hard to get to the truth at this point.
\_ when it comes to a question of crediblity between
a white man and a black woman, we all know who to
trust.
\_ We already found that out when Clarke testified (he said that had we
done everything he wanted it wouldn't have stopped 9/11). It's a
shame that this commission is a blame hunt instead of an attempt to
fix problems.
\_ To fix problems you need to find the cause. The blame game tells
you who thought what way. Was it institutional or executive
based? What were the priorities? Who knew what when? Was it
incompetance, lack of communication or PHB syndrome?
\_ If you want to find the cause, you shouldn't be lobbing
partisan opinions, or even having this in open session. This
whole Rice inquisition is happening not to find answers, but
to present a dog and pony show to the public, which includes
the blame game.
\_ Like Cheney's Energy policy? Golly, no partisans there.
fix problems.
Yes it was a dog-and-pony show, because sometimes you NEED
prove you have a dog-and-pony, that can state your case
instead of being told "don't worry your pretty little head
about it, we know what we're doing."
\_ as one radio commentator mentioned- the phrase "couldn't the FAA
have put heavier doors on the cabin / armed the pilots"
never came up from any of the commission members. They
seriously are not interested in the truth, even the Democrats
who would benefit from showing the Bush administration's
failures. They are all worthless parasitic trash.
\_ Because the FAA could never have gotten that passed though
committee before 9/11.
\_ what committee?
is a lot more glamurous.
\_ you guys have such short memory span. Remember, Bush and his
neocons were putting China and Russia under their cross hair and
eager to start another cold war. Fighting an evil empire
is a lot more glamurous.
\_ I thought it was 'neocons and their Bush'?
\_ my bad, i'm sorry.
\_ glamorous.
\_ What frustrates me is the emphasis on how "lucky" the US caught
previous terrorists attempts. You can MAKE luck. It's like sodans
whining about no sex when they spend whole weekends playing UT.
If you're not trying, it's not going to happen.
\_ Exactly. We all know that it's the CounterStrike guys who get
the chix.
\_ Word. I hate those guys.
\_ Clinton lobbed cruise missiles at bin Laden (after the U.S. embassy
bombings that killed hundreds). You can bet he would have liked
to have Predator accuracy at that point.
On the other hand, Bush didn't do anything. Nothing was
"actionable". The attitude was that if Clinton supported it, the
Bush people didn't want anything to do with it.
\_ Given Clinton's record it's a sound basic policy from which to
start.
\_ Condi testimony indicates a failure of the intelligence
community, mostly their fear of being wrong.
\_ Maybe. That's the question. Emperor's clothing or deaf ears?
\_ no, the statement means keeping mouth shut before
telling the emperor or emperor's helpers like condi |
| 2004/4/8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13085 Activity:moderate |
4/7 Oh no! Don't throw Condi in the briar patch! Oh please! No, stop!
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040408/D81QM1501.html
\_ 'She said she made the unusual decision to retain him when the
new administration came into office, saying, he was an "expert
in his field, as well as an experienced crisis manager."'
So unusual that two administrations before this had done the same
thing.
\_ retaining competence in government _is_ unusual.
\_ Touche'!
\_ Meaning the previous two administrations didn't take terrorism
seriously, either as history has shown. Maybe if this idiot
hadn't kept the same job through 3 admininistrations someone
who would've got something done would have been there. |
| 2004/4/7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29908 Activity:nil 54%like:29915 |
4/6 "My prediction: Bush will win California."
http://csua.org/u/6sh |
| 2004/4/7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:13055 Activity:high |
4/7 War President:
http://www.danielsh.com/warpres/warpresSMALL.gif
http://www.danielsh.com/warpres/warpresBIG.jpg
\_ the fact that there are duplicate photos seems to diminish the point
a bit
\_ Ooh! Can you do the same thing with the 9/11 families?
\_ it hasn't been proven yet that 9/11 was Bush's fault. |
| 2004/4/6 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29905 Activity:high |
4/6 Wow. http://Salon.com running an ad for John Kerry for their free day pass. Nice work for objective journalists: http://images.salon.com/src/pass/kerry/kerry_splash2.html \_ when did they ever claim to be objective? \_ So why does anyone take them more seriously than freerepublic? \_ Uh, that means that Kerry is paying them to run ads. Did you know all the TV networks run ads for whoever pays them money? It's like bribery or something! \_ A political ad to donate money to a candiate--while going to an article criticizing bush. |
| 2004/4/6-7 [Health/Disease/AIDS, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13046 Activity:nil |
4/6 http://www.thememoryhole.org Wired also has a story about it. \_ Ah, finally looked at the mutilation pics. Nice. Grinning kids looking like they're on a pleasant field trip, charred torso being poked. They should have set up a soccer game with one of the heads. \_ Actually, I meant the docs about the goings-on of 9/11. I guess I should have posted the http://wired.com article instead. \_ Or maybe some of the context for the link. Duh. \_ Mind read or die, scum! |
| 2004/4/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:13010 Activity:nil |
4/4 Good frontline, annoying if you don't have broadband.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ordinary/view
\_ Even the best system is not perfect. Tough luck.
\_ It's Bush's fault, right?
\_ no, but it's people like bush that perpetuate this system
\_ So it's Bush's fault.
\_ best my ass. this is the south.
\_ Even the best system is not perfect, but ours is far
from it. This incident is a good demonstration of many
of the worst problems including: "prosecutors in robes",
DAs motivated purely by politics, an over-reliance on
obviously unreliable "eye-witness" testimony and Plea-
bargaining, which is at least as likely to result in
false testimony as true. |
| 2004/4/2-3 [ERROR, uid:12999, category id '18005#1.5975' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12999 Activity:nil |
4/2 We bombed on the programming contest, but right now we're #1 here:
http://www.clickbackamerica.org/default.php
\_ Depressing, isn't it?
\_ Why do you keep making fun of Cal's programming team for
doing so poorly? If you're so hot, why don't you join or
coach the team?
\_ Can we say the same thing about US presidents?
\_ I kept sending mail to prsident@whitehouse.com but all I got
back was pr0n stuff about interns and blue dresses.... |
| 2004/4/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29896 Activity:nil |
3/31 GWB: Invigorating America's Youth:
http://www.overspun.com/video/AmericasYouth.rm |
| 2004/4/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12967 Activity:nil |
4/1 Bush and Cheney wed!
http://www.planetout.com/news/feature.html?sernum=840 |
| 2004/3/31-4/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29892 Activity:nil |
3/31 Bush Judicial Nominee: Driving birds near to extinction is good
because it makes birdwatching more exciting.
http://csua.org/u/6p3 (http://www.sacbee.com |
| 2004/3/31-4/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:12945 Activity:nil |
3/32 Where can I find the Bush humor slides about WMD? |
| 2004/3/30 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12935 Activity:nil |
3/30 Condoleeza Rice had a green monochrome CRT at her desk. retro cool?
\_ All the white cabinet members have at least CGA graphics.
\_ Even as parody that was in pretty bad taste. But, I guess
that's the idea of satire (if anyone these days could
remember the definition.)
\_ I'm not so sure about the bad taste, considering the real
life not-trying-to-be-funny bs that's been flying around.
There was a clip on the daily show last night of Bob Novak
asking a guest if he thought that Clarke was coming forward
now because he didn't like Condoleeza Rice, a black woman,
as head of national security. The guest was so shocked that
he asked him to repeat the question.
\_ Bob seems like he would be a perfect Monday night
football commentator
\_ Ann Coulter was the first to bring this up. Scary stuff.
\_ Sounds like they're taking a page from da Ali G Show.
"So, Richard, why do you hate black people?"
\_ Haven't the Republicans been complaining for 40 years
whenever the Dems try to play the race card? I guess
it just goes to show you that the Republicans can
be just as idiotic and craven when given the chance.
\_ More evidence that political language tends to migrate
from left to right.
\_ No, it just goes to show that there are partisans on
both sides of the aisle. Partisans of both major
parties should be exposed as useless groupthinkers. Bad
behavior in one group doesn't excuse bad behavior in
another.
\_ isn't it fun when the tables are turned? |
| 2004/3/30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12930 Activity:nil |
3/30 Rice to testify in public, under oath:
http://csua.org/u/6o8 (BBC)
Bush and Cheney to testify in private.
\_ you mean not under oath?
\_ All under oath. Just Bush and Cheney are not done in public.
\_ Because it's executive privilege to lie to the public.
\_ [Thanks for the penny]
\_ [No, thank you!] |
| 2004/3/29-30 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12910 Activity:kinda low |
3/29 What does Condi have to hide?
\_ yea, she's Black, she must be hiding something..
\_ What do YOU have to hide? Why do we have that pesky 4th amendment?
\_ What did Clarke have to hide?
http://www.drudgereport.com/rc1.htm
possible news program talking about the same topic.
\_ I think the distinction here is that Clarke wasn't going on every
possible news program talking about the same topic. This is a
drudgereport flurry over absolutely nothing. Nobody is contesting
the claiming of separation of powers concerns. They haven't
subpoenaed her or any others. But members of the commission from
both sides of the aisle are urging her to come forward. The
distinction is not small. Now, if Clarke had criticized her and
the administration for doing this, that could be a legitimate
flash-in-the-pan topic, but this more of the same drudge drivel.
--scotsman
\_ She has offered to come forward in closed session. Only
grandstanding politicians are insisting on public testimony.
Specifically, Lee Hamilton said:
"But there's another whole dimension here, and that dimension is
the public dimension -- and I think the American public would
benefit from hearing Condi Rice testify under oath."
Isn't the panel trying to find out what happened? Why does
Hamilton think it needs to happen in public? Answer:
grandstanding politician.
\_ Except he is no longer a member of congress.
\_ she is National Security Advisor, i wouldn't want
her to divulge anything that might help the terrorist
alter their plans.
\_ but if it helps get Kerry elected..let the terrorist win
\_ I agree with you, but I don't see how this precludes her
testifying publicly. She's free to say, "I'm sorry, that
would violate National Security" if it comes up.
\_ no, that's exactly why it's a priviledge for NSAs
to not testify publically. |
| 2004/3/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12884 Activity:nil |
3/26 Carter's Man in Managua
http://www.affbrainwash.com/archives/007518.php |
| 2004/3/26 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12871 Activity:kinda low 66%like:11465 |
3/26 What liberal media?
http://www.bartcop.com/libmedia.htm
\_ Right. That was pathetic. |
| 2004/3/25-26 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12848 Activity:low |
3/25 No fox news isn't biased or anything... Aside, I'm outraged that Fox approached the White House with this background briefing tape. According to McClellan, "it was Fox News who yesterday came to us and said they had a tape of this conversation with Mr. Clarke." If that's true, then a news organization that was included in a briefing with the agreement that it was on background -- that is, with no quotes and the briefer not be identified -- approached a source's former employer and offered to give up apparently conflicting words that the employer could use against the source. (I read the transcript. It's not particularly contradictory, frankly, and can easily be read as how Clarke characterized it.) This is a major journalistic no-no. When I was at Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism, we were taught to go to jail before you give up your sources. And you sure as hell don't approach someone you're supposed to be covering and offer to help them out against someone. http://www.back-to-iraq.com/archives/000711.php \_ The briefing isn't a "source". It isn't confidential and he is a former public servant. At the time he was a public servant and he is now testiying about important public matters. I want the truth, not alligator tears about Clarke and how his reputation is now tarnished and his book sales might drop. I'm not too impressed with the quality of education provided by the CsoJ. \_ How dare you question Pravda? \_ Why do you hate America? Why do you hate yourself? \_ Remember, it's ok to reveal a CIA operative, but don't you dare make the president look bad! \_ w00t! \_ Hey Columbia J-School Grad, when did you go? \_ Most journalists are stupid twits. |
| 2004/3/22 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29876 Activity:nil |
3/22 Why do the Republicans take so much money from the dirty, nasty
trial lawyers? Why does the motd censor keep deleting this, but
leaving the pro-Bush posts?
\_ Dem Constituency: Unions and trial lawyers
Rep ": business
\_ SKY GREEN! SEA YELLOW!
\_ Soon, baby. |
| 2004/3/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12801 Activity:kinda low |
3/22 All posts critical of the President will be deleted immediately.
Criticism of our Commander In Chief or the Republican party
during wartime will no longer be tolerated. -DHS
\_ so when will the war be over, so that we can resume criticizing
our CinC?
\_ Chimp in Charge?
\_ W00t!!!
\_ The struggle to preserve freedom will NEVER end!
\_ War is Peace! Freedom is Slavery!
\_ lefty troll.
\_ You're right. It's not that criticisms of Bush won't be
tolerated. It's just that you will be deemed anti-American,
an America hater, pro-terrorist, or a commie.
\_ Come on, is there an insult more anachronistic than "commie?"
You can't even use it ironically, its so tired. The RPG
Paranoia made a joke out of it in 1985. That was almost 20
_years_ ago.
\_ Why is it a troll? Everytime I put up a post critical of Bush
or any Republican policies, it is immediately deleted. I
am just stating the facts.
\_ facts fuck my ass..
\_ facts my ass.. |
| 2004/3/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12774 Activity:very high |
3/19 Apparently the Taiwanese have hired Jeb Bush to run their election.
\_ Huh?
\_ I don't know about that comparison. If, however, the President
of the United States use his presidential powers to stage an
assassination attempt by Al Queda in a last minute bid to
win the election, that would be comparable to what happened in
Taiwan.
\_ No matter how many times you repeat this, it is still
not true.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story/0,2763,430306,00.html
\_ What's not true? "It"? "It" is true. Join us in the
year 2004. The weather is great up here!
\_ I was referring to the ballot shennanigans, not the assasination.
\_ Oh my God, can't you just let it go and moveon? The whole
country has been over this a million times. The press did
their own recount of everything, Gore lost, join us up here
in the now and the future.
\_ No matter how many times you repeat this, it is still
not true.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story/0,2763,430306,00.html
\_ What's not true? "It"? "It" is true. Join us in the
year 2004. The weather is great up here!
\_ Will you please open your eyes? The recount itself is
meaningless. The only way that election would have
been valid is if they'd had a runoff. The difference
in ballots was squarely within the margin of error!
Take Stats and you'll know that you can draw no solid
conclusions in a contest like that.
\_ We don't do "runoffs" nith si country. Were *you*
calling for a run off in 92 when Perot took 19%? The
election was valid. It followed the laws and it's
unfortunate but there is no procedure for statistical
margin of error problems. Winner takes all and that's
that. I've had "stats", thanks. Have you had civics?
It's over, move on. Frothing won't bring more people
\_ Oh, he became president through a _legit_ process.
(You could make the argument that the process
needs fixing, but so far, it's legit by
definition).
to your party for 2004.
\_ There are so many red herrings here, I think you
must be a fishmonger. I know we don't have run-
offs; I'm saying that not having runoffs is
assinine. I'm calling for a runoff because the
difference in votes fell within the margin of
error; in 92, this was not the case in any state.
\_ It wasn't worth saying anything more to such crap. If
you had posted something worth responding to, you would
have had a real response. As I said when I responded.
There's no reason to provide a real response to a frothing
troll who has added nothing to the thread. You might as
well just say, "Yes, it is!" so I can say, "No, it isn't!"
and we can cut'n'paste back n forth for a while. Add value
and you'll get a real reply. Do you really honestly
believe you said something worth responding to?
\_ I don't know about that comparison. If, however, the President
of the United States use his presidential powers to stage an
assassination attempt by Al Queda in a last minute bid to
win an election, that would be comparable to what happened in
Taiwan.
meaningless. The only way that election would have
been valid is if they'd had a runoff. The difference
in ballots was squarely within the margin of error!
Take Stats and you'll know that you can draw no solid
conclusions in a contest like that.
\_ This has got to be tearing Taiwan apart right now. Anyone with
relatives/friends/actual presence there like to comment?
I'm done frothing; I'm trying to get reforms.
Bush is president now, so be it; but don't pretend
he's president through a legit process.
\_ Oh, he became president through a _legit_ process.
(You could make the argument that the process
needs fixing, but so far, it's legit by
definition).
\_ Rule #1) Have family in high places. Rule #2) Have the supreme
court in your back pocket - maybe go duck hunting together. It
worked for us!
\_ Rule #3) wear tinfoil hat. If you had a higher quality post
you'd get a higher quality response, frother.
\_ Uh huh. Your only response is to continue to claim,
against all evidence, things that are not true.
\_ It wasn't worth saying anything more to such crap. If
you had posted something worth responding to, you would
have had a real response. As I said when I responded.
There's no reason to provide a real response to a frothing
troll who has added nothing to the thread. You might as
well just say, "Yes, it is!" so I can say, "No, it isn't!"
and we can cut'n'paste back n forth for a while. Add value
and you'll get a real reply. Do you really honestly
believe you said something worth responding to? |
| 2004/3/20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12772 Activity:nil |
3/19 Hahahahaha! Look at your stupid conservative guy trying to reply!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/bob/04/97.html Hahahaha!
Bush is doomed!
\_ Yeah, it's just as great "It's none of your business!" or
"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it"
\_ I want links for these quotes..._
\_ 1) google. 2) read a newspaper, they were in several. 3) if
he didn't make them you'd see it *everywhere* that the evil
BushCo had fabricated quotes. Don't be silly, they were made
in public in front of a zillion people.
\_ Do liberals actually think this is what conservatives are like? It
would be far more interesting if you could get a real conservative
to write a counter point instead of just smearing them with froth
and bile. |
| 2004/3/19-20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12763 Activity:nil |
3/19 Find out how much and to whom your neighbors gave presidential
campaign contributions:
http://www.fundrace.org/neighbors.php
\_ Or, how I came to boycott that bakery I used to like down the
street.
\_ Because you found out the black muslim bakery is run/owned by a
child molester and racist?
\_ Wrong bakery. Been avoiding the black muslim bakery for
yonks.
\_ You stopped going to a bakery because they don't agree with
you politically?
\_ of course i did. i don't support fascist bakeries! no
cookies from BushCo Nazis! No BushCo beer!
\_ Raving motd satire aside, yes, I did. I'm voting with my
dollars. I don't support Bush, and I cannot, in good
conscience, support a business that supports him-- esp.
on the local level where my actual $3.50 in coffee and
bagels each morning is actually contributing to the
continued well-being of the business. And, yes, I spoke
to the owner reasonably and rationally about why I was
going elsewhere. He was sad to see my business go, but
adamant in his political beliefs.
\_ Martin Kelly, CEO of Pyramid Brewery: $2,000 to Bush
\_ OT but... I was standing on Shattuck and I noticed this familiar
sweet, rich, funky smell and I couldn't identify it until I
looked across the street and saw that Triple Rockwas brewing.
Wort smells neat.
\_ clearly it's a VRWC to get all liberal students drunk on bad
cheap beer so they'll be too wasted to vote against BushCo!
\_ Pyramid doesn't make bad, cheap beer, they make mediocre
microbrews.
\_ Bring back the Bison Brewery dollar beer happy hour!
\- you can lick the gutter out front for a similar but
cheeper experience. --psb
\_ Funny, Partha, I don't _remember_ stepping over
your sprawled body in the gutter in front of
Bison's after happy hour, but then, I _was_
usually pretty drunk.
\- that was a comment on the taste of their beer
not reflection on an experience of mine. --psb
\_ *I* remember stepping over (well, no really, it
was _around_) him but I don't expect him to admit
to that if he remembers it. |
| 2004/3/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12758 Activity:nil |
3/19 Bush campaign gear made in ... Burma? link:csua.org/u/6hx |
| 2004/3/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12748 Activity:moderate |
3/19 Proof that we are morally superior to the neocons.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/04/03/19_neocon.html
\_ Couldn't you have just pointed to http://kpfa.org and gotten it out of
the way?
\_ I'm still waiting for a definition of "neocon". Other than "ooh,
they're scaaaary."
\_ I have posted this many times. Did you not see it, or
do you disagree with the Christian Science Monitor
defintion?
http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html
\_ Hadn't seen it. I must have been too slow and missed it
before motd purging. However, how is this different from just
plain conservative (at least the "what they believe") part?
Also, how does this definition of 'neocon' imply the
http://democraticunderground.com link's assertion that neocons have
"utter disdain for any and all governmental social
initiatives"?
\_ I'm not sure if they call themselves neoconservatives, but
here is a statement of principles by the guys who everyone
*else* calls neocons:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
I would define neocon as someone who agrees with this set
of principles.
\_ "the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to
"override strategic considerations" -- Does that mean that
when Bush guts regulations neocons think it is bad (just
kidding)
\_ "neocon = jewish."
\_ I guess it's trying to distinguish this group of republicans who
call themselves conservatives but whose policies don't match
more traditional conservative principles, as e.g. Pat Buchanan.
\_ Pat Buchanan is NOT a traditional conservative. He is a
flaming moron. It's like calling Trotsky a traditional
liberal.
\_ Your frustration is understandable but the comparison is
inapt. Buchanan would probably be satisfied with the term
"traditional conservative". If Trotsky (or Stalin) heard
you call him a "traditional liberal" he would have been at
best...displeased. He would probably have tried to have you
shot.
\_ Inept. Actually their feelings on the matter are
irrelevant. Both are poor choices to represent the
mainstream of the respective movements.
\_ I prefer Trotsky to Stalin. Anyway, Stalin is neither
a liberal nor a real communist, actually. |
| 2004/3/18 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12739 Activity:low |
3/17 http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/04/03/13_trifecta.html Bush *laughed* and made a *joke* out of 9/11! At fund raisers! \_ the same way the Passion reminds me of the Lord's sacrifice, the casket reminds me that we are still at war and it's not over. \_ I visit this site every once and a while for a laugh. If you search google one finds repeated posts that wish for the death of US soldiers and further terrorist attacks because we deserve it. They deify Castro, Che, Chavez, and de Silva. The site consists of the residual scum of the 1960's and counter-culture adolescents whose every third word is an expletive. Their notion of of a meaningful political message is F*CK BUSH. \_ let me guess, you are the anonymous motd freeper? \_ this is a high quality site which tells the truth about what is really going on. if you can't deal with the truth then you get what you deserve when BushCo and Ashcroft finish destroying the few rights you have left you punk. \_ ahahah. the clueless abound \_ Actually, that smells much more of troll than of clueless. \_ Do you actually believe this or are you being sarcastic again? Can you provide any evidence of any of this? \_ Yes I visit the board fairly often. Search on Google I'm not going to do it for you. That guy Will Pitt was going to appear on CNN in the months after 9/11 until the inflamatory anti-American rhetoric he was spewing was publicized. \_ you're not smart enough to understand the value the site brings to the net. you're also dodging the issue raised by the op about Bush making a big fucking fund raising joke about the 3000 deaths he caused. \_ Give me a url that backs up your claims. This was the first thing I read there: http://www.democraticunderground.com/auntie/04/129.html It is not profane and pretty anti-communist. \_ http://csua.org/u/6hd http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110004262 \_ I'm not sure I get the point of this second link. \_ Fair enough. I thought you meant in the articles, not the discussion board. \_ Although I gotta say, the guy who wrote this webpage is freakin' nuts. Reading this I can almost feel him foaming at the mouth and slobbering all over the keyboard as he writes. \_ OMG! There are people with extreme opinions on the internet? Shut it down, man! Shut it down before someone gets hurt! \_ Sounded like a reasonable and fair criticism to me. Bush is "mean". \_ So you agree that we need more democraticunderground urls on the motd to keep the motd "fair and balanced"? |
| 2004/3/17-18 [Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12729 Activity:nil |
3/17 Are you making many post-college friends?
\_ Yes: (1) got involved with community-based organizations
serving Asian immigrants and Filipino Am. yuppies; (2) went
to yoga centers; (3) volunteered to work on an indie film
(which eventually got distributed by Sony Pictures); and
(4) became a groupie of a Chicago alt-country band. Not bad
\_ that's kind of gross. - danh
\_ not *that* kinda groupie. -elizp
for a neurotic introvert, and it's been fun. -elizp
\_ I've got so many goddamn post college friends
I really have trouble keeping track of them all.
\_ http://www.plaxo.com!!! spam them enough and you won't have
so many to keep track of.
\_ Yes: mostly through work, some through old college friends,
a few through hobbies.
\_ I made lots of friends at http://freerepublic.com
\_ Yes, mostly through work or friends of old friends I've known. |
| 2004/3/17 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12720 Activity:nil |
3/17 John Kerry foreign policy speech. Who says he's not a leader?
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0317.html
\_ Err.. this is the same guy who a few weeks ago was saying
Bush was going too far. Let's flip a coin too see what side
of the issue he'll be on next!
\_ Nice use of talking points without reading speech. Excellent
job of not thinking for yourself. Yay!
\_ Oh, I read the speech. Mostly it was the usual political
crap saying, "When I am president, money will fall from
the sky, and [you whoever you are] will have the newest
and best of everything! Don't worry, there will be no
problems when _I_ am president!"
\_ Nothing like the motd for cynicism, shortsightedness,
narrowmindedness, and stupidity!
\_ And insults with no point! And blaming everything
on the guy you don't like! |
| 2004/3/17 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:12719 Activity:nil |
3/17 http://www.moveon.org/censure/caughtonvideo Rumsfeld disclaiming the use of immediate threat in the push for war ... and then being presented with a direct quote contradicting him. \_ (I thought that last part was obvious from the URL) -op |
| 2004/3/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:12712 Activity:high |
3/16 New York Times/CBS poll: 11% think Kerry is a conservative, 12% think
Bush is a liberal.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/15/opinion/polls/main606465.shtml
\_ which really means between 12 and 23 percent of those polled are
ignorant morons.
\_ Yup. Which is probably the biggest problem. The leader is elected
based on television personality, and soundbite carpetbombing.
A truly wise leader would probably bore people, and probably
would avoid the job and the associated bullshit in the first
place.
\_ A truly wise leader isn't a technocrat or paper pusher. It
takes leadership to lead. Carter != leader. Reagan = leader.
GHB != leader. BC = leader. GWB = leader. Kerry != leader.
If personality weren't important we could get a computer to
do it.
\_ ob: Hitler was a leader too. Having a TV personality isn't
a requirement to be an effective leader. It's only a
requirement in the USA to manipulate public opinion. China
for example doesn't need a dancing figurehead to make
forceful national decisions. More to the point, leadership
doesn't go hand in hand with wisdom.
\_ Not a good troll. You just combine catch/key words and
bad formatting. A lazy troll.
\_ I'll feed you the cookie: China is a heavy iron fisted
dictatorship that rules by fear and force. They don't
rule at the whim of their populace. That's a good
model that would allow us to have wise but zero
charisma leaders. How about GWB declare martial law,
disband the government and do what he thinks is best
instead of poll following and wasting his time trying
to answer all those annoying reporter questions? Let's
try it for a few years and see if our country ends up
doing as well as a nice place like China.
\_ what gives you the impression that Bush answers
annoying questions from reporters? His press
conferences are 100% scripted.
\_ duh, all press conferences are. what is new about
that? you're right, press conferences are
controlled so let's use the Chinese system.
\_ I'm just wondering what you're saying. When
does Bush answer "annoying reporter questions",
if his press conferences are controlled?
\_ are u surprised? lots of the lib. vs con. stuff is nonsense.
Here is something neither of them would like to admit: GWB is a lot
like BC as a president, minus the libido. The unilateralist
interventionist PAX Amerika approach was started by BC, not GWB.
BC = GWB + sex drive.
\_ UR so KOOL saiing AMERIKA w/a K!!! hahahahahaha!!!!11
\_ and that's why I may not be voting for bush this fall. unlike
my liberal counterparts i don't froth and hate blindly just
because there's a (d) near a name nor do I fall in sycophantic
enthrallment to anyone with an (r). both BC and GWB are bad for
the country, just in different ways. the problem for me is that
kerry is like BC but stupid and ineffective and elitist. well
actually i guess that makes kerry nothing like BC. -conservative
\_ The corruption in BC's administration was unparalled in the 20th
century. The DNC has returned millions in campaign contribution
from the Communist PLA. How many contributions were never
caught? China has all of our nuclear weapon designs and
literally thousands of front companies performing industrial
espionage. What was Billy Bob's N. Korea policy - send his coke
head brother there on a tour.Between militarizing the IRS,
Forest Service, and other agencies, ignoring five or six
terrorist attacks, Waco, Elian, demoralization of the military,
etc. etc. BC was the second worst president with a tie for 1st
between FDR and Wilson. I remember posting links here in 2000
describing the 'diversity quilts' and PC other policies
Clinton's administration was pushing in the CIA. We know now
the results of these 'policies'. William Casey met with BC once
in the two years he was head of CIA. On the domestic agenda,
yes GWB is similar to BC. [motd formatd was here] [then the real
motd formatd fixed it for real]
\_ Whoah. I got sprayed with spittle just reading this onscreen.
\_ Why bother posting if you have nothing to say?
\_ The fact that you think FDR was the worst president ever says
a lot about your mindset.
\_ Yes and pointing that out says nothing about the poster,
or your differing opinions. Your implied assumption that
FDR = good and anti-FDR = insane says you really haven't
read your history or studied the long term social costs of
FDR's programs or actually the abuse of their growth and
continued existence long past their useful life span.
\_ Anyone who can't find some good in him has a problem.
You don't have to love him, but there must be something
you liked.
\_ There is 'some' good in everyone, mostly. That
doesn't make them a good president or mean they had
good policies, or more specifically in this case mean
that their policies were good beyond the time period
they were written and should have been kept and
expanded into the horror they've become today.
\_ So you're blaming FDR because later presidents
didn't end his programs when they outlived their
usefulness? How many federal programs come with
a sunset provision? |
| 2004/3/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12689 Activity:nil |
3/15 Computer specialists will be drafted first:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/13/MNG905K1BC1.DTL
\_ old news and what's wrong with serving your country again? |
| 2004/3/15 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12674 Activity:nil |
3/15 You may be a bigger part of the Bush/Cheney endless oil grabbing wars
of the future then you think -- government might be setting up to
draft "computer experts" and other skilled draftees in the future.
Guess what, h0zer -- that means you! http://csua.org/u/6fb
\_ as long as we are paid..
\_ Military salaries suck ass. Veterans benefits make military
salaries look great.
\_ Yeah wow that would suck if you had to serve your country! |
| 2004/3/14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:12656 Activity:high |
3/14 Australia has their own Bush poodles just like Britain and that
weakling sycophant Blair.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8966351%5E7583,00.html
\_ Yup, he sure was a weakling standing up to both houses of the
Parliament.
\_ yeah to be Bush's little poodle boy. |
| 2004/3/12-14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12646 Activity:moderate |
3/12 American Research Group: Kerry Increases Lead Over Bush, Democrats more
united than Republicans:
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/presballot
\_ If I was a foreigner I'd be cheering positive Kerry news, too.
\_ why? foreigners cheer for bush. outsourcing, big trade
deficit all good for foreigners.
\_ gee, and here the left has spent 3 years telling us how the
rest of the world now hates us because of bush. which is
it? having your cake and eating it too? don't be stupid.
\_ oh, that's mostly just the nato allies, and some moderate
used to be friendly muslim nations. But India and
the east asian nations love bush. In short, the
ones with whom we should have good relationships
hate us, while those that take advantage of us love
us. Bush screwed up both politically, and
economically.
\_ not really. Which East Asian (i presume you are talking
about north east asian countries) you are talking about?
Anti-American sentiment is running all time high here
in North East Asia. South Korea's president
in North East Asia. South Korea's president won
won election on his tougher stands against Americans
(even though it's all election rhetrics). In short,
many countries think Bush is being a big bully, which
has a lot of truth in it.
\_ there you go. even s. koreans, who honored the US
as an old friend by sending troops to iraq, think
the bush gang is a big bully and warmonger.
\_ no this is just a case of "what have you done for
me lately?" france is the ultimate example of
this. without the US france wouldn't exist today.
how much thanks do we get for that? its just the
way the world is. everyone has their own best
interests at heart which makes sense and is the
way it should be. this is totally normal and has
nothing to do with who the president is. if the
rest of the world loved our president i'd wonder
why and what it was costing *me* and my country
so the president can feel popular around the
globe. i'd vote against the residing president
on that basis alone.
\_ without France, there will be USA today.
There are more casuaties on the French side
than American soldier during the Revolutionary
War.
\_ yes and so what? at what point did we
backstab france? this has nothing to do
on that basis alone.
War.
with anything i said.
\_ huh? so you prefer that the rest of the world
hate us like say how they hated the
soviet union? that will be proof for you
that we have a good president?
\_ they didnt hate the soviet union anymore
they ever hated us. they were just the
other super power and all the little
countries you're so concerned about played
the 2 off each other for most of the 20th
century. hating us isn't proof we have a
good president, liking us isn't proof we
have a bad president but each is evidence
in that direction.
\_ Complete bullshit. Who loved the Soviet
Union? Pretty much all of Europe admired
the USA and most of the rest of the world
the bush gang is a big bully and warmonger.
on that basis alone.
that we have a good president?
have a bad president but each is evidence
in that direction.
too. The USSR was simply an empire, and
only opportunist dictators found profit
in alliance with it.
\_ no one ever said anyone loved the USSR
where are you getting this shit from?
if youre going to post please try to
read what you're replying to and dont
reply to your own self created straw
man arguments that others never made.
\_ I think you've got the two directions
confusd. each is evidence of the other
direction. And no, it wasn't about
playing offthe two superpowers. It had
always been about supporting the US for
what it respresented.
\_ Why are you guys babbling about foreigners? The link is
a poll of AMERICANS.
\_ Because, if you read a news paper or read it online,
you'd know about Kerry's recent quote about unnamed
foreign leaders who are pulling for him. Of course this
was a provable lie, but hey, it's only politics. |
| 2004/3/8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12567 Activity:nil |
3/8 Bush gang is furious that they won't be able to steal Florida again:
http://csua.org/u/6c6
\_ I have to hear a rational response to this question: how did
Bush 'steal' Florida - what is your evidence?
\_ Supreme Court decision which effectively awarded Presidency to
one side was unprecedented? The vote was also 5-4, aligned
conservative vs. liberal.
\_ As reported below the key issue was decided 7:2, read
the decision.
\_ CNN: "Broadly speaking, the 7-2 split was over the
question of reversing the Florida court, but the 5-4
split was over the termination of manual recounts."
\_ Please don't rely on CNN for vague explanations.
Read the decision, 7-2 the recounts violated
equal protection. The 5-4 was the remedy.
\_ Which was one of the most perverse
missapplications of the equal protection clause
that I've ever heard of. They basically said
"County A can't have recounts because you're not
doing a recount in County B, which doesn't need
one, and that somehow harms County B."
\_ If you actually read the decision you
would understand the justification.
You're right in the sense they didn't
even need to invoke equal protection,
they should have stuck with Article 2
of the Constitution.
\_ I don't see what in Article 2 would have
stopped a recount. Only that the electors
must give their votes on the day set by
congress. It seems like the SC had no
grounds to stop a recount, only to compel
the electors to reach a decision.
\_ So you would have been happier if the
(R) controlled Florida legislators had
a vote on it instead? That was the
other option at the time which seemed
more legal to me.
\_ Yes, I understand 7-2 was about violating equal
protection, and 5-4 was about the remedy.
However, I still think the 5-4 decision was more
important than 7-2 -- as indicated by all the
media I've seen, conservative and liberal.
Please provide one relatively non-partisan URL
which says otherwise, since your viewpoint is
the one that differs from the accepted view.
\_ The accepted view? As defined by who? I
don't "accept" that view and neither does
anyone else who has actually read the court's
decisions and followed it closely at the time.
\_ Katherine Harris scrubbed 57000 legal voters, almost all
black and Democratic, from the rolls.
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=217&row=2
\_ Actually, the majority of the voters removed were white.
Given the preexisting rampant voter fraud in Florida
clearly some sort of reform was in order:
http://csua.org/u/5ei
Is it your contention then that most felons, pets and dead
people vote democrat?
\_ Suarez, who committed all these crimes, is a Republican.
\_ Suarez was a Democrat at the time.
Carollo was the Repub. candidate
http://csua.org/u/6cb
\_ Nope Suarez was independent at the time:
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/2000/11/20/storm.html
my bad
\_ 90% of the purged voters were black. Read the link.
"My office carefully went through the scrub list
and discovered that at minimum, 90.2 percent of
the people were completely innocent of any crime
except for being African American. We didn't have
to guess about that, because next to each voter's
name was their race."
\_ Step back a second and read his quote. 90.2
of which people - he doesn't specify. He is
either stretching the truth or lying. The best
the ACLU could was 54%, in one county.
http://archive.aclu.org/news/2001/n060601c.html
57,000 legal voters were not removed as you stated
above, that is also a lie. The people removed were either
felons, dead, or did not exist. I reassert what
I said before - a majority of these 57,000 were white
\_ At least 57000, maybe more:
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=182&row=2
They were removed from the polls for having names
similar to felons and for being the same race.
Salon says "half were black":
http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2002/11/01/lists/index_np.html
\_ Christ its another article by the same guy. Talk
about being tautological. First he says its 90.2
percent then more than 50%? Very convincing source..
\_ Here is another article then:
http://http://www.democrats.com/view2.cfm?id=6543
Do you have even one source that says that
most of the purged voters were white?
NAACP says "a larger percentage of Black voters
than white voters"
http://http://www.naacp.org/news/archives/2000/florida_lawsuit.shtml
The Nation says 200,000 were either scrubbed
or had their ballots thrown away:
http://http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20010430&s=lantigua&c=1
\_ Again you are not referring to the 57,000
people removed. Clearly errors were made, but
your article names only 5 people. Given the
massive, pulitzer prize documented fraud in
Southern Florida clearly reform was necessary.
http://csua.org/u/6c8
\_ That was voter fraud committed by another
Republican. What a surprise.
\_ Suarez was a Democrat at the time.
Carollo was the Repub. candidate
http://csua.org/u/6cb
\_ Wrong. Suarez was never a Democrat.
\_ According to Palm Beach Post (as quoted in http://democrats.com),
~43k 'probable' and 'possible' felons were identified.
Out of that, 6500 names were not exact matches. From that,
5400 appeals were filed, and 2500 were upheld. After the
election, "at least 108" who were purged were later proven
to be legal voters. There were also 996 convicted of
crime in another state, who should have been allowed to
vote in FL, but were not.
\_ From the results of the Federal inquiry:
http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/ch5.htm
At least 8000 were removed that should not have been
for sure, according to Florida state testimony:
"Other voters were disenfranchised because a company
hired by the Department of State to match voter
rolls against other databases to ensure that felons
and the dead could not vote did not properly do so.
Database Technologies included in their list the names
of more than 8,000 voters who should not have been
removed from the voting rolls. However, by the time
the error was caught, it was too late for the counties
to fix it; in fact, the first time many of these voters
realized they had been removed from the voter rolls
was on Election Day."
Still waiting for your evidence that a majority of
those scrubbed were white. Do you have any evidence?
\_ Look I have no idea how to respond to you.
You are all over the map changing your position
every time you add something. First it
was 90.2 percent were black and were removed.
Then it was 50%, then .. fuck if I know.
I'd look forward to responding to a coherent
argument, were it put forth.
Please don't continue
this neurotic stream of consciousness of
links and babble, count to
10 take a deep breath and read my comments
above.
\_ I have posted from differing sources to
prove the overwhelming evidence that makes
my point: a majority of those disenfranchised
were black. Not every source agrees on the
exact percentage and I suspect that your
reading of Palast's 90.2% is correct, but
ALL agree that a majority were black. You
on the other hand, have not posted one
iota of evidence to support your contention
that most were white. Balls in your court.
\_ I figured you would actually be familiar
with the USCCR report...
'Furthermore, whites were twice as
likely as blacks to be placed on the
list erroneously, not the other way
around.' But she's a liar right?
http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/appendix/dissent.htm
You can find the rest of the info
for yourself.
\_ That was from the dissent, not the
conlusions. Only two commissioners
signed the dissent out of eight.
You want me to find it myself, eh?
In other words, you can't find it,
mostly because it doesn't exist.
\_ Are you aware of the make up of this
so-called investigative panel? Or
any of the hateful racist shit that
came from these people?
\_ And here's the switch to attacking
the source of the report! Right on
time!
\_ Let me add that is part of
testimony presented before the
Senate - are you implying
Thernstrom perjured herself?
\_ i'm the palm beach post guy, not the white voter guy.
however you cheat. you merely quoted the usccr.gov
report QUOTING fl state senator daryl jones and state
rep chris smith. you are not quoting the report itself.
tsk tsk. the report also stated that clayton roberts,
director of the division of elections, stated that the
problem was addressed and "no person was removed from
the voter rolls based on tat erroneous information."
\_ Fine I will quote the report then:
The most dramatic undercount in the Florida election was
the uncast ballots of countless eligible voters who
were wrongfully turned away from the polls. Statistical
data, reinforced by credible anecdotal evidence, point
to the widespread denial of voting rights. It is
impossible to determine the extent of the disenfranchisement
or to provide an adequate remedy to the persons whose
voices were silenced by injustice, ineptitude, and
inefficiency. However, careful analysis and some
reasonable projections illustrate what happened in Florida.
The disenfranchisement of Florida's voters fell most
harshly on the shoulders of black voters.
http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm
\_ note that you are now beating a hasty retreat from your
own 8000 number. i am not contesting that eligible
voters were left off the list. my contention is that
1) the original 57000 was not backed up by fact,
2) the number was way smaller, quoting tampa bay
post "at least 108". i will merely observe that even
8000 is an order of magnitude less than the claimed 57000,
and now you've even backed off from the 8000.
\_ I am not "backing off of it" at all. Everything I
have seen indicates that the vast majority of those
57000 scrubbed were not guilty of any crime. Do you
have any evidence otherwise, other than partisan
sniping by Republican election officials?
\_ 1) i quoted http://democrats.com quoting tampa bay post
with "at least 108". 2) i refuted your bogus claim
from the usccr report. give me something credible
that says 57000. if i could find a http://democrats.com
ref, you can find me something non obviously
partisan, and we're even.
\_ more quoting fun from teh usccr.gov report,
"Although the Commission.s record reflects that
some supervisors of elections registered general
complaints regarding the use of the exclusion lists,
the record does not reflect that the Division of
Elections was flooded with specific examples of
Floridians erroneously identified as felons."
note that i am quoting the CONCLUSION of the report,
instead of dishonestly quoting the report QUOTING
a partisan polician.
\_ No, that is not the conclusion. This is the
conclusion:
http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm
I can't even find the line you quote. What
section is it in?
\_ God, this is such old news. It's like the abortion or death penalty or
other hot button issues. Blacks were denied voting rights, well
so were people in the panhandle and the military, the USSC gave
the election to one side 5:4, well no, the key issue was decided
7:2 and the FLSC had previously given it to Gore 5:4, blah, blah
blah until we all drop dead of age and partisanship.
\_ None of these other people had their right to vote
taken from them. Everyone who wished to vote in the
Florida panhandle and showed up on time was able to.
Florida bent over backwards accepting military votes.
They even counted votes that came in late. All the FUD
in the world can't change these facts.
\_ Exactly, blah, blah, blah. It's like abortion or the
death penalty. This is a huge troll going nowhere fast.
\_ Thank you, anti-Bush person, for deleting my post.
\_ I did not delete your post. The coward that refuses to use
motdedit did it.
\_ Fuck motdedit. In the ear.
\_ Miami Herald report: http://http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/news/2071226.htm
Lead: "Republican George W. Bush's victory in Florida,
which gave him the White House, almost certainly would have
endured even if a recount stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court
had been allowed to go forward."
\_ I agree that 4+ out of 5 articles I've seen on this topic say
"Bush would have won anyway". Anyone have well-supported URLs
against this?
\_ This is about the recount. This has nothing to do with
all the voters being scrubbed from the rolls.
\_ So, find a URL talking about roll-scrubbing in this case
being illegal, and how Gore would have won otherwise.
Points if the URL isn't from ACLU, NAACP, Salon, etc. |
| 2004/3/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/Gay, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12518 Activity:nil |
4/3 Bush is doomed! http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak04.html \_ Bush is no conservative. |
| 2004/3/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12478 Activity:nil |
3/1 America headed for one-party PRI-style rule?
http://www.prospect.org/print/V15/2/kuttner-r.html |
| 2004/2/27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12429 Activity:nil |
2/26 Rumsfield and the New American Century --psb
http://www.poe-news.com/features.php?feat=31845
\_ this is pretty funny. too bad you had to post it with a stupid
misleading label so it sounds like some kind of pnac neocon troll.
more useful label: whacky pictures of rumsfeld with amusing kung fu
captions. |
| 2004/2/26-27 [ERROR, uid:12418, category id '18005#9.305' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12418 Activity:high |
2/26 Kerry's Soviet Rhetoric
The Vietnam-era antiwar movement got its spin from the Kremlin.
by KGB Defector
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/pacepa200402260828.asp
\_ a response: http://www.calpundit.com/archives/003364.html
\_ And I'm sure Venona was part of the vast right-wing
conspiracy as well eh?
Funneling of Soviet money, particularly oil revenues,
to Western insurgency groups is all very well
documented. Notice the author of your link does not
question the veracity of the NRO text - he simply
demagogues. Is it really necessary to recite for
you Soviet sponsored insurgencies during the Cold
War?
\_ Bush knew. http://www.buzzflash.com/perspectives/911bush.html
\_ It's on Free Republic. Go post there if you care. |
| 2004/2/26-27 [Reference/Tax, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12416 Activity:nil |
02/26 Brookings Institution on whether Bush's tax cuts should be permanent:
http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/gale/20040308.htm
\_ There you go: Dog bites man, no story; man bites dog, front page.
\_ Huh?
\_ It's on http://brookings.edu. Go post there if you care. |
| 2004/2/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12415 Activity:nil |
02/26 Bush To Cut Deficit From Federal Budget:
http://theonion.com/news.php?i=1&n=0
\_ Thank God! Now we can afford a permanent tax increase! |
| 2004/2/26 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12408 Activity:nil |
02/25 Howard Stern pulled from all Clear Channel stations:
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040225/255963_1.html
Interesting timing, considering that he's been "indecent" for ages
but just recently had started critizing Bush, which is a well documented
no-no in ClearChannel land. |
| 2004/2/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12385 Activity:moderate |
2/23 Whoa, check it out. Looks like Andrew Sullivan's love affair with Bush
is well and truly over:
http://www.andrewsullivan.com
\_ He's a conservative. The power of the Republican party is that, no
matter how pissed people get, they'll always keep voting Republicans
into power. Check back with him after the race has boiled down to
purely Kerry vs. Bush. He'll be wishy washy for awhile and then
he'll throw in his lot with dubya despite it all.
\_ You guys just don't get it do ya? You're gonna lose!
\_ Who is "you guys"? I'm what you would call a dubya-hatin'
lib'ruhl.
\_ If this were a spending or military issue, I'd say you were
right, but this is an issue that directly impacts Sullivan's
life and liberties. He may not be as understanding, forgiving,
or docile as the Bush administration is hoping.
\_ I'd like to agree with you but, lemme see, how long did he
take to get over Rick Santorum's little proclamation and
take to get over Pete Santorum's little proclamation and
Bush's reply a few months back? I think it took him about a
month before he had completely moved on. This will take a
little longer.
little longer.
\_ http://www.spreadingsantorum.com
\_ Conservatives complain about Bush, but when presented with
a liberal, the conservatives will back Bush for sure.
\_ Like I said, you're gonna lose! I'm going to enjoy gloating on
the motd for awhile after it happens. The Republicans tried to
run on a culture war in 1992 without a record on the economy
and they lost. This issue is a big loser. Naked bigotry is
not pretty.
\_ How'd we do in 94 after everyone saw Clinton's first 2 years?
\_ How'd we do in 94 after everyone saw Clinton's first 2 years?
\_ Didn't the Republicans win Congress?
\_ nothing more bigotted than the gay agenda
\_ Ah yes, the ATTACK OF THE GAY AGENDA!
http://www.markfiore.com/animation/agenda.html
\_ Gore was a better candidate than Bush and he lost because
of this "But Bush is an idiot" effect. Bush is an idiot, but
I think Kerry is an even weaker opponent than Gore was.
\_ I think you're wrong. Nyaah nyaah! What an intellectual
debate we're having.
\_ What part is wrong? Gore being better than Bush or
Gore being better than Kerry?
\_ Once someone actually writes "Nyaah nyaah!" you
should just let it go. |
| 2004/2/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/Gay, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12377 Activity:high |
2/23 Washington Post/ABC News poll shows only 38% of Americans support
amending the constitution to ban gay marriage. 58% said it should
be left to the states to decide. Bush is on the wrong side again!
http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?date=2004/01/22/3
\_ So should I point out the bias of your source or point out that
the issue has barely hit public conciousness so the poll is invalid
or should I point out that like a lot of fuzzy feel good issues the
public is always willing to go along until they see their little
girl playing with the little girl across the street who lives with
2 lesbians and their little girl wants to spend the night there?
I'd go find the polls from last month that show the opposite but I
really don't care.
\_ Which judges? Are you just pulling stuff out of your ass? The
only court that's made a ruling on this so far was...wait for it...
a STATE court.
\_ Which judges? Are you just pulling stuff out of your ass? The
only court that's made a ruling on this so far was...wait for it...
2 lesbians and their little girl wants to spend the night there?
I'd go find the polls from last month that show the opposite but I
really don't care.
a STATE court.
\_ Well we might need an amendment that says the courts
they can't make legislators pass _new_ laws. Seems
pretty obvious already to me, but sometimes you need an
amendment to drive the point home. Maybe another one that
says once a law is passed, government officials have to obey.
-- ilyas
\_ No one said anything about judges. What are you talking
about?
\_ Agreed, brother. The constitution also finally needs to be
amended to stop all that flag burning, to keep people from
driving drunk, to make sure software jobs don't go to India,
to make sure people follow speed limits, yeah! -John
\_ Oh my god! We all know all lesbians are child molesters!
\_ what about filing Federal Taxes as a married couple? it
should be on a federal level
\_ Unfortunately, those 58% won't have their way if the judges have
their way. The only way for those 58% to get their way is to have
the constitutional amendment.
\_ You don't care so much that you overwrote three other people's
posts! Way to go asshole! You're also claiming that the WaPo
has a liberal bias which makes you an idiot AND and an asshole.
\_ Serious question and not a partisan troll: Is the primary reason
why conservatives keep wanting to add all sorts of crazy
amendments to the Constitution a direct result of judicial activism
by the Supreme Court during the 60's? That is, are they just trying
to pre-empt justices legislating from the bench?
\_ You don't care so much that you overwrote three other people's
posts! Way to go asshole! You're also claiming that the WaPo
has a liberal bias which makes you an idiot AND and an asshole.
\_ Overwrote? Nonsense. You was nothing new here the split
second before I hit save. The rest of your reply is just
ad hominen ranting trash. |
| 2004/2/23-24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12365 Activity:nil |
2/23 Bush Administration economist defines McDonald's jobs as
"manufacturing" jobs:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/20/business/20jobs.html
\_ Just wait 'till they figure out how to outsource Big Macs... |
| 2004/2/22 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12350 Activity:nil |
2/22 It's official. Ralph Nader is running.
\_ Read the far far far left debating Nader's presidential bid:
http://publish.portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/02/281004.shtml
About the same level of dialog as freerepublic, on the other side.
\_ God dammit. I hope he runs off the edge of a cliff. It's not
worth another 4 years of BushCo just to have a "viable third party"
that no one would want in power anyway!
\_ Actually, it would be great to have a *viable* third party.
One egotistical asshole running as an idependent in a few states
and getting about 1% of the vote has no relation whatsoever to
establishing a viable third party other than making poeple
mistrust future third party attempts, however.
\_ Go Ralphie go! Four more years!
\_ Whee. I wonder how many states will have <1000 vote margins this
year? Freeper and Naderboy should go get drunk together.
\_ When is BushCo going to start donating to Nader's campaign? |
| 2004/2/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:12313 Activity:high |
2/19 Re the advanced centrifuge equipment found in Iran -- FINALLY it
looks like the Bush administration is using something hard.
\_ think iran is next in the invasion queue?
\_ Do you think is the current instability there is a coincidence?
\_ Do you think the current instability there is a coincidence?
\_ No. While Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Dubya were busy taking out
Saddam (the guy who tried to assassinate Bush Sr.), someone
competent was taking care of Iran. The IAEA is inspecting,
they already found serious equipment, and if the IAEA is
kicked out, that's something real the UN and the US can work
together on. You also need to think about how this is
different from the WMD inspectors getting kicked out of Iraq.
\_ Um, it was after the invation of Iraq that Iran allowed the
IAEA in.
\_ so after we invade Iraq over made up WMD's, Libya offically
abandons its WMD program, and Iran starts letting
inspectors in. Suddenly the costs of the Iraq invasion
are starting to look worth it after all...
\_ Sure, if the Bush administration thinks so, maybe
you'll see ads which claim this. Maybe Bush Jr. will
bring this up in a debate! <orgasm> |
| 2004/2/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12309 Activity:nil |
2/18 Anyone interested in seeing what Max Boot is writing these days?
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-boot19feb19,1,6229710.column
\_ Not unless it is an apology for lying to America about the
threat Iraq posed. |
| 2004/2/18 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12302 Activity:moderate |
2/17 [So, for some reason, I think that a dip in Kerry's weeklong edge
over Bush in random polling justifies me erasing anyone who disagrees
with me. I have no understanding of irony.]
\_ You're an asshole. I posted that this morning on my way to work and
haven't been back until now. Restored. I have censored nothing and
didn't even get to see whatever was said in response to what I had
to say because you're a self righteous prick. --Kerry thread OP |
| 2004/2/17-18 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29814 Activity:high |
2/17 Hey, as long as the freepers are throwing around Kerry the Hypocrite
stories, can I get a "Hey Hey!" for Larry Flynt and his Bush Abortion
story? He's been right more times than Drudge!
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/165111p-144622c.html
\_ Drudge has been wrong exactly once. Larry Flynt? If that's the
best source of anti-Bush news, then you're in for 12 more Bush
years including the 8 Jeb is going to get. |
| 2004/2/17-18 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12278 Activity:high |
2/16 The other day, someone on MOTD suggested a mandatory draft in USA
as a sort of social lesson for everyone. Here is a commentary by
Daniel Schorr on what is the real issue behind President Bush's
National Guard record. It vividly display one of the acute
problem with mendatory draft:
http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1678830
\_ Here is a comment on mAndatory service rather than the link above.
The problem with mandatory service is that the only big contries
built on it have been dictatorships, communist or otherwise.
\_ rest deleted because it was too stupid to live.
\_ Hello, modern-day Germany has mandatory service.
\_ Yes and they're progressively getting rid of it, because
various studies have shown it to be a great place to
introduce impressionable adolescents to drugs and neo-
nazis. Also, usually, becoming an officer in European
armies is voluntary, but requires a huge time commitment-
most modern empoyers frown on this, meaning that 'shit
floats'. Lastly, most democratic countries with a draft
have either gotten rid of it, or are in the process of
doing so. It's expensive, it takes a huge social toll,
and doesn't create a terribly good military (Germany's army
has some _incredible_ problems.) Don't forget that the US
had a draft until the 70s; most of the smart people (plus
Bush) got out of it, meaning you ended up sending the
underclass off to war--against their wills. Modern-day
conscript forces are clunky, usually undertrained,
underfunded, highly incapable, and thoroughly unsuited
to modern warfare. Look at the Swiss army, one-time
example of quality--it's a complete joke nowadays. The
only working examples of conscript armies are those in
countries under direct military threat (e.g. Israel) where
most people see the need for large-scale participation in
defence. I don't see the Mexican army massing at our
southern borders anytime soon, do you? -John
\_ Mexico is already sending thousands across the boarder
every night. If that isn't an invasion, I don't know
what is.
\_ And 90% of Canada's population is massed within 100
miles of the US border! They _must_ be preparing to
invade!
\_ They've already invaded, but no one cares b/c
they already "look" american and speak the king's
english.
\_ Bloody monarchists! Who elected Elizabeth
queen?
Kennedy's appeal to young people's idealism is a classic populist
sound bite that perverts the fundamental premise of liberal
democracy, namely that the government serves at the pleasure of the
electorate and operates within the boundary of a robust legal
system. Having the people labor at the mercy and command of the
state in the name of sacrificing for their country, and commandeer
their time and property is, well, you know what it is.
\_ They've already invaded, but no one cares b/c
they already "look" american and speak the king's
english.
\_ Bloody monarchists! Who elected Elizabeth
queen?
\_ <insert Monty Python's Holy Grail reference
here>
\_ What, the curtains?
\_ She was elected?
\_ Hey, good way to ignore our completely open
borders and make a mockery of an important issue.
\_ Oh, that's right, I'm supposed to take your
"Barbarians are at the gates!" line seriously.
Relax, boyo, they're not here for any job that
you want, and we'll boot them if they dare to
organize or demand human rights.
\_ Yeah anything outside your little ivory
tower world just isn't important. We must
mock that which we disagree with because we
have no other points.
\_ I wrote the original draft post. Although realistically a
strict military draft isn't the way to go, I still think a
program of public service could be designed in such a way as to
be beneficial. It wouldn't really be a draft per se. There are
a lot of different types of service other than "military
grunt." It would have to be incentivized in ways other than
oppressive force. Related to the "underclass", with the current
system I often hear stories of poor people who feel forced into
the army economically. Some woman in the South Carolina debate
I think gave a sob story about that, about her son who died in
Iraq. The gov't TV ads emphasize learning job skills and
getting money for college, not getting killed by Arabs. So that
issue is still present even without a draft. [formatd]
\_ by Arabs, or Bosnians, or Somalis, or Nigerians, or Afghanis,
or North Koreans, or Palestinians, or Kuwaitis, or anyone
else I've forgotten that's been shot at or shooting at any
Americans in the last few years.
\_ Just admit that you're afraid to fight for your country. Then
truly appreciate those that are less fortunate than you, enough
to lose their lives so that you can go on.
\_ I'll fight for my country. I'll fight to make sure it doesn't
end up in the hands of boneheads like you.
\_ What was boneheaded about it? Is everyone posting on drugs
today? Is this backwards day or what? |
| 2004/2/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12273 Activity:kinda low |
2/16 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/02/1! This is really scary. If he has the power to force people to make such lifeless scripted statements as a Senator, what would happen if he was the President? \_ Hey! Only Bush's intelligence can be questioned on the motd comrade! \_ Bush's what? \_ URL's broken. |
| 2004/2/13 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29803 Activity:high |
2/12 I love you Democrats. You have such interesting primaries. We
haven't had a good one like this in way too many election cycles.
And what's up with the intern thing? Are your guys boinking all
your interns? At least our guys go outside the office for a quickie.
\_ Bush vs. McCain wasn't interesting? Or are you not a Republican
either? Perhaps you're just an ignorant tool who doesn't
pay much attention to the news. |
| 2004/2/13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12236 Activity:very high |
2/12 link:csua.org/u/5zn Bush approval rating over time \_ the more interesting part is the "disapproval" rating. \_ while interesting, it is generally pointless, because disapproval rating + approval rating = 100% - no opinion so disapproval ratings are just a reverse mirror image of approval \_ <DEAD>randommeaninglesschart.with.no.comments.from.poster.because<DEAD> <DEAD>.op.is.really.just.a.troll.org/troll.html<DEAD> \_ Really! but I think it's interesting. -op \_ Really! but I think it's interesting, and it makes me happy whenever I see the chart. -op |
| 2004/2/11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29800 Activity:very high |
2/11 Bush calls request for service record "gutter politics"
http://csua.org/u/5yk
Hey Republicans: sow the wind, reap the whirlwind.
All those years "investigating" Clinton are coming back to haunt you.
\_ Oral sex is much worse than deserting your fellow soldiers.
\_ Depends on who's giving the oral sex.
\_ Attn: George Soros: If you offered a reward for credible witnesses
to come forward about snorting coke with GWB, you could cripple
this White House.
\_ Ditto if there's someone who will admit they helped forge his
National Guard records or help get an honorable discharge.
\_ They're not forged. They just don't show clear Dubya;
\_ They're not forged. They just don't clear Dubya;
McClellan waving the papers and sounding indignant isn't
persuasive.
\_ I like how McClellan says "he recalls serving" as if it's
some fuzzy thing he can't be expected to remember. "Like
uh, I was doing a lot of cocaine back then but I think I
probably went to Alabama, at least that's what I recall."
Too bad nobody else remembers him being there.
\_ From what I've heard there's a timesheet that is undated,
unsigned, and has a torn name that says 'W'.
\_ Ask McCain about gutter politics.
\_ So funny how this story finally has legs in the mainstream media,
three years after everyone else already figured it out. |
| 2004/2/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12207 Activity:nil |
2/11 Excellent and disturbing report on the 9/11 commission's investigation
and some unanswered questions:
http://www.observer.com/pages/frontpage1.asp |
| 2004/2/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12205 Activity:nil |
2/10 Can't wait to see the ads the Democrats put together with this
collection of headlines:
LA Times: "Bush Supports Shift of Jobs Overseas"
Seattle Times: "Bush Report: Sending jobs overseas helps U.S."
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: "Bush Economic Report Praises 'Outsourcing'
Jobs"
Orlando Sentinel: "Bush Says Sending Jobs Abroad Can Be Beneficial"
\_ I forget where I saw this one: "Intelligence Probe Could Be Trouble
For Bush"
\_ Reminds me of my favorite recent headline: "Justice Department
to Probe Cheney's Staff." They're probing Dick's Staff! Huh
huh huh huh huh huh....
\_ It hardly matters. The average voter is used to reading left wing
'mainstream' media headlines and assigning them proper value. It
would be woefully stupid to run a political campaign based on media
headlines anyway. OTOH if they had actual Bush quotes standing at
a podium saying "Sending American jobs overseas is good for
American workers!" then there'd be something to talk about.
\_ So a report out of the administration isn't as disturbing to
you as a press conference? These are the same arguments that
pushed NAFTA through and decimated our factory-job supply.
Keep pushing those margins and you'll have a lot of angry,
out of work people. Sounds like a good recipe for crime or
revolt.
\_ Please put more words in my mouth so I don't have to think.
Thanks! No, a report out of the administration is actually
the same as a press conference or speech. A headline from
the 'mainstream' media is useless. I'm anti-NAFTA, btw, so
be careful you poke that stick.
\_ The headlines are talking about that report. What is your
point? Do you disbelieve that report exists or what?
\_ I truly wonder if liberals aren't so disorganized that they can
put together such an ad. Are they really that far from Dean's
mentality on rallying his base?
\_ YEEAARRRGGHH!!
\_ Needs more Gs. |
| 2004/2/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12203 Activity:kinda low |
2/10 Serious inquiry. I don't think Bush has talked about outsourcing.
What is his official position? I've heard Kerry talk on the radio
saying that he'll remove tax breaks to companies that move jobs
overseas. Also he called those CEOs Benedict Arnold CEOs. He has
also proposed legislation that would require call centers operators
to answer the phone announcing their location. I'd go farther.
All call center operators should announce their REAL first name and
location. All those sweatshops in india pick up the phone and LIE
about their name. I can tell the phony accent. They name is not
John or Mary. It's Prakash, Rajesh, Lakshmi, etc. I don't like
people lying to me. Where does Bush stand on this issue?!
\- When the people at Safeway/McD which you a great day, do
you think they should be randomly checked under peine forte
et dure for sincereity? How about when a cafe announces they
have the best coffee in the world? what is *your* stand on
steel tarriffs? --psb
\_ When the people at Safeway/McD which you a great day, do
you think they should be randomly checked under peine forte
et dure for sincereity? How about when a cafe announces they
have the best coffee in the world? what is *your* stand on
steel tarriffs? --psb
[formatting corrected. I just couldn't take it anymore.]
\_ why should they have to announce their location? how would you
like to do that?
\_ "Hello, my name is Prakash in Bangalore India. May I verify
your social security number?"
"What?! I want to talk to a supervisor in the United States.
I'm not giving my social security number to somebody in India."
\_ the opening phrase used by the call center person is not a
concern for the call center person. it's just a script. their
feelings in the matter are of no concern. |
| 2004/2/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:12196 Activity:nil |
2/10 Why are you wondering about WMD? Bush already said they found them.
End of story. "We've found the weapons of mass destruction."
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0305/30/wbr.00.html
\_ Uh, huh. And they were where, exactly? |
| 2004/2/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12195 Activity:high |
2/10 So much talk about outsourcing. Nobody can give me the official
Bush stance on the issue? If he's for it, that's fine. Just come
out and say it and tell us how he's going to re-train or deal with
the millions of people who are going to lose their jobs.
\_ Both Kerry and Bush are / will be for it. You seem to forget
how much money corporations pour into politics. You free-traders
are naive; Walmart is the largest corporation on the planet
today, refenues larger than the GDP of all but 30 countries.
Where does Walmart produce most its products
and where does it sell the same. The
trade deficit consists predominantly of US corps
importing their products to the US. |
| 2004/2/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12175 Activity:high |
2/9 Holy smoke, CNN/Time has Bush approval at 42%. Aren't you wingers
even a little bit worried now?
\_ That's just the bias of the liberal media.
\_ Ahhh, right. Sorry, I'll assume the position again, sir.
\_ URL?
\_ Its from this issue of Time:
link:csua.org/u/5wq
Kos has a scan here of the relevant graph. Yes its a partisan
website, deal with it:
http://www.dailykos.com/images/poll_1.gif
\_ Also, the numbers on the top right are REVERSED! Go go TIME!
\_ http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
Reports this backwards from Time. One of them is wrong.
\_ Time printed it backwards. Ah well. Gotta love copy editors
asleep at the switch. |
| 2004/2/6-7 [Politics/Foreign/Canada, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12136 Activity:moderate |
2/6 Heh, cover photo of Canadian news magazine on Bush
http://www.drudgereport.com/bm.jpg
(see web site or http://www.macleans.ca for full story)
\_ Found it through macleans.ca via "Customer Care" -> "Back Issues"
http://m1.buysub.com/wcsstore/RogersCommunication
images/M02S176555_FS.JPG
\_ Well, that's intuitive.
\_ fuck you and your drudge report. here's a link to the Canadian
news magazine:
http://www.macleans.ca
\_ calm down, son. I already looked for the cover photo on
macleans.ca, and I couldn't find it.
\_ That's because youre a moron. See "fuck you" above.
\_ where's the cover photo, genius? |
| 2004/2/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12129 Activity:kinda low |
2/6 I don't really blame bush for this but it's ironic timing...
Feb. 5, 2004 | WASHINGTON (AP) -- On the same day a poison-laced
letter shuttered Senate offices, President Bush asked Congress to
eliminate an $8.2 million research program on how to decontaminate
buildings attacked by toxins.
Buried in documents justifying Bush's 2005 budget proposal released
Monday is an Environmental Protection Agency acknowledgment that his
proposed cut "represents complete elimination of homeland security
building decontamination research."
\_ a good wash down should be good. There's something about the
great outdoors taht kills germs.
\_ This is about poisons (chemicals), not germs, (biological).
\_ water should dilute them, then just wash them into the
sewers.
\_ Do you dump your oil changes down storm drains too? |
| 2004/2/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12100 Activity:moderate |
2/4 For whomever said that the VP candidate matters in a presidential
election I have only two words for you: Dan Quayle.
\_ VP candidate matters only when the Pres. candidates are closely
matched. Bush won because the GOP convinced voters that Dukakis
was soft on hard crime.
\_ and because Dukakis looked like a twink in that oversized
helmet and tank
\_ I like that picture of Al Gore looking down a barrel of
a rifle.
\_ No, because Dukakis said, "I will raise your taxes".
\_ Dan Quayle was a good man. If you knew anything about Dan you
wouldn't say he was a negative for Bush.
\_ He "was"? What happened to him? Did he die? Turn into
a bad man?
\_ I'm unaware of what he's done with his life since then.
He isn't dead AFAIK but he may be out raping nuns for all
I know. I tell you he "was" because he "was" but it is
possible he may not be anymore. I chose my words carefully. |
| 2004/2/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12097 Activity:moderate |
2/3 Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and other Democrats on the committee
reminded Rumsfeld that in September 2002 he said "we know" where
weapons of mass destruction are stored in Iraq. Explaining that
remark, Rumsfeld told the panel that he was referring to suspected
weapons sites, but he acknowledged that he had made it sound like he
was talking about actual weapons. The remark "probably turned out
not to be what one would have preferred, in retrospect," he said.
\_ If you're going to troll you need to spice it up a bit. This
blatant bait isn't going to catch anything.
\_ Maybe he's meta-trolling. You know, write something to get people
to accuse you of trolling.
\_ look, no one is going to bite on this obvious troll material.
\_ maybe it isn't troll material which is why I keep deleting your
comments...
\_ it's troll material. what do you expect? conservatives
frothing? liberals whooping it up? the opposite? it doesn't
matter what anyone in Mass. says about anything in the real
world. it's a small, loud, useless little state. troll.
\_ Dumbass, this wasn't about what anyone in Mass. said, but
what Rumsfeld said. I guess it got you frothing. -!op |
| 2004/2/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12075 Activity:high |
2/2 67 Kurds blown up on Sunday, 265+ injured, not much coverage.
\_ were any of them American?
\_ they supported Americans
\_ That's not relevant
\_ W00t!
\_ But look at Janet Jackson's tits! Woot!
\_ That nipple... piercing(?) is disturbing.
\_ it wasn't pierced. just a cosmetic add-on for the show.
\_ It happened on Sunday. Non-football discussion is unpatriotic.
\_ it was front page news, what more do you want?
\_ today, not on washingtonpost or http://cnn.com. i wonder how many
americans know about it. not much coverage.
\_ disturbing
\_ They know that people blowing up in Iraq bores America now.
They don't even really get excited about the weekly troop
deaths either.
\_ only because they are not doing their job. get some
nice photos with lots of blood and carnage and some good
interviews and people will be interested, but american media
is tame pussy these days, which is how it should be, just
like my country singapore. |
| 2004/1/31 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12045 Activity:nil |
1/30 We're going to have to invent a whole new term to describe the Bush
Administration's spending. "Like a drunken sailor" doesn't even begin
to cover it.
http://csua.org/u/5sa (yahoo news link)
\_ Since the motd is chock full of conservatives who don't like
the Bush admin's leftist spending policy, you're baiting your
hook with the wrong worm. Care to try again?
\_ Actually I wasn't trolling. Were you? Did you even read
the link? Its about money for "Star Wars," a favorite
conservative pet project. |
| 2004/1/30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:29771 Activity:nil |
1/29 Condi attacks WMD critics, spouts usual line:
"The president's judgment to go to war was based on the fact that
Saddam Hussein had for 12 years defied the international community."
C'mon, Condi, we defied the international community because they
defied the international community?
http://csua.org/u/5rh |
| 2004/1/30-31 [Reference/Tax, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12038 Activity:kinda low |
1/30 States that pay out more in federal taxes voted for Gore, states that
take in more in welfare benefit than they pay in tax voted for Bush:
http://tinyurl.com/2zswk (nytimes link)
\_ 'Cos if you're looking for sense, don't ask an American voter.
\_ Democracy is two Republicans and a Democrat deciding who is
for dinner. |
| 2004/1/30-31 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12036 Activity:high |
1/30 The Real Way Presidential Elections Are Won:
http://www.anesi.com/presname.htm
\_ psb for President!
\_ why doesn't psb use "\_" like everyone else? his "\-" is
inferior and shows a selfish refusal to follow social
convention. clearly not a team player. |
| 2004/1/30-31 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12031 Activity:nil |
1/30 What do you think would happen if the Democrats started publicly
running on the claim "Bush will take away the right to abortion
if he is reelected" ... and they just keep saying that over and
over and over. --psb
\_ You adorable little neocon, you. Still, it's funny that I haven't
\- where did *that* come from? --psb
heard anything about abortion, yet. Given W's clear intentions and
how far they are from a sizable portion of the electorate, you'd
think they'd be making more meat out of it. Maybe they don't want
to touch it until after the national.
\_ Very little. Those lines have already been drawn. Those who are
pro-abortion and pro-Bush know it's possible and will fight the
issue when it comes up, but it isn't enough to shift votes. The
reverse is true too.
\- look there is a general sense that "ooh bush owes some favors
to the crazy right wingers" i am talking about taking the
sort of sleazy "if the democrats get into offices the will
spend a billion dollars to trawl the prisons for black serial
rapist and subsized their relocation to saratoga, ca ... be
afraid!" type tactics and using them against the Reps. It
will be sort of hard to say "john kerry will sell texas to
the communistas" since they just need to trot out john kerry
walking into a freefire zone while bush is at happy hour eating
pork rinds. you cant make something like capital punishment
reform an issue. nor even gun control. abortion may be the
one issue that will energize you lazy hedonistic liberals.
my interest here is academic. you may wish to read "the 480".
--psb |
| 2004/1/28 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11972 Activity:nil |
1/27 Anyone have a recommendation for a decent digital sniper rifle scope?
\_ What's the diff between a digital scope and your bog standard
tube-with-lenses-at-either-end? -John
\_ just curious, what is wrong with an optical one?
-- can't shoot anything beyond 150 yards
\_ y00 sux0rz!!1 my gild w1l r0x0rz y00r sux0rZ gild! h@r!
\_ how are digital scopes different?
\_ they're kewler!1 i hav wun in doom3, d00de!
\_ ask on http://www.freerepublic.com
\_ what's wrong with a leupold vari-x?
\_ my g1ld doom3 hax0rz sk0pe r0xrz y0r lamER lop0ld!
\_ you are most likely a troll. But to those who know,
what is the advantage of a digital scope?
\_ http://www.nightvisionplanet.com/atn-dgtlu.html
\_ Seems like a waste. You really only need one good reticle,
and once you learn to use it well it'll be more than
sufficient. For those who have the time/interest, there's
a book by Maj. John Plaster called, "The Ultimate Sniper,"
that has a chapter on choosing and using various reticles. |
| 2004/1/27 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11970 Activity:nil |
1/27 Question for my fellow libertarians: what do you think of the trillion
dollar deficit over the next 10 years? Do you have more respect for
democrats or republicans? Personally I have more respect for democrats
because they actually believe that govt is the solution to a lot of
problems and aren't afraid to act on it. Republicans, on the other
hand, keep talking about small govt. I'm still waiting for the
fucking govt to shrink! What happened to abolishing the dept of
education, destroying public radio and television, or reducing the
size of the fucking federal budget? I'm never voting republican
again.
\_ Well, your troll isn't well formed, so let me make a few corrections:
'Personally I have more respect for democrats because, while they believe
in something other than what I, as a libertarian, believe in, they at
least act accordingly, whereas republicans do not.' The answer to what
you meant to say is that there are cases where going into debt is
justifiable. The only question left is whether going into debt in the
current conditions is justifiable or not.
\_ Been over this. Republican != conservative. Thank you. And no,
you're no libertarian. You're an easily spotted lefty troll. You
have never voted Republican in your life.
\_ I find it highly annoying how they keep talking about deficits when
they really mean debts. WE're running 3.5 trillion in debt so far
and its likely to be at least 6 by the time gwb is out of office
(I'm assuming the Dem's lose this one). That's about $15,000
debt per US citizen (not per taxpayer!). Someone gets to pay it,
and as long as we keep up the deficits, its going to be future
taxpayers.
\_ The current national debt is $7 trillion. --scotsman
\_ They're not talking about debt, they're talking about cumulative
deficits. -tom
\_ Which is basically debt.
\_ no, fucknut. |
| 2004/1/27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11968 Activity:nil |
1/27 Nerdtest: http://students.washington.edu/mmccain/nerdtest.html how do you score? -61% \_ 42.85% \_ I don't have time for shit like this anymore. :( \_ me either. there's way too many idiotic javascript tests out there written by bored cs students or other bored cs students. \_ then U LOSE! Seriously, part of being a nerd is having time to waste on things like that. \_ 52.38%, with a couple guesses. Yay. |
| 2004/1/27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11966 Activity:nil |
1/27 The Onion: http://theonion.com/4004/top_story.html Bush 2004 Campaign Pledges To Restore Honor And Dignity To White House |
| 2004/1/26 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11941 Activity:nil |
1/26 Taking bets. Will Kay be Bushco's downfall?
\_ No. No one cares and anyway he said a bunch of stuff was moved to
Syria so there's room for doubt in reasonable minds.
\_ no.
\_ No, it will be death by a thousand cuts that undoes Bush.
\_ You're assuming that there will be a "something" that undoes
him. Is it beyond imagining that nothing will happen and he'll
get a 49 state land slide victory a la Ronald Reagan?
\_ I agree. I think the democrats might be able to *win*
the election, but it's pretty unlikely that Bush will
*lose* it in the way the above poster means.
\_ if every person who voted for gore votes democratic once again
, and a few thousand greens in florida switch over to the
dems, bush would lose. how many people like bush MORE now than
they did 4 years ago?
\_ If every person who voted for Al Gore (including the dead
ones, the illegal aliens, and the ex-cons) gave me a nickel
I'd have a lot of nickels. So what?
\_ Everyone who thinks he did a good job with Afghanistan,
freeing Iraq, and creating Homeland Security. That's not
a negligible number of people, even with all the critics.
Why did people elect Reagan? Because he saw the world in
black and white, and a lot of people went with that.
\_ Yes it is beyond imagining that Bush will get a 49 state
landslide. There are at least a dozen states, California
one of them, that Bush will not win in Nov, no matter what.
\_ His poll number in CA aren't that bad. So, no, to people
who watch these things it isn't at all beyond imagining.
\_ I "watch these things" too and I sure that Bush
will not get 49 or 50 states. He will not get Hawaii
or Vermont or Massachusetes or Rhode Island for four.
You are nuts and don't even know it.
\_ I predict Bush wins California and another 4 years.
You heard it here first.
\_ Did you actually read his Sunday comments?
"I actually think the intelligence community owes the president
rather than the president owing the American people. ... Based
on the intelligence that existed, I think it was reasonable to
reach the conclusion that Iraq posed an imminent threat."
\_ Yes I did, and it seems very reasonable to be upset with
a president who appointed a large number of the administrators
in that intelligence community. The administration took the
worst-case analyses in Iraq to build support for invading,
and effectively ignored NK, Iran, etc. They wanted this
war and they got it.
\_ So what you're saying is, even though Kay comes out
highly pro-Bush, that the Democrats will still be able to
leverage Kay's comments into Bush's downfall?
\_ What I'm saying is, Kay's comments will undercut the
public's faith in this administration's ability to
maintain national security, and thereby make their
downfall difficult to prevent.
\_ I just don't think the buck will stop at the President's
desk.
\_ The public is also seeing the part about Kay saying
stuff was moved to Syria and quite frankly doesn't give
a shit anyway. You're grasping for straws. WMD in Iraq
is not an Achilles Heel of any sort. Bush is polling
higher nationwide at this time than any previous P. in
modern times at the same time in their first term. You
are setting yourself up for some serious disappointment.
\_ What about daddy. Approval at 89% in 1991,
dropped to 29% by the end of the year. -scotsman
\_ Could happen. Lots of things could happen, but
Bush really lost because Perot was there. With
our Perot, he would've edged out Clinton in 92.
\_ Ross Perot didn't make daddy's numbers drop.
W was at 60% a month ago. Watch him slide.
\_ are you a Republican?
\_ no, but I am a conservative. is it the same
thing in your mind?
\_ for the purposes of my question, yes. thanks. |
| 2004/1/26 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11937 Activity:nil |
1//25 What's the vegas (/online gambling) line for Bush to win re-election?
\_ It is 2:1. It was as high as 3:1 but has come down a bit lately,
now that it looks like Dean is not the Democratic nominee.
\_ See http://tradesports.com A 'price' of X means the odds are (100-X) : X |
| 2004/1/25 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11928 Activity:nil |
1/24 Attention conspiracy theorists!!! Are you aware that Kerry was a
member of Skull and Bones secret society at Yale, Just like Bush Jr.
and Bush Sr.? What does it all mean?
\_ depends on what it is. when i was kid, my friends and i thought
the kool-aid man was pretty cool. what does that mean?
\_ I guess I was trying to make an obtuse point: the tin foil
hat crowd is severely divided. The clinton-hating tin foil hat
crowd will never admit that Bush is part of the Evil Skull
Conspiracy and the Bush-hating tin foil hat crowd will never
admit that Kerry is part of the Conspiracy. Both of these
groups are strongly represented on the motd. Personally, I don't
think the secret societies amount to jack, and was hoping to
draw out the tin foil hat people, but now you've burst the
bubble.
\_ No. Correction: it isn't that we won't admit Bush is part of
S&B. That would be stupid since it's a simple matter of fact.
It is that we don't care that either Bush (or Kerry either)
was a member of the Spanking "May I Please Have Another!"
Society. What people did in college just isn't all that
damned important. If you're trying to draw out the tinfoil
people you need to start with something they believe in, not
what you *think* they believe in. There was no bubble to
burst, young troll.
\_ Well there's something about Yale anyway. Dean went there too.
And Clinton. Damn east coasters always giving west coast the shaft.
\_ Yeah, imagine going to the best school you can get into in your
geographic area instead of going 3000 miles away to a lesser
school with higher entry standards. How stupid of them to all
go to Yale, Harvard & Princeton.
\_ Funny you should phrase it that way, since Bush came from
Texas and UT Austin is easier to get into but provides a
far better and more rigorous education than Yale.
Don't believe me? Go look up the requirments for any given
major at Yale and at UT, and look at the silibi of the major
courses.
\_ yeah, keep thinking that.
\_ Let's start with the value of a Cal education. Go look up
"silibi" and come back to tell us how smart you are.
\_ Well Clinton, as governor, was involved in the narcotics
trafficking at Mena during the Bush#1 presidency. Bush, as former
director of CIA, should never have been President; there should
be a law prohibiting such an andvancement . Supposedly the Clintons
and Bushes have been good friends since the '80s. - freeper
\_ What is so special about being the head of a particular agency
that should disqualify someone from the other Office? I don't
recall seeing that line in the Constitution. Maybe we should
ban anyone who has had military service, too? Or who was an
executive at a multinational company? Or who ever tipped below
15%? Or who ever cut in line at the super market? |
| 2004/1/25-26 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11927 Activity:kinda low |
1/24 Regarding the charisma post below, Al Gore is very articulate but
somehow I don't find him very charismatic at all. I don't think he's
dumb (certainly smarter than GWB) but he's just soooo boring and
not very charming. On the other hand, Clint Eastwood is very
inarticulate but very charismatic. So I don't think charisma has
anything to do with public speaking or such. It's much deeper than
that I think.
\_ Al Gore's speaking skills aren't really that great; he turns people
off with his artificial manner. He talks kind of slow, and has this
smugness that is just annoying. Clinton is a lot better speaker.
It's related to one's attitude and self-confidence. Clinton and
Clint Eastwood both have a relaxed self-assuredness, and can
speak naturally. Al Gore has gotten a bit better over the years,
but he's notorious for having that stiff and "uncomfortable in his
own skin" kind of impression in public.
\_ Al Gore is no smarter than Bush. Other than personal animosity
what evidence do you have for this? Both are/were poor public
speakers in 2000, when we last saw them together. Neither was
particularly articulate. And Gore, despite being a silver spoon
baby just like Bush, couldn't graduate from a decent white boy
school, where as Bush did. Gore didn't attend MIT. He flunked
out of the same easy-to-graduate-no-fails-out-of-here-sons-of-
rich-white-boys-all-go-on-to-be-senators-from-here white boy
schools. Gore = zero charisma idiot. Bush = charisma+++ silver
spooner. At least be honest about who your heroes are. Clinton
was smarter than both and super driven in a way neither is but
is either incredibly arrogant or incredibly stupid given that he
was on top of the world and threw it away.
\_ Al Gore had higher SAT scores:
http://www.insidepolitics.org/heard/heard32300.html
\_ I think that actually summarized my objection with Bush.
I don't speak English and I got 1140 on my SAT. And
obviously Bush couldn't get into Harvard with that
kind of score by itself.
\_ i don't speak english either, but i do type it. and
yes, that's why he went to yale.
\_ Charisma is subjective. Some people find Bush to be
personally loathsome in his demeanor. I would rate Gore as
zero charisma and Bush as Charisma---. Of course, you could
say that I just think this for political reasons. But
consider that this whole discussion started with the subject
of movie stars' charisma. Name one movie star who, in addition
to their adoring fans does not have haters. It's always
subjective. Or maybe it's a vector, and the direction is
subjective. After all, you and I appear to agree on the
*magnitude* of both Bush's and Gore's charisma vectors, just
not the direction.
\_ While Gore is not my hero he did write an article about the
Internet for the September 1991 issue of Scientific American.
I have much more faith in Gore's intellectual credentials
than those of Bush. !-op
\_ ditto. i think bush may be better than gore at interpersonal
relations, but his (low) intelligence is a big detractor.
as mentioned previously, no one likes a dummy, except for
other dummies who don't realize he's a dummy.
\_ Remember, Bush didn't win the 2000 election; Gore lost
it. The American people are not fond of watching an
intellectual tear some average schmoe apart on TV, and
that's what it looked like. That really tipped the scale.
The dumbest thing alg0r did was listen to his campaign
managers. He should have hired Bill's.
\_ indeed. too many dummies in america. but i for one
welcome our new dummy overlords. |
| 2004/1/23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11900 Activity:nil |
1/23 Cho: don't dish it out if you can't take it.
http://www.nydailynews.com/01-23-2004/front/story/157605p-138358c.html
\_ Haha, from Drudge? This is the guy that's famous for excerpting
words from speeches that are sometimes minutes or even hours
apart and then using ellipsis to glue them together into whatever
phrase he wants to publish.
\_ "Cheney... gather... violent... law enforcement personnel...
and... come all... over... my... face."
\_ From anyone. If you're going to spew, be prepared to get
quoted, misquoted, and slammed. |
| 2004/1/23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11898 Activity:nil |
1/23 cool. answer some questions, the site determines which
candidates you agree most with:
http://www.presidentmatch.com/Main.jsp2?cp=main
\_ That survey gave me 100% on a candidate who i disagree with on
several issues, as measured by *their* tally. Is crap.
\_ I agree.
\_ cf. http://www.vote-smart.org
\_ Me and Joe L. matching at 100%, 94% Edwards, 90% Kerry and 86% Bush
which just goes to show they're not all that different afterall.
Even got a 67% with Kucinich who I think was always just clutter
and 69% with Sharpton who never should have had any press at all.
Poor Joe, I actually do think he's a good guy, but he was so stupid
to give deference to a scumbag like Gore. If Joe had balls I might
actually be a supporter.
\_ rofl i support kucinich who???
\_ Kucinich 100% w00t!
\_ Yeah I also got 100% Kucinich. It's hard to avoid "no opinion"
on some of the issues. I'm not sure what I think on healthcare.
Getting the deficit and debt under control is probably more
important to me than all the other crap. I might actually be
a conservative at heart but I hate most actual republicans.
\_ Kerry 100%, Bush 27%.
\_ Sharpton 100%, Bush 14% (is it sad that I wasn't trying?)
\_ hahaha, it gives me Kucinich 100%, Dean 90%, Clark 87%,
Bush 13%
\_ That site is just wrong. I'm conservative yet it rates me
wanting Democrats. Dean and Sharpton over Bush. How wrong.
\_ What issues are you conservative on? How much did you prioritize
them over the issues you're liberal on? If you're a libertarian
sort of republican, it's not surprising your views don't mesh
Bush.
\_ Many of Bush's supporters are simply too stupid to realize
his views and policies don't fit with their own.
\_ how ignorant of you. The problem is with their
calculations, not with Bush supporters.
\_ Their calculations are based on what you stated as
your positions, and what Bush states as his. Why don't
you tell us which of Bush's positions they
misrepresent?
\_ You can tell that there are serious problems with this site just
by how it lists Bush as having served in the military. True,
but not really.
\_ heh, I agree. Although if Bush was a reservist today deployed
for a year in Iraq, then I'd see it. |
| 2004/1/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11886 Activity:moderate |
1/22 Oh dear: http://csua.org/u/5ng (boston.com) GOP senators spy on democrats using computers. was that so fucking hard? \_ GOP senator STAFF spy on dems. The staff who did it should be fired, and any senator who knew what was going on should be run out of office. \_ I'm sure there'll be a thorough investigation which will show that none of the senators knew anything about it and it was all rogue staffers who couldn't be identified anyway. \_ right...just like there's a thorough investigation into the CIA mole leak. \_ I hope you know I was being sarcastic... \_ Hrm... Bob Novak again... why am I not surprised? \_ Watergate? \_ Not a chance. No one cares anymore. If Nixon was in office today and did everything he was accused of and more nothing would come of it at all. \_ Its only a scandal if the Democrats do it. In the Hall of King Bush, the Democrats are the Court Jester. Or if you prefer Classical metaphors, they are the Christians to be thrown to the lions as entertainment for the masses. \_ anytime a newspaper says someting like: "staff exploited a computer glitch that allowed them to access ... without a password." it means "Some dumbass left it a null password" or there was No glitch, there just was no authentication required. As for the "if the Dems do it", If the Dems did it you would probably all be screeming about how the poor Dem staffers had their computer confiscated, just for browsing around an open system. \_ republican tech. geeks are smarter than dem. tech geeks: As the extent to which Democratic communications were monitored came into sharper focus, Republicans yesterday offered a new defense. They said that in the summer of 2002, their computer technician informed his Democratic counterpart of the glitch, but Democrats did nothing to fix the problem \_ Read further, young troll: Other staffers have denied that the Dems were alerted to the problem. \_ I had already read further, and your tiny bite is not left my trolling urges satisfied. Damn you for your interference in my troll. -not even a republican |
| 2004/1/22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11884 Activity:nil |
1/22 Oh dear:
http://tinyurl.com/25pny
\_ asshole, if you shorten, say what the website is.
\_ Sorry for posting a non-work-safe link. It's porn, porn,
porn. Now eat the peanuts out of my steaming shit and shut
your miserable festering cakehole, you inbred filthy
stinking son of a shit-reeking alley whore. -John |
| 2004/1/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11877 Activity:nil |
1/21 Go Margaret!
http://margaretcho.com/blog/frommichael.htm
\_ I usually don't find Margaret Cho funny, but this
is a riot!
\_ Can we get Margaret an honorary csua account? She'd make an
excellent addition to the motd.
\_ Yeah she is about well informed about the budget as the
average American. Entitlements have always taken a larger
chunk than defense or places for the VP to relax.
\_ See? Even you can't resist being trolled by her. We
should sign her up!
\_ The idea of a celebrity motd flame warrior is pretty
cool.
\_ Dude, seriously. We could set her up with macho@csua
and watch the flames take off.
\_ Straw man. She didn't say "entitlements." Go back and
reread and try again.
\_ She wouldn't add anything to the motd. We already have enough
trolls, leftists, and ignorant ranting. She could increase the
4-letter-word count. That's about it.
\_ since the motd is mostly anonymos anyway, why don't we just
pretend that she has an account? Who'll know the difference?
-mcho
\_ mostly no one and no one will care. go for it.
\_ Sup, Republican ass monkey biyotch! --macho@csua |
| 2004/1/20 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11843 Activity:low |
1/19 Iowa: Dean: Crushed. At least Iowans have some sense.
\_ So, do you actually believe that Kerry can beat Bush, and that
if he does he'll really make a noticable difference?
or Edwards? I also find it hard to take seriously a process
that has Dennis Kucinich beating Wesley Clark by more than a factor
of 10.
\_ As a registered voting Republican I find Dean a weak and pathetic
opponent. I honestly don't think he stands a chance in Hell vs.
Bush in a general election. A Kerry/Edwards ticket is going to
be a tough race (assuming they don't stumble, rape any nuns, etc)
I don't see what you see in Dean. His only claim to fame is he
hates Bush (or says he does) as much as you do. He can't win a
national election on "I'm the guy who hates Bush!" Adults won't
vote that theme in sufficient numbers. People at the polls want
hope for the future, they want the vision thing, not hatred and
bile and spewing.
\_ Actually, I don't believe Dean could beat Bush. Why? Because
Dean portrays himself as a one-issue candidate - namely, the
whole WMD thing. Although he may be right about Bush using
WMD as a ruse to accomplish his own acts of personal revenge
while jeapordizing the lives of thousands of American soldiers,
British soldiers, and innocent civilians, most American voters
don't seem to give a damn.
\_ Clark wasn't running in Iowa.
\_ You're replying to a Deaniac. You can't expect him to know
anything.
\_ I can't get excited about any of the other candidates. They avoid
anything controversial, and just do the same old political dance.
I agree Edwards is pretty impressive though. It's easy to imagine
him getting broad support.
\_ Also, Gephardt is expected to drop out of presidential contest.
http://csua.org/u/5m4
\_ Good riddance.
\_ kind of sad, because I really think Gephardt *REALLY* has a shot
against Bush. He is not the most exciting canidate on earth,
but he has the organization to mobilize massive mainstream
voters. -socialist who love dean, but well aware
dean is too far to the left to be successful.
\- Do you like Gephardt's OrangeGlow? --psb
\_ The more I think about it, the more an Edwards/Clark ticket looks
like the ideal. John Edwards is a pretty cool guy.
\_ I like the way you think...except don't you mean Clark/Edwards?
\_ Why Clark? He's a Republican for Christ's sake! I don't see
how any Democrat voter could seriously cast a ballot for him.
\_ First of all, I think Clark has the best chance of unseating
Bush (honestly, Dean doesn't stand a chance). Second, I'd
like to think that I'm voting for a person based on his
leadership and not his party affiliation. As a registered
Democrat, I'm voting for Clark because I think he
demonstrated strong leadership as Supreme Allied Commander
during the Kosovo campaign.
\_ If he was a Republican would you cross over and vote for
Clark instead of any of the other Democrats running? If
yes, then great. If not, then you're full of it.
\_ I don't think Clark is Republican. The only thing
that makes him Republican is Dean saying he is and
the fact that Republicans like to make the words
Republican and military synonymous with each other
(which I think is a load of crap). I don't believe
people are born into a party and stick with it their
whole lives. There are many people who switch party
affiliations. That doesn't make them less of a
Democrat or less of a Republican.
\_ So you honestly just believe that Clinton called him
one day last year and he suddenly had this instant
conversion from (R) to (D) philosophy and ideals?
It wasn't too long before that he wa heaping praise
on Bush and the rest of the Bush Admin. and was out
lobbying and promoting (R) causes. As a (R) I'd vote
for him except he's so flip floppy. No conviction.
\_ During times of war, people usually give the
POTUS the benefit of the doubt because there is
the assumption that the president isn't a lying
scumbag who's willing to risk thousands of lives
for the sake of personal revenge. But Bush lied
to everyone, including Clark and Kerry. In fact,
many people who once supported Bush during the
war now oppose him. Things change. People switch
from R to D or D to R.
\_ Bush is not the (R) party. He's one man. No
one switches parties based on the actions of
one man who at best will have 2 terms. That's
just plain silly. The entire philosophy of
the two parties is different.
\_ Republicans voted for Swartzenegger. (sp?)
\_ Some. So did a lot of Democrats. This Republican voted
for Tom. When you see this State swirl down the toilet
because we (as a State) elected an actor don't come on
here and try to make it out like this was a pure (R) thing.
He had broad support across all lines. unfortunately.
\_ It's thinking like this that will give us another 4 years
of Bush, which is the last thing I want. Wake up!
\_ So you'll vote for a Republican, any Republican, if it
\_ having a balanced budget and good headway towards
reducing some of our national debt would have been
a lot better for the poor and middle classes.
Instead, some people got a check. To induce spending?
In a time when our economy was fucked? This
administration took a promise of the first net
positive budget balance I can remember in my lifetime,
and turned it into an even larger deficit. How exactly
does this help the poor? Plus, although I was one of
the lucky ones who actually got a $300 check, most of
the people I know (family, acquaintances, etc) did not.
It was completely random.
means getting Bush out of office?
\_ He supports repealing the tax cuts, cutting income tax for
families making under $50k, and medical coverage for all
children. This does not sound Republican to me.
\_ Uhm? Repealing the tax cuts means the poor and middle
class and married people all get fucked. Are you even
remotely aware of who the tax cuts helped and by how
much? It seems not. Don't bring that talking points
mantra stuff to the motd. It was not just the top 1%
that was allowed to keep more of their money or was given
more money. Every working family and person got
something. Repeal the tax cuts and you hurt those same
children you say you want to help. You don't know what
a Republican sounds like.
\_ Have you looked at what Clark has proposed? Repeal the
dividend and estate tax cuts, restructure the income tax
cuts and _actually_ help the poor and middle class.
\_ Refute me, you ass, don't bother dismissing me.
[Somewhat better response either overwritten or
deletd.]
\_ I refuted you. The tax cuts helped everyone in some
way. Repealing them hurts everyone in some way.
Do you want me to find and quote the specific lines
from the new tax code? If you can't see that I did
more than enough to make my case I can't be blamed
for your ignorance of what should be common
knowledge. Go read a newspaper. And I didn't have
anything to do with any deletes or overwrites, btw.
\_ I like how people claim that Bush's tax cuts
"helped everyone" when I'm sitting in front of
my pay check trying to figure out how I was
"helped". I guess it must have been that
whopping $20 in tax savings. Big fucking deal.
\_ stop overwriting.
\_ Well, stop writing to the motd when I am.
\_ you overwrote my post(the spam post),
plus the first reply to it, both of
which were completed over 90 seconds
prior to your save. I use me, I also
merge. Have some consideration,
jackass.
\_ Reminds me of the Simpsons where Mr. Burns
offers the Union a keg of beer in exchange for
a new contract that drops their dental plan. |
| 2004/1/19 [ERROR, uid:11826, category id '18005#2.7675' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11826 Activity:nil |
1/18 This is it. This is going to be the year when LaRouche finally makes
it all the way to the White House.
http://larouchein2004.net
\_ LaRouchies have been elected to state level offices before. Don't
discount the man too fast. After the (D) party implodes this year
they'll *have* to win the Presidency in 2008 or they'll fade from
history and possibly get replaced by several smaller parties by
region including the LaRouchies.
\_ "Implodes this year" Keep dreaming.
\_ Shrug. It's already happening before your very eyes if only
you'd open them. I'm an (I) so I don't care. Both of your
mainstream clone parties suck. It wouldn't be the first time
a major American politically party vanished. What makes your
party so special that they're immune to history?
\_ if the Dems implode everyone will rush to Green- then you fat
head-in-the-sand neocons will be in for some serious rapage. |
| 2004/1/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11825 Activity:kinda low |
1/18 Even the Conservatives are starting to question Bush's wisdom
in stomping into Iraq:
http://www.vdare.com/roberts/bush_doomed.htm
\_ not sure that http://vdare.com is conservative website. I think deep
down, all Bush really wanted is to forge a pro-American dictator
in Iraq, thus, Bush can have a clean exit strategy. This is
never about democracy nor human right, nor do we REALLY
give a crap about Iraqi people.
\_ If the only goal was a U.S.-backed dictator, why not try to
instigate a coup? After all, Saddam *was* a U.S. backed
dictator.
\_ We tried to bring him down. His control structure was too
tight for subversion. If instigating a coup is as easy as you
say, we woudldn't of have this "North Korea" problem right
now.
\_ Roberts served under Reagan and worked for the Cato Institute
and the WSJ. His Conservative credentials are impeccable.
\_ ohh. I thought that 1. WSJ is relatively liberal, no?
2. Cato Institute, oppose to "American Heirtage Fundation,"
is a liberal think tank, no?
\_ Cato Institute is a libertarian think tank. You realize
you are a moron, mr. chicom troll, right?
\_ WSJ is "relatively liberal" only if your point of
comparison is http://freerepublic.com
\_ Uhm, ok. You understand that a single individual can not speak for
all of us, right? You also understand that on this side of the
tracks, we have never blindly followed anyone. Question everything.
When a conservative fucks up, we say so. I can point you to much
better articles where conservatives attack Bush. Want to know why
this happens so much to Bush? Because he is not and probably
never was a real conservative. He's a great Republican, however.
\- the time has come, the walrus said, to motd of many things.
http://sundials.org/about/humpty.htm --cheshire psb
\_ I'm glad you know how to STFW. That's a useful skill.
Another useful skill is 'critical thinking'. If you applied
some, you would see the world is not a simple black & white
place. In this case you would see that having a certain
political philosophy does not make one a member of a certain
political party. The opposite would also be clear to you.
\_ Christ, someone wasn't breast-fed long enough. I pity
you. |
| 2004/1/17 [ERROR, uid:11813, category id '18005#5.21625' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11813 Activity:nil |
1/16 So why is it okay for Rush to call Hillary "Hitlery" but not
okay for moveon to compare Bush to Hitler?
http://www.fair.org/activism/hitler-ads.html
\_ Who said it was ok for Rush to do that?
\_ the troll who started this thread, who also doesn't seem to
understand that moveon isn't comparing Bush to Hitler--moveon
held a contest where anyone on the net could submit a 30-second
ad spot, and one or two of the spots compared Bush to Hitler.
They were never selected nor endorsed by moveon. -tom
\_ Hillary is a shrieking hag.
\_ sig heil, der fuhrer hillary!
\_ To me, niether is wrong; both are just kinda stupid. However,
there does seem to be a difference in tone about it. Rush is
trying to make a silly name. (He's more of a stand-up act than
a political commentator) The Democrats I've heard were really
trying to convince people Bush was Hitler reborn. |
| 2004/1/16 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29749 Activity:nil 66%like:11783 |
1/14 So those mortar shells turned out not to be chemical weapons
at all, why didn't our triumphant anonymous motd post a retraction?
\_ you are a bitter liberal
\_ you are a sheep! -!op
\_ You're all sheeple!!! -- crazy guy on cable access
\_ O'Reilly's interview on ABC's Good Morning America (March 18, 2003)
"Here's, here's the bottom line on this for every American and
everybody in the world, nobody knows for sure, all right? We don't
know what he has. We think he has 8,500 liters of anthrax. But
let's see. But there's a doubt on both sides. And I said on my
program, if, if the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein
and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation,
and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?
But I'm giving my government the benefit of the doubt. . . ."
.... now, do you recall when he apologized? What? You DON'T?
BECAUSE HE NEVER DID. AND NEITHER WILL THE REST OF THE ASSHOLE
REPUBLICANS.
\_ I wasn't aware O'Reilly posted on the motd. Why don't you
call his show to complain. I don't have to apologise for what
a media and entertainment figure has said. None of them speak
for me and I hope none of them speak for you.
\_ "Where the debate is, is why haven't we found huge stockpiles
and why haven't we found large caches of these weapons? Let's
let the Iraqi Survey Group complete its work." -Colin Powell
\_ Wouldn't it be funny if the survey group said "you know,
we couldn't find anything!" and Powell voluntarily took
the blame and resigned?
\_ there is no point to drill on this. we all know Bush just want
to get Saddam, and there is no rational reason behind it. God damn
I wish my tax dollar could be better spent.
\_ What's to retract? The original URLs all made it very clear that
the shells were being sent for testing. When are you going to
ask that Dean open his records from his time as Governor? What is
he hiding? My favorite so far is his energy commission which held
secret closed door meetings with leaders from the energy industry
from which he formed his energy policy... just like... Dick Cheney!
\_ Because the claims were touted as "look, WMDs may have been
found!" with a small clarification much later "oh they need to
do a little testing." In a case like that you should have the
the decency to correct yourself later.
\_ This is barely worth replying to since in your own statement
you make it clear it was "may have been" as if that's such a
strong statement. If the primary crime is saying "may have
been", there is no need for later clarification that testing
is required. The "may have been" directly implies testing
is required and I think it was nice of the journalists to
state the implied outright instead of making us guess. You
are so full of hatred that you'll take the most reasonable
and non-inflamatory statement such as "may have been" which
we all agree was in the same article as "requires more
testing" and turn it into some twisted bit of evil. You're
really lost and out in the hinterland on this one. There are
lots and lots of valid anti-Bush anti-Iraq-war things you
could go off on. This isn't one of them.
\_ The original point is valid. By caging your claims with
a unheeded qualifier you are confusing people. There have
been tons of stories about "WEAPONS FOUND" (hey remember
those Trailers Of Death?) all of which are touted loudly
as "see, he had them" with a small disclaimer near the
end. There is little or no retraction later by the same
touters when the stories are proven false. This means that
people who don't follow these stories closely get the
impression that weapons were actually found. After all
they keep reading stories about weapons being found,
and repatition DOES lead to people believing rumors.
Claiming otherwise is dishonest.
\_ "People who don't follow these stories closely" are not
my concern. They're the same people who don't vote or
don't care about any of this stuff anyway. The rest of
us are perfectly aware of what is going on. If you have
a beef with how the media reports the news, then you can
join the rest of us on the conservative side of the
country. We've been complaining for decades. Welcome
aboard!
\_ Last I checked Dean's energy policy didn't cost $150 billion.
\_ So it's ok because he was from a small state? So Cheney's
crime wasn't that he did the same thing as Dean, just that
it cost more? If Dean was from a big state or did this as
a member of the federal government then it would be bad? So
a bank robber who gets away with $20 at gun point is ok but
if the bank had more cash on hand that day and it was $1000
then it would be really terrible? Blind, blind, blind....
\_ There is no okay here. There is, however, better and
worse. Dean's energy policy not only didn't cost an
unfathomable $150b, it also did not do so by explicitly
lining the pockets of those who provided input. If you
cannot see how what the Bush admin did was worse than this,
you'll need to start carrying a white cane yourself, so's
we can see that you can't see.
\_ Again, your only defense is that Dean had a smaller
budget to fuck up. His process was *exactly* the same
and it is the *process* that Cheney was being attacked
for (and rightly so IMO). Dean should suffer the same
criticism. Once in office do you think he'll suddenly
change his style or continue as he did as governor?
\_ Right! Dean and Cheney both had suspect processes!
Both needed to fix those! Cheney's processes
resulted in outlandish profits for his croneys!
Dean's processes resulted in no outlandish profits!
Ergo: Cheney is worse than Dean!
\_ Ergo, Dean was dealing with a smaller budget but
his process was equally bad and as president will
be dealing with the exact same budget cheney is
dealing with and will fuck it up exactly the same
way. Ergo, indeed. My ass. Take off the
blinders and learn some basic logic, troll boy.
\_ Remember to vote for your lizard, so the other lizard
doesn't stay in office.
\_ take me to your lizard!
\_ Anything to change the subject. You forgot to mention
that Clinton got a blow job.
\_ And took millions in campaign contributions from
Chicoms for missiles technology.
\_ No facts! No anti-Clinton facts on the motd you hater! |
| 2004/1/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11784 Activity:kinda low |
1/14 recommendations on reliable web/email hosting companies? they
can be large 'national' companies or smaller local ones --Jon
\_ http://he.net |
| 2004/1/15 [Science/GlobalWarming, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11783 Activity:nil 66%like:29749 |
1/14 So those mortar shells turned out not to be chemical weapons
at all, why didn't our triumphant anonymous motd post a retraction?
\_ you are a bitter liberal
\_ you are a sheep! -!op
\_ You're all sheeple!!! -- crazy guy on cable access
\_ O'Reilly's interview on ABC's Good Morning America (March 18, 2003)
"Here's, here's the bottom line on this for every American and
everybody in the world, nobody knows for sure, all right? We don't
know what he has. We think he has 8,500 liters of anthrax. But
let's see. But there's a doubt on both sides. And I said on my
program, if, if the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein
and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation,
and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?
But I'm giving my government the benefit of the doubt. . . ."
.... now, do you recall when he apologized? What? You DON'T?
BECAUSE HE NEVER DID. AND NEITHER WILL THE REST OF THE ASSHOLE
REPUBLICANS.
\_ "Where the debate is, is why haven't we found huge stockpiles
and why haven't we found large caches of these weapons? Let's
let the Iraqi Survey Group complete its work." -Colin Powell
\_ Wouldn't it be funny if the survey group said "you know,
we couldn't find anything!" and Powell voluntarily took
the blame and resigned?
\_ there is no point to drill on this. we all know Bush just want
to get Saddam, and there is no rational reason behind it. God damn
I wish my tax dollar could be better spent.
\_ What's to retract? The original URLs all made it very clear that
the shells were being sent for testing. When are you going to
ask that Dean open his records from his time as Governor? What is
he hiding? My favorite so far is his energy commission which held
secret closed door meetings with leaders from the energy industry
from which he formed his energy policy... just like... Dick Cheney!
\_ Because the claims were touted as "look, WMDs may have been
found!" with a small clarification much later "oh they need to
do a little testing." In a case like that you should have the
the decency to correct yourself later.
\_ This is barely worth replying to since in your own statement
you make it clear it was "may have been" as if that's such a
strong statement. If the primary crime is saying "may have
been", there is no need for later clarification that testing
is required. The "may have been" directly implies testing
is required and I think it was nice of the journalists to
state the implied outright instead of making us guess. You
are so full of hatred that you'll take the most reasonable
and non-inflamatory statement such as "may have been" which
we all agree was in the same article as "requires more
testing" and turn it into some twisted bit of evil. You're
really lost and out in the hinterland on this one. There are
lots and lots of valid anti-Bush anti-Iraq-war things you
could go off on. This isn't one of them.
\_ Last I checked Dean's energy policy didn't cost $150 billion.
\_ So it's ok because he was from a small state? So Cheney's
crime wasn't that he did the same thing as Dean, just that
it cost more? If Dean was from a big state or did this as
a member of the federal government then it would be bad? So
a bank robber who gets away with $20 at gun point is ok but
if the bank had more cash on hand that day and it was $1000
then it would be really terrible? Blind, blind, blind....
\_ There is no okay here. There is, however, better and
worse. Dean's energy policy not only didn't cost an
unfathomable $150b, it also did not do so by explicitly
lining the pockets of those who provided input. If you
cannot see how what the Bush admin did was worse than this,
you'll need to start carrying a white cane yourself, so's
we can see that you can't see.
\_ Remember to vote for your lizard, so the other lizard
doesn't stay in office.
\_ take me to your lizard!
\_ Anything to change the subject. You forgot to mention
that Clinton got a blow job. |
| 2004/1/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11770 Activity:kinda low |
1/14 As the "chemical weapons vans" went, so do the "poison mortar shells"
http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/01/14/shells/index.html
(thanks for the deletion asshole. BTW this is an AP wire)
\_ Trusting George Bush is not a matter of "facts" or "evidence"
\_ Thrusting George Bush is not a matter of "facts" or "evidence"
it is a matter of faith. You just have to Believe. Something
agnostics will never understand.
\_ You just have to Believe that the liberals will screw you over
more. That's not too hard.
\_ "The liberals are coming! The liberals are coming!"
\_ Emehrjensee, emehrjensee, everyone to get from street.
\_ You misspelled "Godless America-hating communists".
\_ "Since the war ended, the U.S.-led coalition has found
several caches that tested positive for mustard gas but
later turned out to contain missile fuel or other chemicals."
You'd think they'd have a better test.
\_ The war ended?
\_ Well, it makes sense to equip troops in the field with a cheap,
fast and sensitive test for preliminary warnings. The problem
is that you should follow up with a reliable test and not say
"OMG WMD WTF!!!" when all you have to go on is the quickie test. |
| 2004/1/12 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11753 Activity:nil |
1/11 Watch 60 minutees tonight at 7:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml
\_ But no, we can't trust this "liberal" biased media. Oh no. We
must listen to Hanity and his Fox News buddies.
\_ Even O'reily says the President should apologize for
over-selling the WMD threat.
\_ We should take care of every two-bit dictator in the world.
\_ We've taken very good care of them in the past. |
| 2004/1/10-11 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11744 Activity:nil |
1/9 http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9.htm proves beyond a doubt that Bush Knew! \_ they also draw up plans for invading North Korea, France, Germany, etc. they do this all the time.. \_ good comeback. |
| 2004/1/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11725 Activity:nil |
1/8 Hey, what a suprise, President Bush fudge the WMD report:
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1589731
\_ NPR? Don't even bother bringing that biased shit here. You're
no better than the freeper guy. Find a real source and we'll talk.
\_ How 'bout that liberal bastion, MSNBC?
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3909150
\_ How 'bout USA Today?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-01-08-report_x.htm
\_ How 'bout reading the report yourself?
http://www.ceip.org/files/pdf/Iraq3FullText.pdf
\_ How about you see who the http://ceip.org is before taking their
'report' seriously?
\_ The administration obviously took it seriously enough
to offer a rebuttal. --scotsman
\_ Because it was reported everywhere even though the
source is trash but that never stopped the media.
\_ How 'bout fox's take?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107798,00.html
\_ See, we need more fair and balanced articles on the motd.
\_ All of these are clones of each other, some taking things
more out of context than others but none of them backs up
the garbage in the so-called "report". Posting lots of links
that say the same thing doesn't prove the crap in the links
are true.
\_ You expect actual insight in journalism? You expect
unbiased reporting in journalism? Debunk it if you're
bored.
\_ Already debunked. The source is more biased than
the freepers.
\_ Like what?
\_ Here we go. NPR is just quoting a think tank. Let's go see
their website: http://www.ceip.org and then decide how likely it
is that their 'report' is in any non-partisan or unbiased. For
those who won't bother, it's a ultra left wing .org that makes
the typical motd leftist look like a right winger.
\_ NPR is not "quoting a think tank". They're reporting on a think
tank's report and the response from the administration. If you
haven't noticed this sort of reporting comprises probably 90%
of "journalism" over the last couple decades. You don't
complain like this when it happens in the other direction...
And calling them ultra-left-wing is pretty knee-jerk. Not
all pacifists are left-wing, and vice versa.
--scotsman
\_ So you admit it is a pacifist .org? What are the odds of
getting a "report" from a pacifist .org that there was
justification for any violent act?
\_ I thought liberals didn't need tanks to think...
\_ Like I said, calling them ultra-left-wing is knee jerk.
They seem to have a platform of pacifism. Who knows if
they have a fiscal policy agenda? Who knows if they
supported LBJ but not Nixon? Do the research and decide
for yourself. --scotsman
\_ Eh. The 'religious right' is lumped with conservatives
for moderate coalition politics reasons. I see no
problems with lumping irrational pacificts along with
irrational fiscal socialists.
\_ Quite seriously, calling them "ultra-leftist" just
makes you look like a kook. They publish Foreign
Policy, the most respected journal of International
Studies published. They are financed by such far
left organizations as Boeing, Citigroup, GE and
Boeing. Their chairman is a venture capitalist!
http://www.ceip.org/files/about/about_trustee.asp
\_ Indeed. Have you noticed how campaign finance
reform is hurting _democrats_ more than
republicans? Republicans get a lot of their
support from ordinary middle class and small
business owners. Democrats rely on big business
with a case of white guilt and hollywood.
Orson Scott Card was right, liberals are the
modern status quo. Warren Buffet's a liberal.
You can't be stupid enough to insinuate that
big business or venture capitalists would
necessarily fund conservative causes.
\_ I am saying that they are not "ultra-leftist"
Are you claiming that GE, etc are ultra leftist?
Did you look at their board of directors?
\_ I agree with your comment about journalism 100%. Now here's
the hard question: what the hell do we do about it?
\_ So, you think this is the ultra-leftist conspiracy? give me a
a break. If Bush's WMD report was true, we would of find WMD
long time ago. Instead, Bush (and all your supporters) is saying
that the reason to go to war is "not important" because Saddam is
a dangerous man at first place.
\_ No, I'm saying there are WMD and we either haven't found them
yet, we're still going through millions of documents to find
and prove them or they were there and moved and need to be
tracked down. We *know* he had them. Everyone in the Clinton
administration and almost every (D) at the time agreed. Did
they just suddenly evaporate when a (R) got into office? That's
just plain stupid. If you believed Clinton, you must believe
Bush as well.
\_ Stop believing what politicans tell you. |
| 2004/1/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11710 Activity:very high |
1/7 More rights removed:
http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,61792,00.html
\_ Happy New Year!
\_ Whiner. What's wrong with this? It just makes official what has
always go on anyway.
\_ Why do you hate America? Oh, yes, it says here in your file
that you're a fifth column saboteur working for the terrorists.
\_ I don't hate America. What a stupid waste of bits. Here's
my genius quality counter punch: Why do you hate America? Oh,
yes, it says here in your file that you're a fifth column
saboteur working for the terrorists. How cool is that? I've
just repeated what you said and it applies equally well! That
is to say, it doesn't apply at all to either of us.
\_ So basically what you're saying is, its okay that our
privacy is being violated, since we're law abiding citizens,
what do we have to fear, etc. etc. etc.? I thought the
motd was teeming with libertarians, not authoritarians.
\_ I never said any such thing. I said they're already
doing it and have been for years. This just makes it
official and publicly known. You invented the rest of
that and put it in my mouth. I'm neither libertarian
or authoritarian. I'm pragmatic.
\_ They've been doing this for years, so its okay?
First of all, I don't see how that justifies it,
and second of all, how the hell do you know about
it? I consider myself a reasonably informed
person and this is the first I've heard of the FBI
having carte blanche to investigate your every
financial move without any warrant or justification.
So either you've got a tinfoil hat on, and are
convinced the government is always out to get us,
or you're just pulling something out of your
ass to try to justify something inexcusable.
\_ The motd is really good at telling me what it
thinks I believe lately. I suspect this is the
same person each time. I'll explain again. I
do not believe the anyone is out to get me or most
of the rest of us. I do not own a tinfoil hat. I
do believe that the government has been able to
acquire almost any information it wants about
most of us for a very long time. It is just a
case of "why bother?". I'm not the tinfoil hat
guy here. I don't think anyone would waste even
a moment of cpu time checking my financial
records (or yours either) because we're both
complete and total nobodies. I've met real life
active duty federal agents. The kind that shoot
people and then check the corpse for ID. They're
not like us. They don't care about us. I'm not
at all concerned these people are prying into my
(or your) financial or any other records. My
only concern is if they confuse me for someone
else on the street that that'll check the ID on
my corpse instead of asking for it at gun point.
These people have existed long before Bush was
even born so don't even go there. You're totally
naive if you think all government evil started
when GWB was inaugurated.
\_ thinking that all the people on the motd with
similar opinions are the same person is a sign
of paranoia. watch the motd for a couple hours
if you care. there are lots of people from
all corners of the political spectrum here,
many of whom probably respond to your posts in
similar ways. for instance, I have posted
nothing on today's motd other than this, but
agree with everything the guy arguing with
you has said so far, and also think you're
a paranoid idiot.
\_ You're right, this is not just a GWB thing.
Your comment about this not being new, and
that we shouldn't get bothered about it is
fallacious-- it is _new_ in that it is now
no longer covert, and we should be bothered
about it because this makes it so much easier
for the innocent (like you) to get mistakenly
dragged into the fray based solely on any
given FBI Agent's suspicion. I know FBI agents,
too, and I know that most are not bad. There
are some, however, whose bad side I never want
to get on. The potential for abuse is so great
that the power does not need to exist. |
| 2004/1/6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11690 Activity:nil |
1/6 http://www.bushin30seconds.org |
| 2004/1/6 [Politics/Domestic/Immigration, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11689 Activity:nil |
1/6 Go Bush: Bush pro-immigration:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/06/elec04.prez.bush.immigration/index.html
\_ http://csua.org/u/5g0
\_ It's all about bringing in cheap farm labor so you can eat your
all vegan diet instead of paying the real cost for your food.
\_ good for economy, good for national security, good
for immigrants, good for Mexico, good for the Bush, good
for the country.
\_ But those cheap labor are sending money to their home countries,
hurting US economy. Plus they are breaking the law and they
are cutting in front of those waiting in line for years to
immigrate legally. I guess nobody cares about the law and
fairness these days.
\_ what if it is a separate queue? |
| 2004/1/6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics] UID:11686 Activity:nil |
1/6 Nothing wrong with a bit of capitalism to take advantage
of trendy righteous indignation:
http://www.babesagainstbush.com/main.html -John
\_ link:csua.org/u/5fz |
| 2003/12/30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11608 Activity:nil |
12/29 Bush the Liberal:
http://markschmitt.typepad.com/decembrist/2003/12/what_if_bush_is.html |
| 2003/12/27 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11598 Activity:nil |
12/26 The First Amendment died earlier this month.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1046839/posts?page=1,50
\_ What, you missed this? Yes, this ruling by the SCOTUS was a direct
restraint of political speech. It cuts to the heart of the 1st
Amendment.
\_ It took me a while to come around on this but I figured out a while
ago that this is bullshit and the SC was wrong. I originally
thought it was a good idea but no longer. |
| 2003/12/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11552 Activity:nil |
12/20 Another Republican/GWB success. Keeping Americans safe:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/12/21/wgad21.xml
\_ Bah! That's not success! Barely managing to stay in office
after an intern sex scandal is success! Learn from the Democrats.
\_ BLUE DRESS! STAINED BLUE DRESS IS THE STANDARD INTERN!
\_ Yeah, he jizzed on the dress while the intern wasn't in it.
\_ Is that like "he didn't inhale"?
\_ As long you never served, you can not make that connection or
qualification you starbucks drinking software engineer
\_ *laugh* I see. Now only ex-military can have an opinion, post
urls, make connections or be qualified to discuss anything on
the motd. Mind if I use your idiotic line when some leftist
posts that Bush is stupid and making the world a more dangerous
place?
\_ Is everyone that stupid about the military's free reign?
Democrat or Republican, they get their $, and they do
their thing to defend America.
\_ nice non sequiter. that had exactly what to do with this
thread?
\_ If you want to use latin phrases, at least spend twenty
seconds looking up the correct spelling. Don't look
like a total tool.
\_ its the motd, who cares? you know what I meant and
spelling flames are always the last refuge of those
with nothing else to say.
\_ Well I certainly don't. But you do look like a
tool, regardless of the validity of your point.
(It actually was a non sequitur, of course).
Next time don't pretend to be educated and just
don't use latin if you don't know how to spell it.
\_ Not as big a non sequitur as a spelling flame.
Nothing marks one as a tool more than a
spelling flame. Nothing.
\_ I d say badly written latin's worse.
\_ nope, he's right. -someone else
\_ Agreed. -someone else #2 |
| 2003/12/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11516 Activity:nil |
12/18 Padilla to be given civil trial:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/18/padilla.case/index.html
\_ It might go to the Supreme Court. That would be great, if it did.
Even if they rule in Dubya's favor, the dissenting argument will
surely have something like: "When the U.S. government interned
Americans of Japanese descent in the interest of 'national security'
after the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, it was wrong then;
and in this post-9/11 world ..." |
| 2003/12/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11510 Activity:nil |
12/18 Republican says 9/11 was preventable:
http://csua.org/u/5b9
\_ See, you can't win. If we go in before something bad happens,
we are unilateral imperialist aggressors. If we go in after
something happens, that something was 'preventable.' I guess
a republican just can't win if he's in office. Not unless he can
see the future.
\_ or even if he can because it doesn't matter what he does, it is
still wrong.
\_ "the commission has navigated a political landmine". Why can't
even professional journalists use metaphors correctly? It's like
reading an all-kinney motd.
\_ We live in the Age of the Mixed Metaphor.
\_ We live in an age of ignorance and journalists are leading
the way. Few people are more stupid than a journalist.
\_ "As you read the report, you're going to have a pretty clear idea
what wasn't done and what should have been done," he said. "This
was not something that had to happen."
Appointed by the Bush administration, Kean, a former Republican
governor of New Jersey, is now pointing fingers inside the
administration and laying blame.
"There are people that, if I was doing the job, would certainly
not be in the position they were in at that time because they
failed. They simply failed," Kean said.
...
Asked whether we should at least know if people sitting in the
decision-making spots on that critical day are still in those
positions, Kean said, "Yes, the answer is yes. And we will."
\_ So do we go back and retroactively fire half the clinton admin?
\_ Quick look! Micheal Jackson, over there!
\_ What? Where?! |
| 2003/12/17 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11505 Activity:nil |
12/17 DIANE SAWYER: But stated as a hard fact, that there were weapons
of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he could move
to acquire those weapons still
PRESIDENT BUSH: So what's the difference?
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/US/bush_sawyer_excerpts_2_031216.html
\_ Even better:
DIANE SAWYER: What would it take to convince you he didn't
have weapons of mass destruction?
PRESIDENT BUSH: Saddam Hussein was a threat and the fact that
he is gone means America is a safer country.
\_ Bush doesn't dance, misdirect, or kickback to you so you'll
shut up like Clinton.
Bush just says Fuck you, like any good Republican, and I believe
most good Republicans appreciate that.
\_ Yup. Most good Republicans are dumb frat boys, just like GWB.
\_ I'm sure it makes you feel superior to think that. With that
loser you idiots are pushing for '04 it'll be 4 more Bush
years probably followed by 8 more from Jeb Bush. As soon as
you jerkoffs in the (D) party get it together and stop
underestimating the opposition you'll start winning again.
Until then, I'm voting Green. At least when my party loses,
I know I've voted my heart instead of voting for the lesser
evil who can't win anyway. Restore the two party system,
vote Green in '04!
\_ I know you're not a Green. You're a Republican troll.
And by the way:
http://www.ericblumrich.com/idiot.html
\_ Nah, Clark is the one that doesn't dance. Where is the clip
where he shut the interviewer up? Republicans dance.
Bush doesn't dance not because he doesn't want to but
because it is beyond his ability.
\_ In spite of Republican fantasies, you are still not a majority
party. Keep saying "fuck you" to the independents and
moderates out there. I really apreciate it.
\_ They don't vote. People who don't vote don't count. One
of the most admirable qualities of Repubs (or which I am
not one) is that they actually vote. They say "fuck you"
with their votes, which is where it matters.
\_ Nail. Head. The most infuriating thing about our system
is how many people choose not to participate in it, always
with the excuse that it means nothing to "their lives."
I'm wondering if this will change in a generation with
the gradual rise to power of new immigrant groups. |
| 2003/12/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11481 Activity:very high 53%like:11187 |
12/16 Bush signs anti-spam bill:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/16/bush.bills.ap/index.html
\_ This is not an anti-spam bill, though it is being marketed that
way. It is more of a pro-spam bill.
\_ Makes perfect sense in BushSpeak, where a bill to enable
more clearcutting is called the "Healthy Forests Initiative"
and a bill to remove civil rights is called the "Patriot Act."
\_ Hey, it was all that dead wood from beetle infestation
that fueled the SoCal fires.
\_ The logging industry doesn't cut dead trees.
\_ Slightly off topic, but on a recent trip up Highway 1
I noticed whole swaths of oak trees that seem to be
dead. From what I've read, this is not directly due to
a beatle infestation but a virus which weakens the tree
and then makes them more susceptible to the beatles.
Its very eerie to see a whole bunch of trees hit this way.
Very post-apocalyptic.
\_ the massive tree death on the Kenai peninsula is
caused by beetles. Not that this has anything to
do with Bush's timber industry giveaways, just
pointing this out while we're on the beetle
tree death topic. it got a lot of press recently
because the infestation was brought on by rising
temperatures in Alaska--which will continue to rise
thanks to Bush's giveaways to the oil industries.
\_ Care to explain the Alaska/CA Beetle thing?
\_ True, but the Healthy Forest Initiative was about increasing
the logging of healthy trees.
\_ what's your justification for this (calling it pro-spam)?
http://csua.org/u/5ah
\_ Spam law analysis: http://csua.org/u/5ai
And use an URL shortener! |
| 2003/12/16-17 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11478 Activity:high |
12/16 Orson Scott Card demonstrating yet again why I can't stand his books:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004435
\_ What, because he doesn't agree with your politics?
\_ jesus this guy is free associating left and right and labeling his
drivel as fact. i thought ender's game was ok though.
but maybe he thinks enders game actually happened.
\_ His politics have never made sense. He calls himself a Democrat
for some bizarre reason, but his actual opinions are a synthesis
of Ayn Rand, the Old Testament, and the Wizard of Oz. I can't
stand his books for almost the same reason - even when he's
making a good point, he doesn't have the courage of his
convictions. For instance, check out his statements about
the meaning of Enders Game - he's the only one in the world who
seems to think its not anti-war. He's also made some really
bizarre statements vis-a-vis the "Peter" character and the
subject of child abuse.
\_ Maybe he doesn't like the way people define "anti-war."
It never suggests in the book that humans never should
have fought the buggers at all, just that they shouldn't
have eradicated them. It the humans hadn't defended
themselves in the first two wars, it's pretty clear
that the human race would have been destroyed instead,
for almost the same reason.
\_ No, it doesn't suggest that humans shouldn't have eradicated
them. It and the sequels show that under the circumstances,
the humans had to fight "us vs. them" because there was no
way to communicate and negotiate. Indeed, the lesson is to
use force last of all, but when you use force, use
overwhelming, overpowering force so that the enemy never
stands up again. That's the lesson Ender learns over and
over again.
\_ This is somewhat changing the subject but...
Someone told me the Wizard of Oz was a book/movie about
communism, but aside from the fact that the midgets live in a
Potemkin Village, I don't see it. Anyone have any insight?
\_ The Wizard of Oz is a godless Communist screed. And not
only that, but flouridation is an insidious Communist plot
to suck out and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
\_ Hoping for a serious response on motd... silly me.
\_ A serious response would be called for if it was a
serious idea.
\_ It's not about communism, it's about a political
movement in the late 1800's known as populism. Its
very pro-populism. Google on it.
\_ Specifically, the Wizard of Oz is a character re-mapping
of the political figures central to the Silver Standard
controversy. My understanding is that it only became a
popular children's story by accident - though this sort
of thing happens more often than you'd think.
http://paws.wcu.edu/mulligan/www/oz.html for one
summary.
\_ Oh jesus. You can do this with any book. This is like
the guy that had the pet theory that the Harry Potter
books were an allegory promoting Libertarian thought.
\_ Did you actually do any research before this
statement, or are you just talking out of your
butt again?
\_ I read your article. This sort of allegory is
bunk unless directly claimed by the author.
A little googling will show you that many
scholars have many wildly different allegorical
interpretations of Baum's book, which just shows
how ridiculous it all is. I'm sure you can
find a way to show that, say, Terminator 3 is
an allegory for the women's rights movement.
That doesn't mean you're any more correct than
the person that says its an allegory for WWI.
\_ The 'Harry Potter supports Libertarian throught'
idea seems dodgy, but the Harry Potter books do
contain many thinly veiled references to Britain's
pervasive class system that would be lost on most
folks living on this side of the Atlantic.
\_ Look we are war. We will be at war with terrorism for at least
a couple of generations. Anyone who questions President Bush
during a time of war is a traitor and terrorist sympathizer.
Any questions?
\_ I didn't know Ann Coulter wrote to the motd! Go Ann! *drool*
--Ann Coulter #1 fan
\_ "Oh my god! Your cock is so BIG and TAX FREE!"
\_ Hi ilya. You can't get over that one, can you? Sticks
with ya. --lye
\_ wasn't ilya
\_ Yeah, lye. How could you soil my good name like that?
My polite indignation knows no bounds! -- ilyas
\_ Consider it humbly withdrawn. Not that I have any
reason to believe anything that anyone says on the
motd. --lye
\_ Gee lye, do you have a hangup about people lying?
\_ No. I always lye. --lye
\_ He doesn't address Bush's WMD justification for attacking Iraq.
Lamer. |
| 2003/12/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11462 Activity:very high |
12/15 With Saddam in custody now the '04 election is done. Stick a fork in
it and vote for Green so we can end the "1 party, 2 faces" nightmare.
What is this? _/
\_ In answer to "what is this?", "1 party, 2 faces" is what our
political system has become. Both parties are the same. They
have the same agenda, offer the same solutions, they 'steal'
each other's platforms not because they believe in them but because
the polls say it's a good idea to do so. This is a one party
nation that uses 2 names for the same party. We need a second
party in this country for those of us tired of business as usual.
\_ Yeah voting for Ralph Nader surely helped Al Gore, Jr. win.
\_ Why would I want the other side of the one party to win? Gore
and Bush might as well be twins. Why is this so hard to
understand?
\_ Watch the polls dip as we lose another 500 soldiers between now
and the election.
\_ Nah, the economy could only add an anemic 150,000 jobs last quarter,
in spite of the biggest productivity gains in twenty years. Expect
things to cool off a bit next year, leading to more job losses
and further wage stagnation. This economy is great for the stock
market, but not so good for Joe Sixpack.
\_ Hence the phrase, jobless recovery.
\_ Unlike you I am Joe6 and work with a ton of other union guys
and we're doing just fine, thanks. Get out of your ivory tower.
\_ Yeah, support for Bush is up a whole 3%!!!!
http://csua.org/u/5a2 |
| 2003/12/12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:11426 Activity:high |
12/11 Responding to a reporter's statement today that German Chancellor
Gerhard Schroeder had said that international law should be applied
in the awarding of contracts, Bush responded: "International law? I
better call my lawyer. He didn't bring that up to me.... I don't
know what you're talking about, about international law."
\_ Something tells me this is Bush trying to make a funny.
\_ I think it's more like a sodan trying to make a funny
(but I'd believe it if there were a URL)
\_ Its a real quote, I saw it somewhere today...can't be
bothered to find it though.
\_ obgoogle
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/la-121103contracts_lat,1,7987667.story
\_ It's the front-page story on http://latimes.com. I would've posted
the URL, but someone would have complained about having
to register as a user on the site. The exact quote isn't
on yahoo news either.
\_ Is there a csua registration for latimes?
\_ What I don't understand is that isn't the US paying for the
contracts? If so, why should any non-US-taxpayers have a say on
who get to bid for the contracts?
\_ This is about sharing the spoil of the war. Yes, they
oppose the war and gave US a hard time. At the same time,
we are asking them to write down debt owed to these nations.
We are also asking them to contribute money and troops.
In other word, it's stupid on Bush's part to be an ass
at this moment when we have so many favor need to ask them.
\_ When is he not an ass? He always has this weird swaggering
attitude about everything. He talks like he's a tough guy
even though he is really a billionaire mama's boy.
\_ Sorry. Germany, France and Russia OWE the U.S., not the
other way around. What is with you liberal sissies
cowering before big bad Europe. They are
venal aristocrats - fuck em. THey need us, not the other
way around. This is called Real politik, they would
(and have) stab the U.S. in the back in an instant.
\_ Interestingly, the http://latimes.com article disappeared off the front
page and is not linked anywhere (but the article is still linked
in as earlier in the motd, and on http://news.google.com).
Anyway, here's the authoritative source:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031211-1.html
Q Sir, Chancellor Schroeder says international law must apply in
this case. What's you're understanding of the law?
THE PRESIDENT: International law? I better call my lawyer; he
didn't bring that up to me. I asked President Chirac and
Chancellor Schroeder and President Putin to see Jim Baker, to
talk about debt restructuring. If these countries want to
participate in helping the world become more secure by enabling
Iraq to emerge as a free and peaceful country, one way to
contribute is through debt restructuring. And so Jim Baker, with
the consent of the Secretary of State, is going to go over and
talk to these leaders about that. But I don't know what you're
talking about, about international law. I've got to consult my
lawyer.
[Even I agree that there was some creative ellipsing of the quote,
which may have had something to do with the link getting taken down] |
| 2003/12/11 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11416 Activity:nil |
12/11 That damn liberal media is at it again:
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20031211_1708.html
\_ Can I get a shout-out from the war-profiteering crowd in the back? |
| 2003/12/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11391 Activity:moderate |
12/9 Bush makes a foriegn deputy appointment I can get behind. -AML
http://csua.org/u/57t
\_ Nitpick: Powell made the appointment. Good story, though. |
| 2003/12/10 [ERROR, uid:11381, category id '18005#18.065' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11381 Activity:nil |
12/9 Is it just me or does http://deanforamerica.com have a bunch of broken images right now? \_ That's a code message for dropping support for Israel. \_ isn't his wife jewish? \_ Do the SodaJews all support Lieberman? \_ Leaning toward Clark at the moment. I happen to still like my separation of church and state. -a random "SodaJew" \_ jews or not, Lieberman should be out. His voting records against any sort of financial / accounting reform alone should be good enough reason to sack him. \_ He is owned by Citibank, the bank of Enron and director Robert Rubin of LTCM fame, who emplored Oneil to bail them out. Treasury Secretary Rubin was also conveniently involved in the Goldman Sachs Mexico bailout in the early 90s. \_ He is from the Insurance state, and represents the insurance companies more than any other candidate. I actually heard him say "americans don't want to hear about healthcare" in a debate with the other democrats. You might as well vote for Bush. The only worse insurance whore I know of is Nancy Johnson, from Hartford (she's in the House.) |
| 2003/12/10 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11380 Activity:high 60%like:11346 |
12/9 Neocons pre-emptively kill six more future terrorists.
Go Bush!
http://csua.org/u/57q
\_ but the Precogs say that they'll grow up to be terrorists. |
| 2003/12/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29700 Activity:nil |
12/8 chew on this, joe!
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/08/politics/08CND-GORE.html?hp |
| 2003/12/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11379 Activity:nil |
12/9 Why isn't Gore running? Is he scared of Bush or somethin'?
\_ Ask Carter in 1984 or Bush, Sr. in 1996. Politics is a
time-sensitive art. |
| 2003/12/7 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29694 Activity:high |
12/6 More fine Republican Family Values:
http://www.counterpunch.org/mccarthy08252003.html
\_ Free MUMIA!
\_ yeah.. i want to free a cop-killer.
\_ Dang republicans. Thank goodness for the fine upstanding
Democrats, like Ted Kennedy. |
| 2003/12/7 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11346 Activity:high 60%like:11380 |
12/7 Bush regime pre-emptively kills 9 future terrorists:
http://csua.org/u/567
\_ Yeah, he knew they were little kids while sleeping in the White
house, mentally took control of the A-10s, mentally imagined the
Mavericks taking them out. Oh pluz! Why don't you say the Clinton
regime took out two Chinese "spies" in the Serbian campaign while
you are at it?!
\_ What happened to taking responsibility for your actions?
I thought that was a Conservative virtue. I guess not a Neocon
one.
\_ Yeah but you think we shouldn't even be in Afghanistan. |
| 2003/12/6-7 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11342 Activity:nil |
12/6 If you're reading this, you have internet access, free time, and
and interest in politics--time to turn on cspan and listen to the
democratic candidates. http://www.cspan.org
\_ "Why should I waste my beautiful mind on things like that."
Barbara Bush |
| 2003/12/5-6 [Science, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11329 Activity:nil |
12/5 Bush Backdrop Generator: Fun for the Whole Family!
http://home.comcast.net/~freshlaundry/bush.html |
| 2003/12/4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11307 Activity:high |
12/3 My Second Marxist Indoctrination
http://FrontPageMagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=11109
\_ Go back to Russia if you hate America so much.
\_ Go back to America if you hate Russia so much.
\_ "It's a war in which we will hunt down those who hate America
one person at a time." -george
\_ Go back to Africa if you don't want to be slave.
\_ wait this article says GWB was a military pilot. Is that really true?
\_ he was guarding the skies of texas during the vietnam war
\_ George Bush senior was a pilot (WWII IIRC). GWB 'served' in
the national guard during Vietnam. I say 'served' because his
service record was, for lack of a better word, spotty.
57,219d33 |
| 5/16 |