Please. Your constant barrage of moronic partisan dribble just serves to fan the flame of hatred from both sides. Your constant and relentless assult on free thinkers who don’t bow before the party line is on par with dictatorship propoganda. You are a tool of the right wing and use what little power you have to stir up shit-storms because you get off on it. You don’t care about the hateful feelings thrown around on this board because of your slanderous posts, you just continue to stir the mix, smiling to yourself as you do the Devil’s work. You are a constant barage of hate, and have worn down people’s normal peaceful response to such dreck that every thread you touch becomes a freefor all hater’s club. YOU, sir, are a threat to peace and stability in this country. YOU, sir, are a scandle and a shame to this very board. YOU, sir, are an insult to America, to think that this great nation built on freedom could have sired such a Ignorant Partisan Fuck who cares nothing about this country and only a perverse desire to serve your precious right wing agenda, consequences be dammed. Gollum has nothing on your obsession to serve your Precious. So you knew people in the WTC, whoopde fuck. Than doesn’t give you special glasses that makes you see the world any better. You know nothing. Your hate destroys the very fabric of this country, and you make me ashamed to call myself American. YOU, sir, are NO AMERICAN. Go back to your cave and never darken this board again with your vile fuckness.
And Reeder can Fuck off, too. The last thing we need are jackasses firing a two-pronged approach at our right to think for ourselves.
Well said. Most policy questions are not really measurable. E.g., we cannot agree on this board whether Bush’s aggressive policies have increased or reduced anti-US feelings among Arabs. There’s no way to scientifically measure it, but the feelings of Arabs are real and important. We have to make judgments and policy decisions the best we can.
I’ll have to respectfully disagree here, IzzyR. Allowing dissention and disagreement during good times is easy; allowing it during difficult times is much harder – and all the more reason why it must. It’s an embarassing weak society that says “we allow disagreement only when things are fine.”
Where do you get this? It seems to me that off the top of my head I can think of just as many conservative “notables” as I can liberal ones around here.
[/quote]
Please, Binarydrone, don’t interrupt Shodan in the middle of one of his “oh, pity us poor persecuted conservatives!” martyr sessions. It’s one of the few sources of pleasure he gets these days.
Hey, Shodan, if you need some nails for your cross, lemme know and I’ll make a run down to Hopme Depot…
Sorry, rjung, you’re going to work harder than that if you want to disagree with me. I agree with your post - we absolutely should tolerate dissent during hard times (unless in the face of absolute crisis - which we are far far removed from these days). I am merely saying that as a practical matter it weakens us and encourages our enemies. Nonetheless, in most cases - as in this one - tolerating dissent is a price worth paying.
What’s really funny is that if you changed 'right" to “left” and “conservative” to “liberal” it would be a perfect description of himself, and many of the other fringe lefties that inhabit this board.
Of course, friend december is entirely right: criticizing the Commander in Chief does offer aid and comfort to the enemy, and promotes divisivness in a time when total solidarity is called for.
I am deeply ashamed, of course, especialy when I reflect on how the Republicans rallied behind Bill C. when he made military actions, how they sternly hushed criticism and sniping in thier ranks. How could we have been so wrong, so misguided?
Lets make up for it! The only way to amend this crisis is to send the terrorists a message of total support for Commander Bunny…our Fearless Leader (Or is it his Dad who was “Fearless” and he’s “Dear”? I get confused…) What is called for is an utterly total Bush landslide in the next election!
Better still, lets not even field a candidate! The Democrats can nominate Bush as well, can they not? Then Bush the Warrior Prince can run against Bush the Compassionate Conservative, winner take all! All that would be required would be for GeeDubya to talk out of both sides of his mouth at once, a feat that President Rove can surely arrange.
And lets dump that silly “two-term” Constitutional nonsense! President for Life Bush! That will surely send the terrorists scrambling to throw themselves at our feet in abject submission! Then, with the terrorism thing in hand, we can burst into the Oval Office, shout “Just kidding!” and kick his sorry ass all the way to Crawford.
Fucking please. There is no “leftist group think” on this board. There is the most spirited, well-informed, intelligent debate on the Internet here. Just because lots of different opinions–and I mean LOTS of different opinoins–are presented in their most thought-out and challenging forms. You think there’s “leftist group think” on the boards, read some damned gun control threads some time. They look more like “Libertarian group think”, which is as big a contradiction in terms as I can imagine! (No offense intended to our honest and earnest libertarian posters, with whom this unabashed liberal finds himself agreeing more often than with fascist neocon brain-vomit like the OP)
I have in times past defended december as a valuable member of this community. You won’t see me making that mistake again.
Well, I’m with elucidator, no opposition, Bush for life.
Plus we all need to purchase not 1 but 2 action figures so I can simulate him fucking himself, oops that was a slip - I didn’t really mean it Mr. Terrorist.
OK, I’ve been reading this trainwreck for a while now, and it’s been a long day, so I may have missed a detail here and there.
What if you think that dissent is likely to save more lives overall than standing behind our Fearful Leader, you know, the one who was not willing to put his own ostensibly patriotic, but non-Homeland-defending self on the firing line when push came to shove? Both in terms of U.S. lives and lives of whatever nation the President feels like invading this week?
You know, **december, **you may disagree with the viewpoint of protestors, and that’s your right, no matter how much I think you’re a complete schmuck for accusing anyone who disagrees with you of appeasing terrorists. I think that’s high up on the list of most insulting things a person can say to another person. It’s not far down from “murderer” or “child molestor.” How you’ve gotten away with it this far, I’ll never entirely understand.
But that sure as hell doesn’t mean they haven’t (or, I should say, we haven’t) balanced the pros and cons. And it’s extremely condescending to suggest that anyone who protested the war in Iraq was an unthinking knee-jerk liberal sheep. I’d love it if you came to Chicago and told my mother that to her face.
If I were to say that punching someone in the nose is likely to make the guy angry at you, it would be based on nothing more than the logical process above. And if you were to insist that I hadn’t proved it and that it was just my opinion and you disagreed - we’d be at the same impasse as we are here.
IZZY, I’m going to explain this very slowly, because I truly believe you don’t get it.
Punching someone in the nose is a cause that has the provable effect of making them angry. We can see that this is an example of true cause and effect because the result – anger – is predictable from action – the punch. Why? Because punching someone causes pain, invades their personal space, and insults them, all of which would reasonably create the response of anger. Furthermore, we can infer cause and effect by the fact that the two are closely related in space and time. You have to reach someone in order to punch them, and their resulting anger will be immediate. Furthermore again, the effect is not dependent on the willful action of some unrelated third party being “encouraged” by the punch and then doing something else that is the obvious actual cause of the anger.
Contrast that to the situation under discussion here, where the “result” of mass murder cannot reasonably be attributed to the act of peaceful protesting; where the two are entirely separated by both space and time; and where the result is obviously dependent on the willful murderous action of someone else – not the protesters.
Once again: You are asserting cause and effect when there is absolutely no evidence to show that it exists. And when asked – repeatedly – why you draw such a correlation in the absence of any proof whatsoever, you state it is something you “believe.” You may well believe that monkeys fly out your butt, but that doesn’t make it so.
So what we have here is not a “difference of opinion;” it’s a failure of argument on your part. And if you want me to stop pointing that out, you’d do well to stop directing your evasive replies to me.
If that’s what you got out of that thread, you’ve joined the milroyj club. Sad to see you go, but I guess it was an inevitable end. To bad, as there was a time when you actually had a voice of your own, no matter how vehemently I disagreed with it at times.
Actually, it was attributed. To TurdNetDaily. While that might sound oddly similar to a certain radical right-wing blog disgused as a news site, I don’t think december will be pulling his future OPs from www.turdnetdaily.com.
Fortunately, the moderators are much brighter than your new incarnation seems to be, and will be perfectly aware that there was no attempt to mislead anyone into thinking it was an actual quote from an actual news site. Which way my wind blows has nothing to do with my posting status, or whether I am given any warnings, just as december’s sheepness has no effect on his posting status.
While it wasn’t meant to be taken seriously, one person apparently glossed over it quickly and thought it was, and another followed suit thinking that it might indeed be serious. You’ll note that these two individuals are on opposite sides in this debate. That actually helps to bolster the singular point it was obviously meant to make, that we have no idea why the terrorist was thankful to the protestors based on the little information we have, so speculating about whether the protestors are at fault is so far into the realm of the insultingly hypothetical that I’m surprised december’s arm didn’t fall off when posting it.
While december is all of those things, making a post like mine isn’t the reason why.
Today being the 35th anniversary of the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, I’d just like to take the time to personally thank all the brave souls who stood up to Mayor Daley and fought in the “Battle of Michigan Avenue.” Without your efforts, and the national attention they focused on the anti-war movement, I’d likely have been drafted to serve in the hellhole that was Vietnam as soon as I graduated high school. Well done, your sacrifice made America a better nation !
I agree with your post - we absolutely should tolerate dissent during hard times (unless in the face of absolute crisis - which we are far far removed from these days). I am merely saying that as a practical matter it weakens us and encourages our enemies. Nonetheless, in most cases - as in this one - tolerating dissent is a price worth paying.