Even better slogan if you spelled “Iraq” a-r-a-c-k.
You know, I was going to apologize for even bringing it up. But after that lame ass attempt to put words in my mouth, I’m thinking not. You see, DT, I have compassion for all human beings, even you. It’s just one whole hell of lot tougher with you.
It makes me feel a little bit better that even the FReepers think Atkinson is a nut.
Oh, man, you’re so right! Read it Dr. Evil’s voice. You keep expecting a paragraph about having his scrotum shaved, or wearing meat-helmets in the Summer.
So George will cross the Potomac and exclaim “alea jacta est”?
The really fun part is that this guy suggests a Roman model, and then proceeds to make a ton of errors as to Roman history.
That would be fun. He should rule from Baghdad.
Also, a White House on the Tigris would sharpen up the Secret Service, which has been getting a little soft protecting the president in DC. Some daily mortar fire and RPG attacks should take the slack out of those expanding waistlines.
Just so long as we’re rid of him, and so long as all American troops are out of Iraq, he can do with that country as he likes!
I’m not so sure he isn’t planning to do something like that. The embassy we’re building in Iraq is the world’s largest and Haliburton has rechartered itself in Dubai, IIRC. Perhaps his plan is that after the '08 elections, he’ll get the new Republican president to post him to Iraq, so that he can personally make sure that the job is done “right.”
The gentleman overwrites every sentence and makes just enough grammatical errors to call attention to his lack of scholarship.
Psychologically, he’s self-absorbed and needs to portray himself as a victim to escape any responsibility for his failure to have earned any of the credentials that he wishes to claim for himself.
Mama, he’s crazy.
When you say “they aren’t Americans,” how can you be referring to "the Americans who go on and on about how ‘noble’ and ‘self sacrificing’ our murderers in uniform are’?
Would you untangle that sentence for me please? Who is the “they” that you speak of? Are you saying that both sides are killing and abusing? Do both sides do this inspite of considering themselves noble and self-sacrificing?
Is it possible to be both at the same time? Can part of you be a killing machine while the other part continues to be noble and self-sacrificing.
This no-name nobody buys himself some web space… and spouts his … unconventional… views for the world to see. And I’m supposed to care about this looney’s opinion because…
I’m totally down with your stance, for the most part, Brian. But this is just… superfluous. You’re railing against the one-tenth of one percent…
Who cares? 
“They” are the people we are killing. The people that most of us don’t regard as people at all, judging from our behavior.
No. You can lie to yourself or others, but you aren’t noble if you are killing people for fun and profit. And considering the lopsidedness of the body counts, it’s disgusting to hear talk about how much “our troops are sacrificing”. How terrible it is that they need to spend time away from their families while killing innocent people and laying waste to a country. :rolleyes:
Methinks I smell some conservative hypocrisy here.
I remember a certain kerfuffle that occurred when an ad contest sponsored by MoveOn.org resulted in an entry that compared Dubya to Hitler. Oh, the horror! Oh the vapors! Our conservative commentators made the point VERY strongly that because MoveOn was sponsoring the contest, they, and possibly the Democratic Party they supported, must be held responsible for the content of all ads entered into the contest, even though they took the ad down.
Ah, but in THIS instance, it’s just a conservative nutter posting to a neocon site, nothing to be concerned about here, move along, move along …
Different matter when the shoe’s on the other foot, isn’t it gents?
While I feel pity for the small boy (and his even smaller opponent), he grew into bitterness and tunnelvision–of course he didn’t pursue further education! His mind was set firmly in the victim mode, coupled with self-absorption. I’m amazed he has a second wife at all–who would put up with this man?
As for his opinions, nutty they may be, but there are more mainstream people walking around who STILL think that Bush was a good idea, that we must keep the faith (so to speak), that we must rid the world of such godless people as the Muslims. It makes me sad (when I’m not angered by it), but at this point, what can one do? Presenting facts does not seem to sway these people. Perhaps in the strangest way, Bush et al has uncovered a degree of mental illness heretofore unrecognized within the national character. Americans: optimistic, believe in hard work and independence and nutty as fruitcakes in the bargain.
The irony is that he is English, living in Australia. He has no say at all in what happens here-not even a vote.
Well, to be fair, MoveOn is a lot more active and prominent in liberal politics than this site (which I can’t even remember the name of!) is in conservative.
Also (and this is my more controversial thought, I’ll admit), many Democrats/liberals DO agree with that ad. I mean, just look around here on the Dope; Bush has been called a LOT worse than, and accused of just as bad crimes as, Hitler.
OTOH, how many conservatives will you find that agree with this article? I mean, seriously?
I think I am being completely fair, in fact, the whole point of the post was fairness. If it is fair to hold MoveOn responsible for the work of a contributor, it is fair to hold FamilyValuesMatter responsible for the work of a contributor. I personally don’t think either organization should be held responsible for the work of contributors to their site. I just think there’s a definite contradiction between what conservative posters here have said about the issue, and what conservative posters said about it when the MoveOn kerfuffle happened. I do not think conservatives are being fair here.
Seriously, I don’t know how may Dems go for Bush=nazi vs. how many conservatives go for “let’s nuke the ragheads.” I suppose you’d have to do a poll or something. It’s a moot point wrt the responsibility of the two websites, however.
I guess my reaction here is visceral - I feel strongly like there is a not insignificant difference between a nationally known and prominent website, approvingly quoted and boosted in various political quarters, sponsoring an ad planned to appear (IIRC) on national TV (the Super Bowl?), and an article written by someone I’d never even heard of before now on some dinky hole-in-the-wall website for an organization I’d never even heard of before now.
You may very well be right. It just doesn’t SEEM like it’s comparable to me.
The title of this thread suggested to me a better idea:
President Bush appoints himself President-for-Life of Iraq.
I’ll supply the pencils and paper if you folks will carry the petitions.