Hell of a thing…you open up that shiny package with the ribbons and discover a giant pus wart.
(everyone) “Hi, Bryan!”
Actually, at least on the TV crawl, it’s usually phrased “WORST POSSIBLE THING EVER BY THE LEFT?” They’re merely asking the questions, you see, like good investigative journalism should---- not making accusations!
Good point, there is considerable debate on these questions amongst the thoughtful right punditti. Is Obaba’s plan to force Eagle Scouts into gay marriages the worst thing ever, or is it the effort to replace English with Islamic as our official language?
First of all, I don’t know whether it’s justifiable or not, but even if it’s not justifiable, it’s less evil than the Holocaust. And I’m not entirely sure that “The invasion of Iraq was done to preserve American interests.”, but even if it was, why is that so bad? Doesn’t America have the right to preserve its interests? If you remember your history, Spain’s done the same thing in the past, hasn’t it? Hasn’t every country done that? And Hussein was still an evil bastard, and the world’s still better off that he’s dead.
Every morning on Fox ‘n’ Friends, they run a piece where they point out “left-wing lies” in our children’s public school books.
I’m sure the “right-wing lies” companion piece is just around the corner.
First of all, it wasn’t unnoticed as page one of your article plainly states, and secondly, you haven’t shown any political bias in his writing. Just asserting it doesn’t cut it. Show me an example.
Fox is an adjunct of the Republican Party. It is propaganda and shouldn’t be tolerated in a democratic society. I am not suggesting censorship, but the content on Fox shouldn’t be on a network coined news. Furthermore, one political party shouldn’t have access to free unlimited advertising, and broadcast news shouldn’t be a medium to advance one narrow political ideology. If this is the model people want, subsidize it to remove the profit and give every political party its own channel.
The other news networks are bunk, too. In an effort to compete, MSN and CNN copied the Fox model of opinion news. It’s cheap news. I think the best way to stay informed is with print news and books.
Glen Beck. That’s all that needs to be said about Fox. He’s their rising star, and though I don’t watch Fox or his show in particular, the few things I’ve seen from him have been utterly revolting. Not because he’s conservative, but because he’s a fearmonger urging people to hate and fear liberals for the crime of being liberals. It doesn’t matter what his actual ideology or stance is. He advocates hating liberals.
I’ve got no problem with conservatives or liberals. I’ve got problems with anti-liberals and anti-conservatives. Right now it seems like the Republican party and Fox News are stuffed full of anti-liberals, and while the Democrats have a share of anti-conservatives, there’s more people who seem to be honestly holding positions on that side instead of advocating hate of opposing positions.
Well, yes, I’ll agree with that. But “less evil that the holocaust” is not something to be proud of.
Well, I will agree that America has the right to preserve its interests by starting wars and killing people if you agree that the rest of the world has the right to kill Americans on sight as a pre-emptive measure. It cuts both ways. If America claims the right to kill people when it is in their interest then it is in the interest of the world to kill Americans as rapidly and as many as possible.
The fact that horrible things were done in the past does not excuse doing them today and I will denounce any and every country which commits crimes today while forgiving those countries who have done it in the past and have changed their ways and have no intention of doing it again. Todays Germans are not responsible for what their ancestors did and they have no intention or inclination of repeating it.
I have no doubt that the world would be a better place of Bush had been killed early in his presidency but I still would not condone his killing.
It is a long standing principle of western civilization, often forgotten by those who profess to defend it, that “the ends do not justify the means”.
But originally, you compared the two.
You’re getting silly again.
Countries act in their interest even today. That’s what countries do, and it’s not always terrible to do tht.
Why not? If the world really would have been a better place if President Bush had been killed early in his presidency, then how can you not condone his killing?
It’s also a long standing princple of western civilization that “It’s justifiable to do evil if such an evil would result in a greater good.”
No it isn’t you fucking moron.
Fiat iustitia et pereat mundus.
Translation: (cause you are a moron) Let Justice be done, though the world perish.
Fiat iustitia ruat caelum
Translation:Let justice be done though the heavens fall.
Gloriosum est iniurias oblivisci.
Translation: “It is glorious to forget injustice.”
Iustitia omni auro carior.
Translation: “Justice is more precious than all gold.”
Yes it is:
“The prince, in short, ought not to quit good courses if he can help it, but should know how to follow evil courses if he must.”-Machiavelli
“I say that justice is nothing other than the advantage of the stronger”-Thrasymachus
A thing may look specious in theory, and yet be ruinous in practice; a thing may look evil in theory, and yet be in practice excellent- Edmund Burke
And since you like Latin, Horace- Exitus acta probat.
In tres partes omnia Gallila divisa est!
You had the gall to divide the pizza, and take a third!
Machiavelli-Toady sucking up to the Medicis
Thrasymachus-Flunked Philosophy 101 Intro to Plato
Edmund Burke-1800 century religious kook.
And since you like Latin, Horace- Exitus acta probat- Actually that is Ovid a Roman Poet not philosopher maybe you take your morals from Quinton Tarantino but I don’t.
Moron.
Are you responding to what I wrote or to the voices in your head? Because I can’t tell.
Quispiam huic thread est questus pwned in duos lingua.
An’tcay eway ustjay eakspay uckingfay englishay?
No I am not. If Americans can kill others when it suits American interest why cannot others kill Americans to prevent American killing them? This seems totally logical to me. Either we are all allowe dto do something or nobody is allowed. The rule cannot be that only America is allowed.
Yes but other countries manage to act in their own interest without starting wars and killing people. That’s the difference. I never said countries were not allowed to act in their own interest, I said they should not start wars or kill people. As an individual you are allowed and even expected to act in your own interest but you are not allowed to kill your neighbor when it suits you. Even if your neighbor is a bad person who deserves to be punished you are not allowed to take justice into your own hands because the harm done to society when you do that is greater than the good done by your action. As simple as that. When America starts a war the damage done to international peace (not to mention the people killed) is much greater than any good which may come of it.
Because, unlike you, I understand the concept of the rule of law and that it is better to respect the rules of the game rather than have a coup every four years and I also understand the moral principle basic to western civilization that the ends do not justify the means and that evil means cannot be justified or made good by any ends, good or bad. This is a basic tenet of Christianity and western civilization and I happen to agree with it. It is the barbarians who believe the ends justify the means. You know, the terrorists. America in fighting terrorists has become like them.
No it is not. Never.
Well, you have just quoted the author who is the posterboy for immorality
So if might makes right, why is it wrong to kill Americans? Or Jews? Can you explain to me why?
Fine, have it your way. Hate my fucking country all you want. I can’t fucking do this anymore.