That’s retarded.
And you are pointing out that Scylla’s post was worthless?
Words:
Substantive
Counterargument
These are things that make a good post. (But are lacking in your post, other than a hollow challenge).
Word:
Dumbass
This does NOT make a good post, yet is present in your post.
“Hey dumbass, why don’t you make some valid points! I am calling YOU a dumbass, because that makes me NOT a dumbass! Ha Ha! You see how by ME calling you a DUMBASS I transfer all responsibility for NOT being a DUMBASS to YOU!! Again, Ha Ha! I laugh at your non-dumb-ass reflecting capability!”
Yep, I am know convinced of your point of view by your extremely cogent arguments.
I guess, in a way Scylla’s post kind of summed up my feelings about this administration. They have too many Mr. T responses to the serious issues, challenges and opportunities of today.
Are you honestly suggesting that a post bereft of cites, and written as Mr. T, needs to be debunked on a line by line basis or something?
What sort of response would you want to see that you’d consider acceptable? Do you want to see someone write as “Howlin’ Mad” Murdock and disagree with him?
How about as Rik Flair, Rowdy Roddy Piper or Bulldog Bob Brown?
Personally, I’d much rather see one done as Randy Macho-Man Savage. Hell, if we’re trying to match ridiculousness, how about the Iron Sheik?
So you’re telling me that secret prisons are a good thing?
Perhaps Scylla thought he was funny?
Strangely enough, I can see Bush as Mr T–or at least Rumsfeld.
I have no problem with two schools of thought or even ideology–though a 3 party system would be more effective, IMO. What I have a problem with is the sanctimony on the Right (and also the GOP)–and the marginalization of the liberal POV. The irony is that no conservative will ever admit that their golden boys ever smeared anyone’s name or ruined anyone’s career–their side can do no wrong.
BS.
Liberal: It’s not a diry word, it’s not the same as communism–all this shit flung at segments of the population that wants to invest in the people of the country.
I will never understand it. But the rancor and denigration from the GOP for Progressives makes me feel no compunction in denigrating them–it’s a useless, stupid cycle. I cannot respect a party or part of a party that so ruthlessly divides people, that so arrogantly pursues profit at the cost of the middle class.
No, they are bad things. I told you that again and again. CIA runs them. CIA is ultimately bad. In a perfect world, the CIA would need to be abolished. I even started a Pit thread against the CIA, for which I was attacked in the most idiotic manner by the so-called ‘liberals’.
However, I recognize the necessary evils we have to employ in this world, such as it is. We need the CIA to interrogate our enemies, as we need the Military to kill them.
What you seem to require above all is comfort. You want your comfortable Western lifestyle and you require your Nanny Gov’t to provide it for you. And on top of that you want a clear conscience. So you slap a Che Guevara sticker on your luxury car and chant for World Peace and No Torture.
And when the ugly ghosts of War and Cruelty inevitably appear you scream for your Nanny Gov’t to chase them away. Your problem is, you have two Nannies: one you like and another you hate. And when the good Nanny comes, you sob quitely, press your face against her ample bosom and go back to your dreams; but when the bad Nanny comes you scream and thrash about in puerile rage.
The Iron Sheik! I was trying to remember his name, but I had a mental block, and could only come up with The Iron Giant (a conflation of him and Andre the Giant). Thanks.
Not that your [del]post[/del] projection is funny or anything, but it reminds me of an old Feiffer cartoon.
“Cia is ill!Cia is comatose! CIA is Dying!”
I’m sorry, can we have this without emotional bullshittery?
-
Interrogate =/= torture.
-
I don’t own a luxury car, and I don’t know what Che Guevara is. Am I a bad Liberal? I drive a non-gas guzzling, non-environment killing, cost me less than $20K 4 door sedan made in America.
-
I support a well equipped, well manned military. We need to maintain one. As far as I can tell, “well equipped” means giving the soldiers/sailors/marines the equipment they need to do the job at hand. They don’t have that. Military spending was slashed. Guess who buy? Hint: Not the Dems. It started back in '89, when Bush I was POTUS, and was supported by the Republican congress when Clinton was in office. Base closures, outsourcing of non-combat designations to private companies…the military branches have drastically cut back on all their medical corps as well as medical benefits to servicemembers.
-
The “nanny government” you so decry is more prevalent now, thanks to this administration, than it ever has been. Or are you still in denial over the “Patriot” Act?
-
When all the stirring words that you get so caught up in are pushed to the side and you’re left with only the facts, you actually have the balls to close your eyes to them and say it has to happen to keep 'Murka safe. You have no integrity.
Sorry, never said such a thing. I only state the fact that it does happen again and again, under any administration. I wish it didn’t, but it does. So there must be some logic to it. There is clear line of continuation of most important (and often unpleasant) US policies regardless which party is in power. Remember I spoke of two (2) Nannies?
Remember I spoke of two (2) Nannies?
Remember I spoke of clear line of continuation of most important (and often unpleasant) US policies regardless which party is in power?
No Che sticker = Better Liberal.
Oh, but it might. Besides, we don’t know for sure what’s going on in secret prisons.
We shall certainly try.
70’s flashback! :eek: A Bulldog Brown quote: “By the time I’m through with him, he’ll be walking around in a wheelchair!”
So then what’s the fucking problem? We’re not allowed to bitch about things that the POTUS (insert whichever) could remedy?
Didn’t Tennet get a medal after he left?
If the CIA is so bad and running around increasing our risk of attacks (pretty bad PR you know) by running secret gulags, then fix the fucking CIA! This “oh well, they’ve always been fucked up what are you going to do?” attitude is exactly the worst way to approach it.
You see me bitching about interrogating anyone? Do I really have to explain the difference between interrogate and torture?
What I’d like is for people to not assume what I want. I don’t know you, I have no fucking idea what you want, same goes for you towards me.
Wrong, no I don’t. Stop making assumptions about me.
First off I don’t own a luxury car, second fuck Che, I could care less about him, and third, world peace ain’t going to happen. Hell, eradicating torture around the world ain’t going to happen either, and you know what? I don’t give a shit about that. What I do give a shit about is this boneheaded administration thinking that running secret gulags IN THE NAME OF AMERICA is a good thing.
A fun little factoid too as you pathetically try to paint me as some hippy. I was very right leaning up until the Iraq war. In the 2000 election had I voted, I would have voted for Bush. I never really liked Gore and thought that Bush would be a better president. Well, things happen, and I judge the guy the same way as anyone else. I look at their actions, the consequences, and their actions following the consequences. I’ve slowly changed my mind over time and have arrived at the conclusion that Bush is the worst pres we’ve ever had.
I’ve never understood being blindly loyal to a party, and I never will. You’re free to change your mind, don’t forget that.
And when the ugly ghosts of War and Cruelty inevitably appear you scream for your Nanny Gov’t to chase them away. Your problem is, you have two Nannies: one you like and another you hate. And when the good Nanny comes, you sob quitely, press your face against her ample bosom and go back to your dreams; but when the bad Nanny comes you scream and thrash about in puerile rage.
[/QUOTE]
Your point? That any new government policy instituted is bad, no matter what, and we asked for it so we should just suck it up?
Yup. Was bullshit then, is bullshit now. I don’t think you’re making any distinction between having a policy and the methods used to enforce that policy.
Well there’s a relief.
No it doesn’t. Ever. Secret prisons or no, interrogation =/= torture. Most especially not by some smirking PFC in direct violation of the Geneva Convention.
I won’t hold my breath.
Missed the last part, although I don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.
You see ANYONE bitching about Afghanistan?
<crickets>
We’re not bitching about the horrors of war, we’re bitching that invading Iraq was a TACTICAL mistake in a global war. Please tell me you understand the distinction.
I don’t know what you’re talking about here, but you’re kinda creeping me out. Did you really need to include “ample” in there?
Good show.
But why do you always need to shoot yourself in the foot? Why do you have to destroy your own credibility?
You know perfectly well that NOBODY argued torture is a good thing. NO-BO-DY. What Cheney argued (at CIA behest) that torture might be necessary in most extreme cases and thus the possibility of it can not be excluded. Which is exactly the same thing VP Lieberman would have argued by now, but for Florida fiasco.
Well, sor-ry!
Yes, so-called liberals. Your average democrat’s political ideology would be slightly right of center in Europe or most of the civilized world.
Luxury Car? Che Fucking Guevera? You sure as hell don’t fucking know me. I’m no elitist nor am I a communist. I drive a pickup truck with a Union sticker on the back bumper. And you equate world peace and a lack of torture with unrealistic expectations. How about we expect our own government not to employ torture or start unnecessary wars, and hold them to that standard.
That speech was better when Jack Nicholson gave it in A few Good Men. Keep your cold war fantasy of saving the world from itself to yourself.