• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

I cannot believe Rumsfeld/Meyers/Bush want to see any soldier

He Gassed The Kurds With The Gas We Gave Him. The Mass Graves Were From The Gas We Gave Him.
 
JDaly1978 said:
So...the 200k+ people he's gassed isn't proof enough for you?

>That was Sept. of 1988. Welcome to 2005.<

There has been a continue "file" if you will on Saddam. There is a long list of reasons we we should have and did remove him. Clinton was in office for how many years and kept saying he was going to get Saddam. He never did.

I always liked it when Sean Hannity would say something like...

"Oh yeah? Well, let me read you what Clinton said about Saddam."

There's more than one way to take out an evil dictator.

We don't have to march our young sons and daughters into downtown Baghdad, do we?

For what reason? Looks like the sanctions and inspections were working?

We haven't found anything, have we? In fact we just gave up the search yesterday.

I'm rambling, but I'd like all of you fine conservatives to honestly ask yourself this question...


What if over 1300 soldiers had died on Clinton's watch?
 
America keeps creating monsters and then when they get to powerfull and stop listening to us we kill them. It's like invasive plants, you have a plant that is killing off natural plants, so you bring in a plant to kill the invasive plant but it turns out to be worse.

That's what we did with Osama, we wanted to get rid of the soviets, we bilt up Osama, he got rid of the soviets, and now we are getting rid of him.
 
Rhadamanthus said:
America keeps creating monsters and then when they get to powerfull and stop listening to us we kill them. It's like invasive plants, you have a plant that is killing off natural plants, so you bring in a plant to kill the invasive plant but it turns out to be worse.

That's what we did with Osama, we wanted to get rid of the soviets, we bilt up Osama, he got rid of the soviets, and now we are getting rid of him.
Perhaps you can tell us the lineup and order of the next few?
 
Well I draw a blank looking into the future, i may be able to do the research for you. But the past is written in the last few wars we have faught.
 
Rhadamanthus said:
Well I draw a blank looking into the future, i may be able to do the research for you. But the past is written in the last few wars we have faught.
Typical.

A general observation:

I marvel at the host of critics who openly confess the inability to foretell the future while steadfastly claiming expertise at analyzing the past. It is fortunate that all enjoy the benefit of 20/20 hindsight which gives the appearance of their being clairvoyant after all; just a bit too late to be of any use.

One finds them commenting on sports, business, and, of course, world politics.

However, in sports, business, and, of course, world politics, events, together with their underlying causes and effects, change with such amazing rapidity that the old saw referring to 'learning from history' has not been applicable for many years.

Currently evolving situations require concurrently developed solutions which may not have the benefit of labratory testing. Field testing, under actual field conditions, is often all for which there is time.

Can we expect perfection? Of course not. However, the preponderance of successes proves the correctness of the method.

Luckily for the 'opposition', this efficient, although inaxact, method inadvertantly provides them with a few bones upon which they noisily gnaw.
 
Taking this back to the Iraq war which so haunts our every post.

Is it better to invade a country because that's what your daddy did?
 
fantasea, how long has this been up, a month? And so correct that nobody would dare try to argue. Have you ever tried writing a book? I mean, people like ann coulter, and you write a lot like she does, except you have more veriety.
 
Rhadamanthus said:
fantasea, how long has this been up, a month? And so correct that nobody would dare try to argue. Have you ever tried writing a book? I mean, people like ann coulter, and you write a lot like she does, except you have more veriety.
You know, I was wondering about that myself. I guess I should feel flattered to be able to have the last word on this subject in the company of such astute individuals. :D

Ann Coulter? I love the way she drives the socialist-lib-Dems nuts. She just keeps on skewering them. Try as they may, they haven't found a way to shut her up.
 
Yes but the problem with her is that she has the same argument for everything. She's like a parrot that just keeps saying the same thing over and over agian.
 
Fantasea said:
You know, I was wondering about that myself. I guess I should feel flattered to be able to have the last word on this subject in the company of such astute individuals. :D

Ann Coulter? I love the way she drives the socialist-lib-Dems nuts. She just keeps on skewering them. Try as they may, they haven't found a way to shut her up.

Ann Coulter: synonym: liar!
Just read Al Franken's book Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them. In it, he documents many of Ann's lies. Notice also that Ann defends 'the common man' when it comes to morals, but when it comes to economics she is very pro-business.
 
anomaly said:
Ann Coulter: synonym: liar!
Just read Al Franken's book Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them. In it, he documents many of Ann's lies. Notice also that Ann defends 'the common man' when it comes to morals, but when it comes to economics she is very pro-business.

I used to read Ann "Nut Job" Coulter until I found out she is a complete a lying sleaze bag. I had a couple of minutes to kill the other day. I made it into town early for an appt. with my tax person. I browsed around a "Borders Books" and came across "How to lie to America" err, I mean "How to talk to a Liberal if you Must." I thought I try that thing Franken did where he let her book fall open to any page and then bet his assistant he could find a lie on the page. I couldn't do it. Well not in one try. Took me three tries. In my defense I was in a book store and didn't have ready access to the "Net" or a research assistant. I had to find something that I was fairly certain would be crap then go find the book written by the guy she was quoting and look it up. Almost took me 20 minutes. She's getting better.
 
Rhadamanthus said:
Yes but the problem with her is that she has the same argument for everything. She's like a parrot that just keeps saying the same thing over and over agian.
Since the Democrats never change their style of playing, she must repeat the same criticisms.
 
anomaly said:
Ann Coulter: synonym: liar!
Just read Al Franken's book Lies, and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them. In it, he documents many of Ann's lies. Notice also that Ann defends 'the common man' when it comes to morals, but when it comes to economics she is very pro-business.
What is wrong with being pro-business? Isn't it business that provides the jobs for 'the common man'? Business should receive every incentive and encouragement to create jobs.

Anti-business activities result in lost jobs. How does that help?

I think it's sad that the only 'spokesmen' the socialist-lib-Dems can find to push their propaganda on the airwaves are a pair of professional clowns (comedians in this case), Al Franken and Jeanine Garofalo.
 
Last edited:
Fantasea said:
What is wrong with being pro-business? Isn't it business that provides the jobs for 'the common man'? Business should receive every incentive and encouragement to create jobs.

Anti-business activities result in lost jobs. How does that help?

I think it's sad that the only 'spokesmen' the socialist-lib-Dems can find to push their propaganda on the airwaves are a pair of professional clowns (comedians in this case), Al Franken and Jeanine Garofalo.

Nothing wrong with being pro business. I happen to own and operate one. My family and I, as well as several employees depend on it's success.

What's sad is two comedians, or anyone for that matter, can easily pick up any of her books, do even the most basic of fact checking and see she's blatantly lying. That's what's sad. Well, that and the fact that so many people believe the lies she telling. Sad indeed.
 
The problem with being TOO pro-business is that when laissez-faire policies are practiced, workers often lose rights. Plus, workers should always have the right to organise, and Republicans are almost always against labor unions. But let's get back on topic. Fant, are you willing to admit atleast that Ann Coulter lies? I'd just love for a con to finally admit that. Just say it-Ann Coulter is a liar!
 
anomaly said:
The problem with being TOO pro-business is that when laissez-faire policies are practiced, workers often lose rights. Plus, workers should always have the right to organise, and Republicans are almost always against labor unions. But let's get back on topic. Fant, are you willing to admit atleast that Ann Coulter lies? I'd just love for a con to finally admit that. Just say it-Ann Coulter is a liar!

We have a winner! That's it in a nut shell. They say drinking water is good for you. I try to drink several glasses a day. I don't think drinking 50 gallons a day would be healthy.

There's a limit to this "Pro-Business" thing. If being Pro-business means you're doing away with all the rights workers have won over the years, we're going to start taking steps backwards in this country. Hum, Guess we already have taken steps backwards. First we do anyway with overtime laws that ensure our workers are paid fairly when they work over 40 hours a week (oh ya, we just tell people we're doing that so big companies can pay their workers more fairly. Sure lots of time big business lobbies Congress to change laws so they can pay workers "More Fairly.") Next we'll be getting rid of our child labor laws. Why can't a 13 yr. old work 12 hour days? What? You want more welfare queens or something? Put that kid to work.
 
Pacridge said:
We have a winner! That's it in a nut shell. They say drinking water is good for you. I try to drink several glasses a day. I don't think drinking 50 gallons a day would be healthy.

There's a limit to this "Pro-Business" thing. If being Pro-business means you're doing away with all the rights workers have won over the years, we're going to start taking steps backwards in this country. Hum, Guess we already have taken steps backwards. First we do anyway with overtime laws that ensure our workers are paid fairly when they work over 40 hours a week (oh ya, we just tell people we're doing that so big companies can pay their workers more fairly. Sure lots of time big business lobbies Congress to change laws so they can pay workers "More Fairly.") Next we'll be getting rid of our child labor laws. Why can't a 13 yr. old work 12 hour days? What? You want more welfare queens or something? Put that kid to work.

Sadly, Pacridge, I've actually debated with someone on here who thought children should have 'the right to work'. Now, when child labor is legal, how often to children get to choose whther they work or not?
 
Pacridge said:
Nothing wrong with being pro business. I happen to own and operate one. My family and I, as well as several employees depend on it's success.
So why do you 'accuse' Ms Coulter of being pro-business?

What's sad is two comedians, or anyone for that matter, can easily pick up any of her books, do even the most basic of fact checking and see she's blatantly lying. That's what's sad. Well, that and the fact that so many people believe the lies she telling. Sad indeed.
That's what I said. The only defense for the socialist-lib-Dems comes from a pair of clowns.
 
anomaly said:
The problem with being TOO pro-business is that when laissez-faire policies are practiced, workers often lose rights. Plus, workers should always have the right to organise, and Republicans are almost always against labor unions. But let's get back on topic. Fant, are you willing to admit atleast that Ann Coulter lies? I'd just love for a con to finally admit that. Just say it-Ann Coulter is a liar!
These days, the favorite passtime at most unions is thinking up new ways to screw the members.
 
Fantasea, this is a classis example of twisting the facts by only showing a small portion of a persons statement, Pacridge is saying, as I am sure you know, that it is when people become too pro-buisness that he has a problem with them. If he is accusing Ann Coulter of being pro-buisness he must be accusing her of being overly pro-buisness. You understand?

Well if the only defense for solialist-lib-Dems is from a pair of clowns then the most commonly read work of conservative republicans is a large amount of blatant lying inside of a badly written text sold at airport newstands.
 
Rhadamanthus said:
Fantasea, this is a classis example of twisting the facts by only showing a small portion of a persons statement, Pacridge is saying, as I am sure you know, that it is when people become too pro-buisness that he has a problem with them.

He is free to have a problem with whomsoever he pleases. I don't have the same problem.

If he is accusing Ann Coulter of being pro-buisness he must be accusing her of being overly pro-buisness. You understand?
One is either anti or pro. I understand that.

Well if the only defense for solialist-lib-Dems is from a pair of clowns then the most commonly read work of conservative republicans is a large amount of blatant lying inside of a badly written text sold at airport newstands.
This sounds like a kid in the schoolyard shouting at another, "And, so's yer old man!'
 
anomaly said:
Sadly, Pacridge, I've actually debated with someone on here who thought children should have 'the right to work'. Now, when child labor is legal, how often to children get to choose whther they work or not?

Well there's work and then there's work. I know as a young man I picked strawberries, beans and cherries in the summer to help pay for my school clothes. My brother and I would get up at 5am and catch an old run down school bus to the fields and pick until the early afternoon hours. Whatever we earned we kept half, the other half went to pay for the next years school clothes. With our half we bought bikes, walkie talkies etc... Some of my favorite memories as a child are of swimming in a pool my brother and I saved up for and shared in the cost. My father was an admin. for the Treasury Dept. My mother was a stay at home mom. I have no doubt my parents could have paid for our school clothing. They had us work for them to help teach us that things in life earned are far more valueable then the things you get for nothing. I owe them greatly for teaching me that lesson.

I learned that lesson as well as several lessons working in those fields. As a child you tend to see the world only through your eyes. You kind of tend to think the life you live must be the life everyone's living. Picking strawberries along side a multitude of other people, I found out many were picking berries to help put food on the table. Some kids I found out, to my shock, were not allowed to keep any of their earnings. While other's were allowed to spend their earnings on whatever they wished.

Another thing I learned was that my father may not have been right 100% of the time. My father came from a different generation. One that looked at other ethic groups with an eye of suspicion. I had over heard my dad talking to his brother, my uncle, explaining just how lazy Mexicans were. I found out in those fields that just wasn't true. Though I'm certain his father told him that as did his fathers father.

So there's work and then there's work. I think all too often many of us allow our own children to go through their teenage years without earning anything. But there are those that given the chance would, either by choice or lack there of, have their children work long hours to help the pay the cost of basic living necessities for the family.

IMO anytime we allow the extreme to happen, it's usually wrong. Allowing children to work without any over sight would have dreadful results. Not allowing children to work at all comes with it's price as well.
 
Fantasea said:
Pacridge said:
So why do you 'accuse' Ms Coulter of being pro-business?


That's what I said. The only defense for the socialist-lib-Dems comes from a pair of clowns.

I never accused Ms. Coulter of being pro-business. I accused her of being what she is, a lair.
 
Fantasea said:
One is either anti or pro. I understand that.

And that comment, Fantasea, speaks volumes about you!

Everything appears to be so totally clear cut in your mind - never any middle ground!
 
Back
Top Bottom