U.S. Bars War Opponents....

[Mateo]

Fine don't listen to me and go ahead with your namecalling I like it better that way anyways. LOL.:)

[Southpaw]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Collegeboy
Nope, I am not to deceide. I can tell you that at no time in history was a democracy ever initiated in a country that either did not already meet the standards for democracy and it being sucessful.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What are the standards EXACTLY?

What is "B"in the First A, Then B, and finally C thing?
See above ? I guess they may be the same.

That reminds me of the Southpark Underwear Nomes!! funny stuff

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Jeffy-CanCon
Self-government is a RIGHT for all peoples. How they govern themselves, or how well, is not for others to judge. That's an idea put forth by your own President Wilson back in 1918. He was a professor of political science, and an internationally-respected statesman. If you want to go name dropping, I think think he outweighs Paul Harvey. People who thought like your Mr Harvey were responsible for propping up innumerable South and Central American dictatorships, all in the name of "corporate freedom".

Well said!!

[Sir_Brass]

Folks, can't you see, CB is going to be a politician and run on the democratic "bash the conservatives" ticket: he's mad b/c we can't lay down and absorb the BS he's spouting like he think we should. j/k


I once thought CB was smart but too liberal. Now I think he's an ignorant and university-bound (as in, permanently attached. should never be let out of it) idiot liberal who also possesses a good dose of racism. That's my impression. And, CB, you and only you are responsible for giving me that reaction. The rest have entertained me with their excellent counters and zingers to your baseless, racist, and totally WRONG accusations which typically assume broad and ignorant opinions to be universal fact. You're making me want to vote for bush more and more in 2004 each day b/c of how you're making the OTHER choice look .

All Bush needs to do in 2004 is point to college boy and say, "This is what my opponent holds up as an educated youth." Everyone would look at college boy and bush would be reelectedby almost 100% of those who voted.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Sir_Brass
All Bush needs to do in 2004 is point to college boy and say, "This is what my opponent holds up as an educated youth." Everyone would look at college boy and bush would be reelectedby almost 100% of those who voted.

What do you mean almost 100% ?

[Sir_Brass]

You think cb to be the only ignorant and far too liberal idiot in the U.S. who votes?

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by Sir_Brass
You think cb to be the only ignorant and far too liberal idiot in the U.S. who votes?

Shhh.....

Let me dream

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by Sir_Brass
You think cb to be the only ignorant and far too liberal idiot in the U.S. who votes?

we could only wish for the day....

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Mateo
Also from a spectator side, FOL, 1DE, Shartley, etc. Are you going to lower yourself to use namecalling to prove a point? We are all civil here, maybe you should cut down on this. Even tho it does make for a good show

Shhhhh!

You are cramping my showmanship!

[Albinonewt]

Shucks, he's given up :)

[davidb]

CB, if I may be so bold as to make a suggestion.. Instead of saying One Thing and then later claiming, "no, I didn't say One Thing, I said One Thing 1.1 (patched version)", try something more along the lines of "wait, that's not what I meant, let me rephrase that - I present to you One Thing 2.0, Correct Thing edition." That way you still get to correct the first thing that was widely misconstrued/incriminating, but you don't have to have the same old argument about how you changed what you said, because you head it up with "here, I am changing what I said to more accurately reflect what I MEANT. I can see how you could have gotten the wrong idea from what I said before." How on earth could anyone throw that in your face? Please try it, it would save everyone a lot of trouble.

On a somewhat harsher note, if you want to claim the moral high ground, you'd better get to climbing. You whining about others calling you names brings to mind an image of an argument between an old married couple with a woman saying, "Dear, let me say this slowly so that you can understand it: nothing you've ever done has ever counted for anything, and you've been a terrible father. Now apologize for calling me a nag."

Wierd analogy, I know, but the point is, the mere fact that you don't go for "name-calling" like some people do doesn't mean you never insult anybody. There's a difference between a man who's done a lot with his life calling (what he views as) some arrogant college kid a "numbskull", and a college kid telling a bunch of men who've done a lot with their lives that they don't know anything, he needs to dumb down what he says to them (and this while a "Bushism" has got nothing on a "Collegeboyism"), and, in the cases of Army and Sam, telling them that what they spend/spent a large portion of their lives doing doesn't count for anything, or is obsolete.

I am sorry that I have to dumb down my post so that people can understand a simple comment.

It's called clarifying, not dumbing down. You need to do it, OFTEN, because half of the things that you say in the first place are all bass-ackwards, and are simply lain in our laps for deciphering, only to have you get mad and/or play the victim if somebody doesn't take it the way which you intended. The, blame for misinterpretation, believe me, lies on your shoulders, not others'. I, for one, can usually figure out what you are trying to say (sometimes only after you make corrections and then claim that that was what was said in the first place).

As for the whole "playing the victim" thing.. You pretend that all of the people who argue with you do so simply because it's YOU.

Waiting for people to take this the wrong way, not think about what I said, and lash out in stupid and immature posting for they see my name and nothing more.

BS. I'm sorry, but none of these people KNOW you. You didn't sleep with their sisters, they don't think you shot their pa, and they otherwise have no predetermined reason to dislike you. Nor do they dislike you because you disagree with them. How many people here, conservative or liberal (or "centrist", as they prefer to be called), just can't stand that darned aaron_mag? I mean really can't stand him. Come on, raise your hands! Nobody? (me neither) Hmmm.. But how can that be, when he routinely stands in direct disagreement with conservative majority of the board? Perhaps because he doesn't come off as condescending, arrogant, haughty, insulting, hateful, but just liberal? Which of course, he actually admits to being, despite the fact that he is well to your right on most of the issues we discuss here. A_M how do you like being a reactionary?

[/rant]

[Sir_Brass]

Originally posted by Albinonewt
Shucks, he's given up :)

Wow, he's finally learned something USEFUL .

[shartley]

Do not be lulled into a sense of false security.

[1stdeadeye]

Either way SAm, the voices in my head are happy with the silence!

[shartley]