Imagine your favored ideological party picks a candidate in the primary that in all good conscience you cannot and WILL NOT vote for POTUS in 08.

WHO in the opposing party would you most like to see win the Presidency?

Strictly non-partisanly speaking, and especially after the debate... if it was right now, I'd go Giuliani. If the Christians are so concerned they would form a third party slate over a Rudy nomination... there must be something worthwhile about him... talk about a dysfunctional barometer.

But honestly... my first choice for this election cycle is None of the Above.

people that I would love to see run - don't!

Because they cannot tolerate the political process.... they also do not wish to be second guessed by the media who seem to have a field day of disecting everything that is said... and then placing a political slant or interpretation on it.

This board is extreme in that manner - but instructive to me as to "others" interpreting what is written (never mind what is said).

So for a person to have "risen" to candidacy in either party - to me - means that there is a part of his or her soul that has been bought and paid for by some outfit - and that outfit may not have my country's best interests at heart.

I am for total campaign reform - as you may have surmised.  A part of that reform would include limiting political ads to a candidates platform and NOTHING else.  any comment on the opponent would automatically DQ the candidate.  

As far as political - religious extremes... they are what they are... the planet is just too small to tolerate the type of religious bigotry that today seems rampant.  IMHO - the likes of George Soros (a skitchy invesment banker and supporter of Moveon.org) and Ann Coulter (a bigoted right winger who is so immersed in her own self rightousness that she fails to see the pain in others) need to just "go away"  and keep quiet as each adds little to rational decision making.



-- Modified on 10/10/2007 8:14:55 AM

considering I can barely stomach the candidates the liberals run out, it's difficult to even consider one the conservatives offer up.

I think Bizarro sums it up pretty well.

All those little gadflies asking all sorts of little questions?  Especially the bloggers who are so goddamned annoying the way they pick until they break stories.   That's not part of democracy?  

Your campaign reform wouldn't permit cross-examination?  Only promises of intention?  That sounds really sharp.  That's what we need most, is promises from politicians, the only group of people (except clergy and maybe shrinks - & oh yes women) who cannot be held responsible for their promises.  So that wouldn't be a waste of oxygen.  We definitely need more half-assed, slapped together operations.

So George Soros is a religious bigot?   The RIGHT wing is full of people who argue that money is free speech, but you get ONE guy who disagrees and wants to use HIS money in the opposite direction, and he's a religious bigot?!  Or what, Bizarre Man?

This board is NOT extreme.  It's castrated.  You need to get out into RL.  There are many places people get killed for talking, and what scares me is not that Coulter wants to make the USA one of them, but that there are mobs who buy her shit.

I think you believe in free speech only as long as people agree with you.  Then when they don't, you blow a fuse and start counting posts.   Fair play as long as you think you're winning, but if you're pissed off, you want to change the rules.  Take it like a man - from a little fuckin girl.

The problem is, this isn't about anybody "winning"; it's about making the community work.  It's not about keeping things quiet, it's about making them work, and you don't seem bright enough to understand that things don't work if the word doesn't get around.

Congrats, you and your RW buddies have put GW in office, and he's gone a long ways toward fucking up this country, possibly terminally; and the counterreaction may well be just as bad.  Congratufuckinglations.  We don't need no stinkin brains.

Tough question, I am not really a member of either party, although I lean a little right of center. I really can't think of anyone who actually has a chance of winning, on either side that I would vote "for". As usual my vote will probably come down to "who will fuck things up the least?"

sad but I agree.

Cross-examination?  would come from the press - in a balanced and fair manner and end the sniping by BOTH political parties.... it does no good.

Promises of intention?  That is done anyway - called a party platform.  it should be more detailed - more like a business plan for the country rather than sound bites.

except clergy and maybe shrinks - & oh yes women  who cannot be held responsible for their promises  -
you have something against this group?

So George Soros is a religious bigot?   No, he is not, but he is bigoted - and he is kinda on the edge of legal....

The RIGHT wing is full of people who argue that money is free speech, but you get ONE guy who disagrees and wants to use HIS money in the opposite direction, and he's a religious bigot?!  
I provided specific examples of extremes on both sides of the asile.  You take exception to only one side... sorry, does not wash.

"This board is NOT extreme."  Really, look at the language on it, specifically yours.

Coulter - mobs who buy her shit.  
Dude - I don't - and specifically said that she should shut up.

I think you believe in free speech only as long as people agree with you....  Take it like a man - from a little fuckin girl.  
I do believe in free speech.... I also believe in RESPONSIBLE speech.  And that- takes some doing - restraint - being willing to admit to mistakes...  Something that seems to be foreign on this board.... and dude, I have admitted to mistakes on this board....even to you.

"the word doesn't get around."  What word? who's word?  around to whom?  
I could write lots - that would seem true.  but without verification, fact checking - well - we could go to war - only to find that the reason we went to war was a falsehood - perpetuated by TWO (count em 2) administrations and congress to boot.... Dude. get over yourself... you are NOT the arbiter of truth you seem to think (unless you are a judge - which explains your free time to post! lol!).

RW buddies have put GW in office AGAIN
AND GET THIS THROUGH THE SKULL AND INTO THE BRAIN - I DID NOT VOTE FOR BUSH 43.

"fucking up this country"  Actually so did Carter.

"possibly terminally" we thought that then but this country can bounce back....

We don't need no stinkin brains. - as you say, if ya disagree - well there ya go.


-- Modified on 10/10/2007 10:44:07 AM

me 2

1)  You think George Soros is a bigot.  Please give us some examples of his bigotry.  Details are good.


2) You want RESPONSIBLE free speech.  Eg you would shut up Coulter and Soros.  You wouldn't expect people to be responsible and figure out bullshit on their own.  Shit no, we don't want smart voters.  We need to protect dumb ones.

Are you going to be on the Speech Responsibility Committee?   Have you read the 1st amendment?   Or are you just going to go nuts when people "post too much"?  You seem to be doing a pretty damn good job yourself, there.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Where have I deviated?  I am asking for responsible speech... did not say ya couldn't - and as I clearly stated... responsible speech requires restraint on the part of the individual.... not the government.

Let's face it, both parties lie.  If ever there was enough stuff said for liable and slander - it is said during campaigns....  So, I am calling for election reform.  You, my friend, can say anything ya want, BUT if you run for office or the party you are affiliated with is running ya... there should be a different set of rules... But stay away from the actual running from office and publish anything ya want.  heck, even Soros can so do - I don't care... but I am asking that they act responsibly.... know what?  We can't even legislate that people must act in a responsible manner.... the RIGHT too often wants us to remove those laws... examples where responsible behavior has been tried to be legislated (and the RIGHT pulls back?) include:  
no cell phone use while driving
cessation of smoking in public
wearing of a helmet for motorcycle riders (ever work in an er and put your hand into the gooo that was someones braim?)
seat belts (ok so we got that one through, but the enforcement is a bitch)

as for me posting?   lol!! See above.

Dude.... chill.... we may be closer in our thoughts than either of us would like to believe.

-- Modified on 10/10/2007 11:32:30 AM

-- Modified on 10/10/2007 11:33:59 AM

you could start here:  http://www.findlaw.com/
You're not the 1st person to discover the world, ya know?

So are you giving up on trying to establish that there's one leftist bigot in the USA, ie George Soros?   Do you have ANYTHING on him, other than your intuition?


What you need to do is a little CHILL yourself, and understand that the laws you mentioned - any many others - exist in a structure, and while I don't object to any of those as regulation, I have a problem with people who are too DUMM to realize that you don't hang people for every dipshit violation, and you don't tie up the entire police force writing parking tickets!

Like I said, RTFM.

nah, there are more than just him.  just as there are more than just coulter on the right.  but know what?  ya start with an example.  I picked the most blatant on both sides....   easier to find on the right.  but hey, there is always the darling of the left.... Charlie Sheen

Clearly you miss the point - as usual.... it would be great to take you to the forest... but then again, you'd probably miss it cause all the trees would block your view.

you can think of, and you STILL can't name anything he's done to prove up his "bigotry".  You want to keep trying?  Or you done looking foolish about him?

Charlie SHEEN is a BIGOT?   Perv maybe.  So you want to see if you can explain what bigoted thing he's done?

Bizz, you make this way too easy for me.  Yeah, I'm sure I miss the point, I'm just too linear in my thinking, I need more colonic thinking, like the Prez.  FUCK!!

and from there the totally irresponsible name calling on General David Petraeus. really....

I don't know how much more in the left gutter one can get.  Again, it boils down to responsible debate.... as opposed to senseless name calling.  I may - or may not agree with Petraeus, but is this really intellectual?  civilized?  Soros - funds these folks... and says nothing... demonstrating to me that he approves.  as to C Sheen.... where on the left is the outcry that he is senseless....

R. O'Donnell - removed from the View ONLY after it was transparent that she went too far with her mindless blather.

REmember - repeat a lie often enough and our largely uneducated citizenry will believe it.

is this new?  Orson Wells.... and his broadcast of the War of the Worlds.... I think it is not new... but we have far more sophistocated means of making falsehood look true...

And calling names - rather than logical presentation of fact.... Well.... that just make things tougher.

Jack honestly - do you think that you act respectufully and responsibly on this board?  I know that I do not always act that way.... but honestly do you?

both responsibly and in a "good citizen" manner - and on the issue of Global Warming... i provided a cogent and somewhat lengthly discourse supporting my views...

on the one hand I provided references to newspaper articles... references to multiple specific events - only to be shot at by the hot shot name callers on this board....

Again on issues of global warming I provide references to a number of scientific articles and numerous respected scientists (as well as oft referenced UN reports that have been misquoted to the point that many scientists have requested the removal of their names from the reports) that suggest that the "concensus on 'manmade' Global warming" is far from a concensus... Except in Al Gore's mind.

And again, was called to task - because I quoted (accurately) scientific journals, rather than some obscure non-verified web site.

This has led me to the conclusion that posting on here is "for entertainment purposes only!"  and that "any resemblence to the real events and people is purely coincidence"!  lol  more so than the hobby.

So!  as I say - it gives me a perspective on how things get distorted in RL!  and that, my friend is useful to me.  highly useful

Bizzare---
nor
a superdude (sadly).

Jesse Fucking Jackson.
If I were on the left I'd run as far from that asshole as I would Pat Fucking Robertson on the right

and Coulter disguises her stuff as academically certified!  whatever the hell that means.

but there is certainly a list to draw from.

I get a little fucking tired of trying to explain this to you, blockhead!   Findlaw, and RTFM!

Our civilization has very EXPLICIT ideas of what is responsible speech, and it (LUCKY FOR YOU) may include naked ladies if you are over 18 (GET YOUR ID OUT, I CAN'T BELIEVE IT).

And those ideas are ANYTHING - GET THAT, ANYTHING - that is not a specific violation of specific laws w/r/t defamation, copyright, national security, fraud, obscenity or criminal nuisance.

THIS IS BASIC!  RTFM!  Your endless whining about "responsible" speech is nothing more than the usual cover for trying to shut people up that you disagree with, eg, Soros, and in that respect you do not understand one of the most basic ideas of the constitution, and are far more loudmouthed than American.   You're just like every other tinhorn dictator who wants people to be "responsible", ie just like he wants them to be.

"Talks too much" is something that I hear about lots of people we give political asylum, BECAUSE sorry to disappoint you, THIS IS STILL THE USA, NOT FUCKING IRAN, or fucking CHINA, nor FUCKING CUBA!!!!!!!    

It so happens I just defended an OSC about 'responsible speech'.  The judge hardly let me finish cross before she tossed it out on her own motion.  I'm pissed, because now I have to file a separate motion for sanctions.


NEXT IDEA, NEXT POST!   Because you have a hard time handling one idea, let alone 2!

but IMHO, both are kind of mediocre as bigots go.   Neither has been directly involved in physical violence, even if they may have ties or be associated with those that do - you can't hold them directly responsible until you get acts close to criminal accessory.  

Rush Limbaugh probably does as much actual incitement as both of them put together, although I don't regard him quite as far out.  He's just a blowhard gasbag lying sack of shit, and there's nothing illegal about that.  I have a radio dial, and I turn him on & off all the time.

The obvious departure point is cull thru Southern Pverty Law Center's blacklist, and see what you agree with.

last couple years.

As I said, I don't worry what she says.  What I worry is that there are mobs of people who take her seriously, eg buy her books like crazy.

Think about this:  You know the Left Behind book series?  Google the author.   That series sells like hotcakes, it's one of the steadiest and highest bestsellers.  There are LOTS of people out there who pay LOTS of money to read how Jesus is going to gut secular humanists in the 2nd coming.

Look around and see how many "Christian bookstores" there are in shopping malls.   Far more than adult bookstores.  (So here we are, more worried about the 2nd coming than the 1st cumming -  Al Gore is right, the end of the world is at hand!)

Now, those fuckers has every right to sell that shit.  But if you don't think his audience is not a threat to the 1st amendment, you're delusional.  

instead of putting facts out to counter Petraeus... (which I suspect would be available) they call names..... and imply much more sinister that was probably the motivation.  

I cannot read into people's intent - the way you obviously can - however, I can assess facts and data.

AND the judge was correct.... Responsible speech - as I have repeatedly said is restraint:
from name calling,
from emotional outbursts (which sadly I too am guilty of.

Guess you have difficulty reading as well... RTFM yourself.

Jack honestly - do you think that you act respectufully and responsibly on this board?  I know that I do not always act that way.... but honestly do you?

is to remember the EOM.

why I scream at you?

BECAUSE YOU'RE A FUCKING BLOCKHEAD WHO HAS TO BE TOLD OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN WHAT EVERY FUCKING 6TH GRADER KNOWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you know what insanity is?  It's repeating the same act over and over, and somehow expecting different results.

We've been over this hundreds of times.  I'm FUCKING SICK OF IT!!!  But I allow you the courtesy of a response nonetheless, even if after a while I feel the need to SLAP YOU UPSIDE THE HEAD!!!!!!!!!  And you have the CHUTZPAH to talk like that!

You think that the cure for different ideas is to stifle them one way or the other.  Your idea of eg "Soros is irresponsible and therefore a bigot"; "Jack0 posts too much", is just like every other dictator throughout history.   You have no answers, so you advocate censorship one way or another.   You have no concept or value for free speech.  You'd rather have polite, than true.  

BSD, you're not just a disrespectful, whining little girl who can't keep up.  You're not just a moron, or a Nazi.  You're committed to the idea that speech should be limited to your terms, and if you get the chance, you will bend the rules to get there, and you have no sense of how dishonest this is.  People like you are a fucking danger to America.

Now SHUT THE FUCK UP and behave respectfully, and once you get some history, you'll get the same in return.

Soros is a bigot because he helps finance an organization that buys an ad you disagree with!!

Shit!   And now you're calling Sheen and ODonnell leftist bigots!  

WTF!!   You're just the usual Nazi who claims his feelings are hurt by the existence of people who post too much, you're a victim, and emotionally traumatized by the existence of Soros and Jack0.

Get a life, you helpless little girl.

that you're spelling has improved from about a 2nd grade level to around a third grade level.  (I'm being generous, but wanted to be nice after you're kind words.)

Keep up the good work!

He's certainly a hypocrite, and leftist by nature.  I have trouble with how to assess both he, and Al Sharpton.  Politically, they drive me nuts a lot of the time.  They're certainly polarizing figures, but acting as lightning rods often draws attention to issues that would otherwise not hit the mainstream media.  That whoe Jena 6 thing for example, if Sharpton isn't there, the media attention doesn't follow as quickly.  He's a media whore, Jackson too, but I think it's a necessary evil sometimes with those two.

I get your point though.

are all fine gentlemen who make magnificent Presidents. Tagliabue because he ran the most successful business enterprise in the world, the National Football League. He did this by having management and labor work together and fairly. He knows how to work through issues. I listened to him at the World Affairs Council and is also quite adept on global affairs.

William Gates, damn the man is smart.

Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, well he was my commander in Desert Storm and I would go to battle for him again. He practiced the American Credo of: Duty, Honor and Country. He is a great man, and a great American.

None are electable. Tagliabue and Gates are quiet and thoughtful speakers. Schwarzkopf, well no one respects the military anymore.

Bigot:
a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

See Soros on Bush or Petraeus.  Lets face it, our military really do not need to be besmirched the way that Petraeus was.  If you disagree - present the facts that support your position... do not call the man (who puts life and limb on the line to do the country's bidding) a traitor.

Really, Jack, how can you say he is not?

As far as calling me a Nazi?  I guess that is how you see it.  do you really think that someone is a Nazi if one asks that folks behave in a responsible manner - ?  and as far as "danger to America" goes - lets face it, we all do not know each other in our real lives - only by what we wright.  If you think I am a danger.... well, that too is your right, but know that is far from truth.

Free speech?  As has been said, there is no such thing as a free thing.  Free speech was bought and paid for - by dead soldiers, brave leaders, and not by two bit lawyers who chisel at meanings - even when they know that is likely to put a rapist or murderer on the street... but know what - it is our system... and it do keep some innocent men and women out of harms way... so yea, I truly do support it.  But I do want self restraint and self responsibility and not - "he made me do it!" mentality... which clearly you support.

Finally, yea, Jack - I do think that you post too much, especially when - no one else is able to keep up with ALL of your threads... no wonder the judge threw your case out the other day.  Perhaps it was because you were ill prepared?  is that possible? well, I have to get back to me real life...


-- Modified on 10/11/2007 6:36:01 AM

continual threats to obtain funding for his orgs.

He was much more effective about 20 years ago... somehow he has lost his mission statement - to make blacks independant... on the system to support them.  His message of self-reliance was incredible - for all!  but his message now?  kinda lost

I suspect that anybody could make things work on NFL salaries.

Schwarzkopf strikes me as a bit hotheaded.  Good general, not so good President.

That said, how could we do worse than the lot we have?

"Nobody respects the military" is getting more than a little tiresome.  Just because you had 90 days of shitter watch in East Bumfuck doesn't mean you can retire.  What it's all about is to keep plugging.  Coming back and dealing with civil life is harder, but you can do it.  

If we transplant the Dalai Lama's brain into Pat Robertson, can we become a Buddhist nation and reincarnate Eisenhower?

I want to correct just one of your many misunderstandings.

If I was DEFENDING, and the judge dismissed the action, then GUESS WHAT?  She must have held FOR ME, DUH!

If I'm gonna file for sanctions, do you think I'd be doing that if I'd lost?  Do you know how hard it is to get sanctions?  Do you think I'd be doing that work if I didn't think it was gonna pay off?

Of course you don't know.  Why else would you be posting?

Schwarzkopf is a bad choice for two reasons:  he supported George W. Bush for President, which shows a serious lack of good judgement, and he was responsible for losing the peace following the end of the first Gulf War when he got outwitted by Iraqis in defining the terms to end that war.

Yes, I know he is a Republican. He's also got an excellent track record in business, and holds the respect of most as a man of integrity and principles. From First Travel to the 1984 Olympic games to the Commissioner of Baseball to candidate for Governor of California to Head of the US Olympic committee.
The man gets results.
Plus, anyone who has the savvy and bankroll to buy Pebble Beach doesn't need the bribery and graft that special interest lobbyists shower upon candidates.

Ironically, I believe it is precisely BECAUSE he is a man of integrity principles, there is no way in this or any other Hell the GOP powerbrokers would ever allow him within 10 miles of the nomination committee. The K Street Kops would make sure his name was lost on the way to the GOP convention.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Ueberroth

I think you could make the same case for any honest and capable person from either side of the aisle. Why would the power brokers from either party want to elect someone who was not  beholdant to them?

which says absolutely nothing.

incredible leaders shy away from our most significant leadership role - president.  For all the resons I have enumerated, and would never be nominated for all the reasons you list.

We get the leaders we deserve, because we do little to fix the system.  NONE of the men listed in this tread would ever consider running - they know.  What they do is to try to work within society to change for the better...

Were he US citizen - Bono - would be ok as well.  look at the leadership style in that one and compare it to others who lead by alienation.... Bono leads by uniting.

Which brings me to a question....

how do we see the presidency - is it a leadership position or a management position?

*MY* post is succinct, etc, overall an 8.5 of 10.

*YOUR* post is a -3.  


Because you are choosing to shove your head into your emotional ass when you in fact know these things, I will explain.   You are not discussing the ideas of any post, just carping that you don't like my post.

We KNOW you don't like the post.  Thanks for sharing.  Now do you have anything of substance to say, apart from alleging other people's lack of substance?

Keep it up, pretty soon I will start crying & whining about how your lack of substance should get you moderated and thrown off the internet.

Meanwhile, you might want to take your issues to a shrink.  Seriously, dude.



-- Modified on 10/11/2007 11:35:51 AM

I come here to kibitz about politics.  Given the large number of rocket scientists, it's hard to keep from pointing & laughing.  In America, that is part of politics.

Seriously, dude, I don't want a fucking RELATIONSHIP with you, or most other people here, and I SURE AS FUCK don't want any RELATIONSHIP ANALYSIS!!

You don't seem to have much sense for American politics.  For one point, you don't seem to understand that the 1st amendment is not a fucking picture, it's a law.  For another, you don't seem to know shit about equal protection and fair play.

For another point, you acknowledge that you don't act properly, and yet fail to comprehend that you just might be STARTING FIGHTS!!!!!!!

From these facts, I deduce that you must not be American.  Given that interplanetary travel is yet unknown, you could be (a) a communist, or (b) a refugee from a psych ward.   Since there are almost no communists left, (a) seems very unlikely.   However, (B) seems very possible.

Now excuse me while I go relieve my gag reflex.

I think it varies from president to president.

I believe that Reagan was the last real leader we've had as POTUS. I believe that GW's style of presidency is one of a leader. I just don't believe that he pulls it off too well.

Clinton was much more of a manager, he pretty much stayed out of the way and didn't fuck anything up. The result was eight pretty good years. I don't believe the eight years of prosperity that we enjoyed were because of him, but I don't believe they were inspite of him either.

and specifically, his type is incompetent.

It could be the early substance abuse.  It could be that his posse always arranged everything, and bailed him out of everything, so he doesn't know the meaning of responsibility.

What seems incredible to me is how well the Republicans function with incompetent leadership, so I have to think there is somebody back there who has some idea of what is going on.  Call it Jack0's "intelligent design" theory.  Maybe not so much *design*, as the realization that they shouldn't change anything unless it's going badly for them.

through history to see which works better for the country as a whole.  The analysis on Clinton is pretty spot on.  And while I don't admire the man as a person, I must admit, he did have the good sense to review the reports on terror, and keep them in perspective - and consider the "what ifs" unlike the current POTUS.

Reagan - clearly a leader and more in the kennedy mold that any other person (the big vision, big picture - let me know what you need to make it so!).  The one that puzzles me is Carter.  Clearly he tried to "manage" but was not a terribly good manager.... much like Bush 43 is a leader, but not a terribly good leader.  

And you wrote this?

"""that you're spelling has improved from about a 2nd grade level to around a third grade level.  (I'm being generous, but wanted to be nice after you're kind words.)""""

BBBWWWWWAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

YOUR a gud spelr

Equal protection and fair play...  would imply playing fair.  And to play fair, one must exercise self restraint.  Many (on both sides of the aisle) fail to exercise self restraint.  One must also be factual.  Again, many in all parts of the political spectrum are members within TER.  Not a problem to me, clearly something that bothers you.

When I make a mistake with a fact - I acknowledge it and move on.

Your comment: "Given the large number of rocket scientists, it's hard to keep from pointing & laughing." says what you think of the majority of posters on here.  With Very Few exceptions, I find that most offer something worth reading, even if I disagree with their political stance.  Where I take exception is for someone to extrapolate a meaning from a post that was neither stated nor implied.  On any given day, almost everyone makes a mistake in his / her post, but even in mistakes it is possible to learn.

The members of this board are a wide range or slice of our society (and many types of expertise are represented - yours happens to be law - whoopee).  That does not make your political position any more "Correct" than anyone elses.  That is what is wonderful about the total of the "Bill of Rights."  The envisionment was that all could sit at the table - and express an opinion.  Even me.  And most certainly, even you.

That's about it.

Bizzy, I really don't want to know, but just for your own information, you might want to check to see if you have a sack left.

We're going to make you HMFIC of Post Approval and Scoring.   Mostly because there's not enough others who fucking care.

Sheesh.

Hey, I remembered!  Fooled ya, din't I!!

Absolutely. I did not mean to imply the Dems were any less self-serving and corrupt than the GOP. Shameful, but very true.

I'm gonna start a new thread on this one

How right you are!  I guess my criticism of "you're" spelling must cease.  I am a broken man.  However, I never said I could spell at a level above a 2nd grader myself!!

Anyway, thanks for the laugh.  I suppose I needed it.

FYI:  You spelled 'good' and "speller' wrong!

of course the judge was correct.  I wouldn't let her go too far astray - she was just too anxious to close the case, and tossed my adversary out before I was done.

Responsible speech is that which stays within the law, and people who say otherwise are anti-constitutionalists.  You know, people who have fragile egos, and need politeness more than they need truth.  Psych cases.  Just what we need more of.

I think you don't post enough.   You're not pulling your weight.  I'm gonna make you read each and every post, and answer each one with 100 word essay, and I'm gonna send the sheriff out if you don't.

Now that's fucking ridiculous, isn't it?  Just as ridiculous as your crying that you "can't keep up".

You know what?  That's a FUCKING PERSONAL PROBLEM, and it's only a problem because you think it is.  Nobody is tying you up and making you do shit, and they never will.

CLUE:  This is the INTERNET!  There is a DELETE button, if you are so STOOPID that you feel you have to read every post!!   Why do I have to seven say this shit?!!

Shit!  How did you EVER learn to use a keyboard!  Did you focus all your brains on that problem, and have none left over for anything else?!

With neurological genes like yours loose in the pool, our nation is doomed, DOOMED.

to you, so just to keep things even, I've got a question here for you.

I've written a number of responses for you here, and all in all, they pretty much get back to one common issue:  HOW IN THE *FUCK* CAN YOU BE SO STOOPID!?! I mean, and still have autonomic nerve functions?

So, would you mind explaining that for me?  I'm really curious.

1)  Your argument is that Soros is a "bigot" because he contributes to Moveon, and they took out an ad asking Petraus if he wasn't "betraying" us.

2) Now the very first question I'm going to ask you is, do you have any reason to believe that Soros knew they were going to run this ad when he contributed?

Of course you don't.  You just have a general feeling that Moveon are "obstinately and intolerantly devoted to his/her opinions or prejudices", and anybody contributing money to them is also a  "bigot" because they knew or should have known in advance.  Because, of course, your intuition is universal.

3)  Now I think that elsewhere you have said that Jesse Jackson and Pat Robertson are bigots.  Do you think that anybody sending money to either of *them* is a bigot?  Because you know, that's one HELL of a lot of Americans, including 80% of all little old widows on social security.

4)  Now I look back to your definition, and I see that it particularly refers to treating members of a racial or ethnic group with hatred or intolerance.  

Would you like to specify for us, which racial or ethnic group Moveon treats with hatred or intolerance?


5)  Now my last question for you, Mr Bizarro is not whether you have any major psychiatric diagnoses.  Instead, it is, why are you a such a fanatical cephaloproctologue?

the judge ruled FOR me?  Before I wanted her to?  Before I had the chance to totally gut my adversary?  Which I now have to do elsewhere?

Another thing that pisses me right off is that I have to wait to hit on the judge until after she makes her ruling.  What a cutie!!

except JackO all make excellent points. We all really should start a new party. HMMMM we need a name......??????????

CiC not to invade Baghdad, The terms to end the war was a deal made up of politicians i.e. President George H.W. Bush, the United Nations and coalition forces. Gen. Schwarzkopf obviously could not be elected if not for the simple reason, he is too old. Born 1934??

What I liked about Gen. Schwarzkopf was how he planned and prepared his troops for battle. I was of them. He was masterful in logistics and is an engineer by training.  He inspired his troops for battle by leading by example. Leading by example is a trait, sorrowfully lacking in today's political leaders.

At his level I hope you can appreciate his mastery of the art of politics. God save the Queen but the British when in a group can be quite pompous and don't forget we had Syrians, Turkish, Saudis etc, also.

Much like Eisenhower he knew how to massage egos and be sensitive to cultural complexities. We were after all a Western Nation in a Muslim world. I can tell you stories, no alcohol, etc. Along with NBC and weapons training we were given instructions on Islam, the Arabic language and told not to, absolutely not to speak to reporters.

Another thing about Schwarzkopf was that he was not afraid to teach us lessons from past mistakes. From top of the Chain of Command to the Officer corp and to the enlisted ranks were constantly reminded with this refrain:

"No My Lai's, you here".

What can I say, I love the guy.



-- Modified on 10/11/2007 8:04:00 PM

Your points are:

(1)  George Soros, Charlie Sheen and Rosie O'Donnell are leftist bigots.  You provide no explanation whatever to support the last 2, but Soros is a bigot by virtue of his support for Moveon; and presumably, so is everybody else who contributes to Moveon.

(2) What makes Moveon a "bigoted" organization is that it believes that Petraus may have betrayed us.  This allegation is your idea of bigotry.

(3) There is no such thing as free speech.  Responsible speech is what you like better.

(4) Jack0 posts too much, because you can't keep up.  OTOH, you think Jack0 supports the "he made me do it mentality" without citation or support.

Does that about cover it?

So we have another post that pretty much covers the issue of Soros' alleged bigotry, if you will be so kind as to respond there.  Or not, I don't care.  The questions are rhetorical, I know you will look like a jackass answering them, anyway you cut it.

Of course, your allegation of bigotry in Sheen and ODonnell is unsupported and equally clearly laughable - unless you happen to know they are disguises of Mel Gibson.  

Your problem could be that you don't understand the English language.  Other reasonable hypotheses are a neurological problem, but I think the most likely one is a psychiatric issue.  Probably nothing wildly uncommon, just serious inability to  imagine yourself in the other fella's shoes, like a 30th percentile antisocial personality issue.   Not a serious Nazi, just a garden variety one.

As for the actual arguments, they are of course ridiculous.  Not even worth discussing.   I'm not even pissed by you claiming that I support a "he made me do it mentality" at the very time you're crying like a little girl that you can't keep up with posts, at the very time you spend a lot of your time counting posts and complaining about it.

Why wouldn't I be pissed?  It's obvious.  You're mentally ill.  Anybody else would recognize the multiple obvious contradictions in their whining.

above Schwarzkopf's pay grade.

Related but not much:  a friend of mine just came back from Basra, and noted that people are not doing a lot of patrolling, and drawing lots of indirect fire as a result.   Man, I would be scared NOT to patrol.

My beef has always been putting people in this position before - wait for it - not before they are adequately prepared - but before we know what we want them to do, or how we expect them to do it.  

And my 2nd beef is that where lives are involved, FUCKING POLITENESS goes out the window!  Faster than a speeding bullet, eh!

Soros is bigoted toward George Bush!

OK, now is that because of the Moveon ad?  Or is it something else?

Jeez, I think you would have said if it was something else.

So there we have it.  Soros is a bigot because he contributes to an organization that opposes George Bush.

Can you explain it any better?

Now, I notice that Rush Limbaugh doesn't make your bigot cut.  http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/50979/

Ya wanta explain?

Because I want to hear it.

As long as it has an anti partisan plank in its platform, count me in.

You're defaulting on the rest?

I suppose that's the best you can do.

ya can't be on cruise control ALL YOUR LIFE, MORON!

other organizations are bigoted, that must leave about 3 dozen non-bigots in the USA, and they're the fuckers who are locked up and CAN'T VOTE if they wanted to!!!

So the entire USA is bigoted.   You must have got that information from Jacques Chirac, ya fuckin socialist fag-boy.

i appreciate your sense of humor.

BK