Discussion:
The Liberals Are Coming Unglued
(too old to reply)
Gactimus
2004-12-06 18:39:08 UTC
Permalink
NO ONE CAN argue that the November 7th, 2000 election proved to be the
turning point against left-wing liberals thanks to the disenfranchisement
of Al Gore and his Democrat party by President George W. Bush's appointment
to office in lieu of a hopelessly divided, imperfect and irreconcilable
election.

From that point forward, the liberal left have been steadily losing
ground in America's political arena. Although popular in Anti-American
socialist nations like France, Canada et al rogue terrorist-harboring
countries; back here at home, the liberal fringe of the Democrat party are
spiraling downwards into the gutter of socio-political and religious
inviability.

The old guard, the liberal-biased media, are falling in their ratings so
rapidly that their news anchors can hardly retire fast enough! More
American voters are wising up and tuning in to the FOXNEWS cable channel,
and using Google-news to locate current issues of on-line newspapers,
magazines, and bloggers across the globe. And look at Hollywood and the
liberal elite, and how their concerted attempt to put Kerry in office
failed MISERABLY! Liberal Democrats are losing power and influence on a
daily basis, and will be completely disempowered long before the 2008
election. The United Nations is collapsing under the tremendous weight of
their corruption, and there is a growing movement on the Republican side of
the aisle to give them the boot, and create a new alliance composed of
those nations who are our allies, and preclude those which are our enemies
like Iran, Syria, Canada, France and Eurabia in general. This will further
disempower the liberals both at home and abroad, and will help to galvanize
the US and our allies together against Jihadist terrorists and the criminal
nations who support them.

Now, thanks be to God Almighty that our President was roundly reelected for
FOUR MORE YEARS in the Oval Office, sending the misguided and frankly
insane liberals "running home to mamma" in the wake of the November 2, 2004
election, there's nowhere left for the dying liberal Democrats to go but
DOWN THE TUBES.

That's where our moderate-to-conservative Republican majority can help to
expedite the extinction of the left-wing liberals, by working proactively
to invite ONLY the moderate Democrats back to bipartisan political
discourse, while unconditionally ignoring the practically-powerless
liberals. Now that we have got the liberal beast on its knees and bleeding
profusely, we must work 24/7/365 and do EVERYTHING we can to finish it off!

So let us law-abiding patriotic Americans collectively-focus our efforts on
undermining the ACLU and liberal Universities using every weapon at our
disposal. Knowledge is power. This means we must INFORM America that the
liberals are terrorist supporters. Why? Because they ARE! Liberals *are*
supporters of Al-Qaeda & the Islamic Jihad according to their OWN words!
Even Usama Bin Laden piped in for Kerry. What's THAT tell us? The liberals
supported keeping the brutal dictator Saddam in power--a genocial terrorist
in his own right who'd used WMDs against his own people! Liberals plainly
support terrorists, and liberals tried to surrender America over to the
U.N. and Jacques Chirac, Kofi Annan & Co. Is that what a PATRIOT does?

Remind Americans on a daily basis that the left-wing liberals are enemies
of the United States on the newsgroups, blogging, on your websites, by
email, snail mail, in person, in public, posting notices on telephone
poles, putting flyers under the windshield wipers of parked cars, working
as hard and smart as we can to finish annihilating what's left of the
liberals. One of the best ways to do this is to kill 'em with kindness.
Yes, kindness. We should be kind but stern to these mentally disturbed
rabidly-irrational souls who identify with liberal issues. Take homosexual
marriage, the prophesied abomination of desolation. Be sure that the
moderate Democrats understand that we Republicans support equal civil
rights for every law abiding citizen. Likewise, be sure to explain to them
that we can't possibly tolerate that which is unequivocally intolerable,
that being homosexual marriage--a divine rite reserved by God for one man
and one woman. PERIOD. (The carrot and the stick.)

Be reasonable and civilized with the moderate Democrats. This will help the
moderates to see that we are NOT bomb-throwing disempowered lunatics--in
stark contrast to the liberal left. We definitely want to be friends with
the moderates, as that will help them to distance themselves from radical
liberals. The current Democratic Party must be destroyed and moderates must
be encouraged to build a new *Democratic* Party with whom we Republicans
can be more bipartisan, passing more legislation which benefits everyone--
everyone EXCEPT liberals. Anything or anyone associated with liberals must
be boycotted and ignored wholesale. NEVER do business with them. NEVER be
their friends. ALWAYS gloat over their bitter election defeat. ALWAYS do
everything you can to make their lives *MISERABLE*, not because we take
pleasure in punishing Anti-Americans, but because it is our duty to defend
& preserve our great nation against the genocidal ANIMALS who're trying to
murder us all.
John Secker
2004-12-06 19:30:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
NO ONE CAN argue that the November 7th, 2000 election proved to be the
<Snip>
Post by Gactimus
& preserve our great nation against the genocidal ANIMALS who're trying to
murder us all.
Not a bad parody of a right-wing nutter, there were just a few places
where it was possible to see that you were making it up deliberately,
but you deserve points for effort and consistency. Say "Hi" to all the
trolls over there in alt.spacebastards.
--
John Secker
Chuck
2004-12-06 20:16:15 UTC
Permalink
why all replublicans are so dumb ? Thats the question ...
Crackers
2004-12-06 20:54:05 UTC
Permalink
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY of the
american political parties. If you're going to have to have a President then
why not just hold an open Pac Man tournament. Who ever wins gets to be
President.

Crackers
--
Ghastly's Ghastly Comic
http://ghastlycomic.com
Gactimus
2004-12-06 21:13:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY of
the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
Brian Siano
2004-12-06 21:39:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY of
the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
c&p'd from:
http://www.easycarts.net/ecarts/CounterPunch/CP_Books.html

"Dime's Worth of Difference" by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair.

Every four years as the presidential elections approach, a distress
beacon goes out to progressive-minded people warning them about the
imment take-over of the country by Republican ultras intent on yoking
the nation under a fascist regime. Every four years, the Democratic
Party offers itself as the only bulwork against the jackboots. Every
four years, this argument becomes more and more labored; the differences
between the two parties more and more difficult to detect.

"There ain’t a dime’s worth of difference between them." That’s how the
great Waylon Jennings described the two parties back in the early 1980s.
There may be even less today. Across a range of issues, from civil
rights and the drug war to job-slashing trade pacts and health care, the
Democrats and Republicans have coalesced into an frightful harmony.

In this sharply written volume, the editors and writers of CounterPunch,
the radical newsletter and hugely popular website, reveal how each party
is fattened by the same roster of corporate contributors; each party
connives to gerrymander congressional districts so that as few seats as
possible are up for contention; each party bows to the desires of
defense contractors and media conglomerates; each party endorses an
economic scheme that shifts money from the poor to the super-rich; each
party warehouses the poor by the millions in a vast prison system, one
of the few booming sectors of the new economy.

Even the imperial wars of the last 20 years have been a joint venture
with Republicans backing Clinton’s laptop bombing campaigns and
Democrats cheerleading Bush’s bloody forays into Afghanistan and Iraq.
These days the parties are divided mainly by pretense, phony policy
debates on oil drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge (as most of the
rest of the continent is given away to the oil companies) or
restrictions on late-term abortions (when abortion clinics have been
extinguished from 85 percent of the counties in America). The Democratic
Party is the graveyard of social change movements.

Yes, the rot is deep, but there is a resistance, a movement to break
free from the shackles of this political duopoly, which has its roots in
the civil rights uprising of Fanny Lou Hamer, the anti-war campaign of
Eugene McCarthy, Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coalition and the independent
campaigns of Ralph Nader. A Dime’s Worth of Difference charts the
history of these rebellions and the Democrat Party’s attempts to coopt
them or crush them out entirely.

Political redemption won’t be found in the voting machine or at
political conventions, but in peopless movements organizing together in
the workplace or on the streets, in communities, at weapons plants or on
the frontlines of the Pacific rainforests. There’s work to be done.
Let’s do it.

Powerful essays by

Alexander Cockburn
Jeffrey St. Clair
Brandy Baker
Robin Blackburn
Sean Donahue
Michael Donnelly
Joshua Frank
Kevin Alexander Gray
Gabriel Kolko
Greg Moses
Steve Perry
Vijay Prashad
Jeff Taylor
JoAnn Wypijewski
Gactimus
2004-12-06 21:58:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Siano
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY
of the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
http://www.easycarts.net/ecarts/CounterPunch/CP_Books.html
"Dime's Worth of Difference" by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair.
Every four years as the presidential elections approach, a distress
beacon goes out to progressive-minded people warning them about the
imment take-over of the country by Republican ultras intent on yoking
the nation under a fascist regime. Every four years, the Democratic
Party offers itself as the only bulwork against the jackboots. Every
four years, this argument becomes more and more labored; the differences
between the two parties more and more difficult to detect.
The difference between the two parties is that when elections come rolling
around the Republicans are the conservative party and the Democrats pretend
to be the conservative party.
Grackle
2004-12-07 00:21:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY of
the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
"Sorely uninformed" You sound like a dork.
Now take your finger and push up your glasses when you say it.
Gactimus
2004-12-07 01:34:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Grackle
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY
of the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
"Sorely uninformed" You sound like a dork.
Now take your finger and push up your glasses when you say it.
Is that how you usually talk to people who are smarter than you?
Grackle
2004-12-07 03:14:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by Grackle
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY
of the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
"Sorely uninformed" You sound like a dork.
Now take your finger and push up your glasses when you say it.
Is that how you usually talk to people who are smarter than you?
No, which is why I spoke that way to you.
Dorks are not intelligent, just socially awkward. Nerds are intelligent in
a limited field, over-achieving in compensation for their social
awkwardness. Better for you to have been called a nerd.
James Garvin
2004-12-07 16:49:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by Grackle
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY
of the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
"Sorely uninformed" You sound like a dork.
Now take your finger and push up your glasses when you say it.
Is that how you usually talk to people who are smarter than you?
A decent troll, but a little light on content. You should have pushed
it a little more.

3/10
James Garvin
2004-12-07 16:27:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY of
the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
Kerry and Bush were just about the same damn thing. Both are idiots and
both are worthless.

If you are into conspiracy theories, they are both members of the Skull
and Bones...wooooo
Gactimus
2004-12-07 16:52:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Garvin
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY
of the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
Kerry and Bush were just about the same damn thing.
They couldn't have been more different.
James Garvin
2004-12-07 18:32:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by James Garvin
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY
of the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
Kerry and Bush were just about the same damn thing.
They couldn't have been more different.
Thank you for the well thought out post with the plethora of data to
back up your claim.
Gactimus
2004-12-07 18:36:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Garvin
Post by Gactimus
Post by James Garvin
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY
of the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
Kerry and Bush were just about the same damn thing.
They couldn't have been more different.
Thank you for the well thought out post with the plethora of data to
back up your claim.
And you supported your position so well. <sarcasm>

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4448630/
James Garvin
2004-12-07 18:54:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by James Garvin
Post by Gactimus
Post by James Garvin
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY
of the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
Kerry and Bush were just about the same damn thing.
They couldn't have been more different.
Thank you for the well thought out post with the plethora of data to
back up your claim.
And you supported your position so well. <sarcasm>
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4448630/
Excellent troll! 9/10
n***@nowhere.com
2004-12-07 23:08:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by James Garvin
Post by Gactimus
Post by James Garvin
Post by Gactimus
Post by Crackers
I say screw elections. There's no significant difference between ANY
of the american political parties.
If you think that then you are sorely uninformed.
Kerry and Bush were just about the same damn thing.
They couldn't have been more different.
Thank you for the well thought out post with the plethora of data to
back up your claim.
And you supported your position so well. <sarcasm>
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4448630/
Well I guess if you believe politicians then they are different.
Jordan
2004-12-06 21:11:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Now, thanks be to God Almighty that our President was roundly
reelected for
Post by Gactimus
FOUR MORE YEARS in the Oval Office, sending the misguided and frankly
insane liberals "running home to mamma" in the wake of the November 2, 2004
election, there's nowhere left for the dying liberal Democrats to go but
DOWN THE TUBES.
http://www.fuckthesouth.com

Fuck the South. Fuck 'em. We should have let them go when they wanted
to leave. But no, we had to kill half a million people so they'd stay
part of our special Union. Fighting for the right to keep slaves -
yeah, those are states we want to keep.

And now what do we get? We're the fucking Arrogant Northeast Liberal
Elite? How about this for arrogant: the South is the Real America? The
Authentic America. Really?

Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes. Those Founding Fathers
you keep going on and on about? All that bullshit about what you think
they meant by the Second Amendment giving you the right to keep your
assault weapons in the glove compartment because you didn't bother to
read the first half of the fucking sentence? Who do you think those
wig-wearing lacy-shirt sporting revolutionaries were? They were fucking
blue-staters, dickhead. Boston? Philadelphia? New York? Hello? Think
there might be a reason all the fucking monuments are up here in our
backyard?

No, No. Get the fuck out. We're not letting you visit the Liberty Bell
and fucking Plymouth Rock anymore until you get over your real American
selves and start respecting those other nine amendments. Who do you
think those fucking stripes on the flag are for? Nine are for fucking
blue states. And it would be 10 if those Vermonters had gotten their
fucking Subarus together and broken off from New York a little earlier.
Get it? We started this shit, so don't get all uppity about how real
you are you Johnny-come-lately "Oooooh I've been a state for almost a
hundred years" dickheads. Fuck off.

Arrogant? You wanna talk about us Northeasterners being fucking
arrogant? What's more American than arrogance? Hmmm? Maybe horsies? I
don't think so. Arrogance is the fucking cornerstone of what it means
to be American. And I wouldn't be so fucking arrogant if I wasn't
paying for your fucking bridges, bitch.

All those Federal taxes you love to hate? It all comes from us and goes
to you, so shut up and enjoy your fucking Tennessee Valley Authority
electricity and your fancy highways that we paid for. And the next time
Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want
to, but you're the ones who built on a fucking swamp. "Let the Spanish
keep it, it's a shithole," we said, but you had to have your fucking
orange juice.

The next dickwad who says, "It's your money, not the government's
money" is gonna get their ass kicked. Nine of the ten states that get
the most federal fucking dollars and pay the least... can you guess? Go
on, guess. That's right, motherfucker, they're red states. And eight
of the ten states that receive the least and pay the most? It's too
easy, asshole, they're blue states. It's not your money, assholes,
it's fucking our money. What was that Real American Value you were
spouting a minute ago? Self reliance? Try this for self reliance: buy
your own fucking stop signs, assholes.

Let's talk about those values for a fucking minute. You and your
Southern values can bite my ass because the blue states got the values
over you fucking Real Americans every day of the goddamn week. Which
state do you think has the lowest divorce rate you marriage-hyping
dickwads? Well? Can you guess? It's fucking Massachusetts, the
fucking center of the gay marriage universe. Yes, that's right, the
state you love to tie around the neck of anyone to the left of Strom
Thurmond has the lowest divorce rate in the fucking nation. Think
that's just some aberration? How about this: 9 of the 10 lowest
divorce rates are fucking blue states, asshole, and most are in the
Northeast, where our values suck so bad. And where are the highest
divorce rates? Care to fucking guess? 10 of the top 10 are fucking
red-ass we're-so-fucking-moral states. And while Nevada is the worst,
the Bible Belt is doing its fucking part.

But two guys making out is going to fucking ruin marriage for you?
Yeah? Seems like you're ruining it pretty well on your own, you little
bastards. Oh, but that's ok because you go to church, right? I mean you
do, right? Cause we fucking get to hear about it every goddamn year at
election time. Yes, we're fascinated by how you get up every Sunday
morning and sing, and then you're fucking towers of moral superiority.
Yeah, that's a workable formula. Maybe us fucking Northerners don't
talk about religion as much as you because we're not so busy sinning,
hmmm? Ever think of that, you self-righteous assholes? No, you're too
busy erecting giant stone tablets of the Ten Commandments in buildings
paid for by the fucking Northeast Liberal Elite. And who has the
highest murder rates in the nation? It ain't us up here in the North,
assholes.

Well this gravy train is fucking over. Take your liberal-bashing,
federal-tax-leaching, confederate-flag-waving, holier-than-thou,
hypocritical bullshit and shove it up your ass.

And no, you can't have your fucking convention in New York next time.
Fuck off.
FLY135
2004-12-06 21:36:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jordan
Cause we fucking founded this country, assholes.
Damn, you and your friends must be really old.
Android
2004-12-07 06:33:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by Gactimus
Now, thanks be to God Almighty that our President was roundly
reelected for
Post by Gactimus
FOUR MORE YEARS in the Oval Office, sending the misguided and frankly
insane liberals "running home to mamma" in the wake of the November
2, 2004
Post by Gactimus
election, there's nowhere left for the dying liberal Democrats to go
but
Post by Gactimus
DOWN THE TUBES.
http://www.fuckthesouth.com
[SNIPPED]

Take a look at a county-by-county map of the US instead of a state map.
There is only one all-blue state (Massachusetts, naturally...although
Vermont is very close). On the other hand, there are a couple of all-red
states (Nebraska, Oklahoma) and several where 5 or fewer counties (out of
20+ counties) are blue (Missouri, Kansas, Montana, Idaho, Utah, Nevada,
Oregon, Colorado). Even in states that went for Kerry, such as California
and New York, the majority of the counties in those states are red.

It isn't a matter of North versus South--more of urban areas versus the rest
of the country. So your Civil War references are irrelevant. Government
workers, celebrities, and upper-class elites, all of whom tend to vote
Democratic, are more likely to live in big cities such as Chicago, LA, New
York, Boston, Detroit, and SF. That's also where uneducated minorities
congregate, and they tend to vote for Democrats that promise them benefits
and special treatment. It's not surprising at all.

What is surprising is that minorities keep voting for Democrats who haven't
done anything to improve their situation (although they are finally
beginning to see the light). What is also surprising is that celebrities,
government workers, and upper-class elites continue to think that they
represent the majority of people in this country when they are in fact out
of touch. And lastly, what is surprising is that liberals such as yourself
now claim to be concerned with your tax money going to support the welfare
of people in red states. You didn't seem to care when conservatives
complained about the welfare system and how it punishes those who work hard
and reward those who don't.

Take a deep breath and get on with your life. And if you want your party to
have a better shot at the Presidency next time, tell it to stop nominating
ultra-leftist millionaires from the East Coast who don't seem at all sincere
when they tell us how much they care about the common citizen. A
fiscally-conservative Democrat, who is liberal or moderate on social issues,
and one who comes from a blue-collar background, could have easily beaten
either Bush or Kerry.
Leon Dexter
2004-12-07 07:04:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Android
Take a look at a county-by-county map of the US instead of a state map.
There is only one all-blue state (Massachusetts, naturally...although
Vermont is very close). On the other hand, there are a couple of all-red
states (Nebraska, Oklahoma) and several where 5 or fewer counties (out of
20+ counties) are blue (Missouri, Kansas, Montana, Idaho, Utah, Nevada,
Oregon, Colorado). Even in states that went for Kerry, such as California
and New York, the majority of the counties in those states are red.
It isn't a matter of North versus South--more of urban areas versus the rest
of the country. So your Civil War references are irrelevant.
If you could see a person-by-person map, you'd not have a tough time seeing
that even this is wrong. It's not hard to find a Republican in the city
(they're everywhere!), nor a Democrat in the country (loads of them where
I'm from). Those are generalizations that are only partly correct.


Government
Post by Android
workers, celebrities, and upper-class elites, all of whom tend to vote
Democratic, are more likely to live in big cities such as Chicago, LA, New
York, Boston, Detroit, and SF. That's also where uneducated minorities
congregate, and they tend to vote for Democrats that promise them benefits
and special treatment. It's not surprising at all.
What is surprising is that minorities keep voting for Democrats who haven't
done anything to improve their situation (although they are finally
beginning to see the light). What is also surprising is that celebrities,
government workers, and upper-class elites continue to think that they
represent the majority of people in this country when they are in fact out
of touch.
Are these minorities who aren't seeing results supposed to vote Republican?
I'm sure they'd take no change over bad change. I'm amazed that people
think Republicans represent the "average guy" when they are such advocates
of greedy corporate America. The truth is, politicians are more out of
touch than celebrities could ever be. At least many celebrities try (more
than at just election time) to appreciate the people who made them
celebrities.
And lets not forget the millions of voters who don't give a shit about any
issues at all, they just vote for president and they vote based on who looks
better or whatever. I know too many people who can't name Bush or Kerry's
position (or even their party's long-standing position) on a single issue,
but voted anyway. That's not even mentioning the people who voted for
incorrect perception of positions...like people who voted Kerry to avoid a
draft, or people who voted Bush to avoid gun bans. And those are incorrect
positions that the campaigns endorsed!
Fred Liken
2004-12-07 17:45:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
And lets not forget the millions of voters who don't give a shit about any
issues at all, they just vote for president and they vote based on who looks
better or whatever. I know too many people who can't name Bush or Kerry's
position (or even their party's long-standing position) on a single issue,
but voted anyway. That's not even mentioning the people who voted for
incorrect perception of positions...like people who voted Kerry to avoid a
draft, or people who voted Bush to avoid gun bans. And those are incorrect
positions that the campaigns endorsed!
And how many people would have voted for Kerry if they hadn't "Gotten out
the vote" among these people?
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 02:29:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred Liken
Post by Leon Dexter
And lets not forget the millions of voters who don't give a shit about any
issues at all, they just vote for president and they vote based on who looks
better or whatever. I know too many people who can't name Bush or Kerry's
position (or even their party's long-standing position) on a single issue,
but voted anyway. That's not even mentioning the people who voted for
incorrect perception of positions...like people who voted Kerry to avoid a
draft, or people who voted Bush to avoid gun bans. And those are incorrect
positions that the campaigns endorsed!
And how many people would have voted for Kerry if they hadn't "Gotten out
the vote" among these people?
You can say the same for both sides. It's not as if Bush presented a
reasoned arguement for anything. His campaign was to pick on Kerry as
"liberal" and a "flip-flopper". Kerry's campaign was at least based on
issues, even though it was "Bush is wrong about everything", which is just
dumb. It was sad to see him try to agree with Bush and still say Bush is
wrong (like on gay marriage, or religious values).
But both sides rely on ignorance for so many votes...you can argue all day
about who does it more. You know what would be great? An election where
you have to pick which issues are most important to you, vote on those
issues, and THEN you get to see who you picked, based on which candidate
agrees with you more closely.
Fred Liken
2004-12-08 16:03:20 UTC
Permalink
It was sad to see [Kerry] try to agree with Bush and still say Bush is
wrong (like on gay marriage, or religious values).
...
You know what would be great? An election where
you have to pick which issues are most important to you, vote on those
issues, and THEN you get to see who you picked, based on which candidate
agrees with you more closely.
No fair! Kerry would just respond to each "Are you Pro Third Trimester
Abortion or Against Third Trimester Abortion?" with "Yes".

lol.

Third Trimester Abortions are just wrong no matter how you slice it... no
pun intended.
Robin
2004-12-08 05:11:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred Liken
And how many people would have voted for Kerry if they
hadn't "Gotten out
Post by Fred Liken
the vote" among these people?
Go ahead.... vote Republican... they'll say you did anyway.
Fred Liken
2004-12-08 16:10:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred Liken
Post by Fred Liken
And how many people would have voted for Kerry if they
hadn't "Gotten out
Post by Fred Liken
the vote" among these people?
Go ahead.... vote Republican... they'll say you did anyway.
Wha?
Xbot
2004-12-08 20:28:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fred Liken
Post by Fred Liken
And how many people would have voted for Kerry if they
hadn't "Gotten out
Post by Fred Liken
the vote" among these people?
Go ahead.... vote Republican... they'll say you did anyway.
Wha?
"Robin" is apparently a relic of the knee-jerk conspiracy theorists who
cropped immediately following the 2004 election. Most of them finally
figured out how silly their stance was and disappeared within a week. The
dumber ones are a thankfully small lingering nuisance.
NightSky 421
2004-12-06 22:56:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
From that point forward, the liberal left have been steadily losing
ground in America's political arena. Although popular in Anti-American
socialist nations like France, Canada et al rogue terrorist-harboring
countries; back here at home, the liberal fringe of the Democrat party are
spiraling downwards into the gutter of socio-political and religious
inviability.
Don't believe for a minute that Canada is "anti-American". I was born in
Canada and have lived here all my life, and I never had the impression that
this nation was ever "anti-American". Of course, you will have some people
protesting against the United States (especially when the President decides
to visit), but that sort of thing will happen anywhere. No country can ever
expect a 100% support rate from all people. I think certain things between
the United States and Canada could be better in the area of trade, and I
also think certain members of the Liberal party here in Canada have
expressed anti-American sentiments, but a few government members don't speak
for the whole nation. However, I do believe Canada should adopt a much
tighter immigration & refugee policy. But that's an even bigger discussion.
Zackman
2004-12-06 23:36:06 UTC
Permalink
Gactimus wrote:

<snip>

Not bad. 6.5/10 -- you lose a point for being OT, but gain a point for
flamebaiting Canadians.

Un-crossposted to alt.spacebastards, naturally.

-Z-
stePH
2004-12-07 15:22:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Zackman
<snip>
Not bad. 6.5/10 -- you lose a point for being OT, but gain a point for
flamebaiting Canadians.
Un-crossposted to alt.spacebastards, naturally.
And you get ten out of ten for being the only poster in this thread so
far to do so.



stePH
--
d00d, where's my sig?
Crackers
2004-12-07 06:10:23 UTC
Permalink
No seriously guys. Pac Man tournament, winner gets to be president. Everyone
supplies their own quarter. No more corporations buying political influence.
Everyone gets a shot at being President.

Hell, screw all that, just make Pac Man himself President for Life.

Crackers
--
Ghastly's Ghastly Comic
http://ghastlycomic.com
Leon Dexter
2004-12-07 06:41:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crackers
No seriously guys. Pac Man tournament, winner gets to be president. Everyone
supplies their own quarter. No more corporations buying political influence.
Everyone gets a shot at being President.
Hell, screw all that, just make Pac Man himself President for Life.
No, man, people who are that good at Pac-Man probably don't want to be
President (and who in their right mind would?), and some of them are...you
know...not socially functional.

Not that it's a completely bad idea, but maybe pick another game. One that
won't shoulder up an idiot savant in pattern recognition. Maybe pick the
guy who has the save in Disgaea with the longest gametime, highest character
levels, etc. That game lets you level up for decades...and anyone who can
slog through hundreds of hours of boring, repetitive, menu-based gameplay
can handle the tedium of politics, and obviously hero-based storylines might
turn up someone who likes meaningless public acclaim. But actually the main
character in Disgaea was the devil's son or something...oh, hell FFX then.
Jim Vieira
2004-12-07 07:53:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crackers
Post by Crackers
No seriously guys. Pac Man tournament, winner gets to be president.
Everyone
Post by Crackers
supplies their own quarter. No more corporations buying political
influence.
Post by Crackers
Everyone gets a shot at being President.
Hell, screw all that, just make Pac Man himself President for Life.
No, man, people who are that good at Pac-Man probably don't want to be
President (and who in their right mind would?), and some of them are...you
know...not socially functional.
Not that it's a completely bad idea, but maybe pick another game. One that
won't shoulder up an idiot savant in pattern recognition. Maybe pick the
guy who has the save in Disgaea with the longest gametime, highest character
levels, etc. That game lets you level up for decades...and anyone who can
slog through hundreds of hours of boring, repetitive, menu-based gameplay
can handle the tedium of politics, and obviously hero-based storylines might
turn up someone who likes meaningless public acclaim. But actually the main
character in Disgaea was the devil's son or something...oh, hell FFX then.
How about a nationwide lottery. Or maybe a big Texas Holdem tournament.
Maybe we could have a Frenchman run his finger through a phone book and
pick someone.
Leon Dexter
2004-12-07 08:54:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
How about a nationwide lottery. Or maybe a big Texas Holdem tournament.
Maybe we could have a Frenchman run his finger through a phone book and
pick someone.
Wow, you sound hostile. I guess you're a politician, then? Can't take a
joke? Or are you just racist? What do you know about the French, other
than that it's politically correct to dislike them at the moment? Maybe we
should tear down the Statue of Liberty, eh? She's French, you know.
i own a yacht
2004-12-07 09:11:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by Jim Vieira
How about a nationwide lottery. Or maybe a big Texas Holdem tournament.
Maybe we could have a Frenchman run his finger through a phone book and
pick someone.
Wow, you sound hostile. I guess you're a politician, then? Can't take a
joke? Or are you just racist? What do you know about the French, other
than that it's politically correct to dislike them at the moment? Maybe we
should tear down the Statue of Liberty, eh? She's French, you know.
foxnews beam their feed directly into jim's head.
nobody
2004-12-07 17:08:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by i own a yacht
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by Jim Vieira
How about a nationwide lottery. Or maybe a big Texas Holdem tournament.
Maybe we could have a Frenchman run his finger through a phone book and
pick someone.
Wow, you sound hostile. I guess you're a politician, then? Can't take a
joke? Or are you just racist? What do you know about the French, other
than that it's politically correct to dislike them at the moment? Maybe we
should tear down the Statue of Liberty, eh? She's French, you know.
foxnews beam their feed directly into jim's head.
And CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/MSNBC beam directly into your tiny brain - man - that
Gactimus is right, you guys are becoming unglued - yeah, racism because he
made fun of the French - when libs/dems stop making fun of "trailer trash"
(aka poor whites who are not liberal,) then start throwing stones.
Jim Vieira
2004-12-07 21:40:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by nobody
Post by i own a yacht
foxnews beam their feed directly into jim's head.
And CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/MSNBC beam directly into your tiny brain - man - that
Gactimus is right, you guys are becoming unglued - yeah, racism because he
made fun of the French - when libs/dems stop making fun of "trailer trash"
(aka poor whites who are not liberal,) then start throwing stones.
Sorry to piggy back on you here nobody (and I agree with you).

But I don't get to see who posted the "foxnews beam their feed
directly into jim's head".. probably someone I plonked, but maybe
my news-server being it's normal, excellent self.

I'm 36. I have held my political beliefs for over 20 years. From the
time I was really old enough to start to understand what was going
on in the world.

We didn't get Fox news in this area until the late 90's. IIRC, I got
it on local cable in 1998-1999. I know we had it before the 2000
election.

I remember watching CNN for the Bush Sr and both Clinton
elections and being sick to my stomach of the biased coverage
and glowing love they were all showing for Clinton who was
as fake as a $3 bill.

It's kinda funny how lefties always think that everyone on the right
is a brain dead follower of people like Rush Limbaugh.. Or Fox
News. Funny how I had these same beliefs for decades before I
ever saw Fox. I didn't first listen to Limbaugh until 1993. And
I can't listen to him as much as I used to. I'm not *allowed* to
listen to him at work because whiny lefties complain to the boss
about it. They don't even have the courage to just ask me to
turn it off. They go cry to the boss.

You people just don't get it. Conservative sources of information
only *validate* to us what we already believed. And I do not yield
that Fox is conservatively biased. They are alot more fair and
balanced than either CNN or MSNBC.

While you lefties keep your soul searching going, we are just laughing,
because you don't get it. It's not that you didn't get your message
out, or all that other stuff you keep spinning.

It's because you are wrong, and too stupid to realize it. You are
the brainwashed sheep who follow feel good rhetoric and bumper
sticker slogans. There is virtually no substance to anything you
stand for. People have rejected you for quite some time now
(besides Clinton winning, it goes back to the congressional
election of 1994).

Just keep up your current beliefs and soul searching, because we
love it, and know we will keep winning. I hope you never stop
trying to get your message out louder. It's what costs you more
and more states.
i own a yacht
2004-12-07 22:02:58 UTC
Permalink
And I do not yield that Fox is conservatively biased. They are alot more
fair and balanced than either CNN or MSNBC.
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaha.
Ben Sisson
2004-12-08 04:15:23 UTC
Permalink
A thousand monkeys banging on keyboards posted the following under the
Post by i own a yacht
And I do not yield that Fox is conservatively biased. They are alot more
fair and balanced than either CNN or MSNBC.
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaha.
Yeah that was the end of Jim's credibility in the political arena
right there.
--
"Why stop now, just when I'm hating it?" - Marvin
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 04:50:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ben Sisson
A thousand monkeys banging on keyboards posted the following under the
Post by i own a yacht
And I do not yield that Fox is conservatively biased. They are alot more
fair and balanced than either CNN or MSNBC.
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaha.
Yeah that was the end of Jim's credibility in the political arena
right there.
I've always liked you Ben, even though we've had our little spats
in the past. But sadly, you are in denial on this subject, like most
liberals. I will refrain from speaking politics with you in future,
or talking with you at all, if that is your desire.
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 02:22:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
You people just don't get it. Conservative sources of information
only *validate* to us what we already believed. And I do not yield
that Fox is conservatively biased. They are alot more fair and
balanced than either CNN or MSNBC.
You know, some of your post makes sense, but come on. Fox itself admits to
its bias...sometimes.
Doug Jacobs
2004-12-08 03:07:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
You know, some of your post makes sense, but come on. Fox itself admits to
its bias...sometimes.
They're biased - and d*mn proud of it!

Though their bias isn't so much along political lines, as patriotic ones.
This, IMHO, makes them more dangerous...
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 03:55:34 UTC
Permalink
In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 Leon Dexter
Post by Leon Dexter
You know, some of your post makes sense, but come on. Fox itself admits to
its bias...sometimes.
They're biased - and d*mn proud of it!
Though their bias isn't so much along political lines, as patriotic ones.
This, IMHO, makes them more dangerous...
MSNBC was being rather patriotic as we were invading Iraq.
I saw no shortage of American Flags on any of the big three
networks after 9-11.

I guess it comes down to (as always), what is being covered.
That is what alot of people don't understand when people say
"the liberal media". It's about what they cover and how they cover it.
I think it was the NY Times that was doing endless exposes on the
Abu Graibe thing for a couple weeks straight. As if it was the crime
of the century. We have a dictator that slaughtered millions, and
some American soldiers who were too gung ho and humiliated some
of them. Most American's roll their eyes and say "So the fuck what?"

And they are touting this new leaked CIA info about problems
in the war. But they don't press on the CBS forgery scandal,
or the oil for food scandal. Hardly at all.

Now we have reason to understand why Russia, France and
Germany didn't want us to go in. They had bigtime financial stake
there, and were right in the thick of this thing. And Kofi's own
son was in on it. It stinks to high heaven, and the whole UN is
corrupt.

People want to keep whining about what happened in the past
in Iraq. Like this recent hoopla over these CIA guys leaking
the stuff about the war, et all. That can only be said to be done
to damage the president's credibility and weaken him. In a time
of war no less. You say one side is overly patriotic. I say one
side is completely unpatriotic and bitterly trying to do whatever
they can to make Bush look bad. It's crying over spilled milk.
We are there now, and we should all work together to make it
work, instead of constantly second guessing everything they do
and constantly saying elections will never work, and how it's a
huge quagmire, etc.
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 04:58:55 UTC
Permalink
"Jim Vieira" <***@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote in message news:CVutd.13036$***@twister.rdc-

It stinks to high heaven, and the whole UN is
Post by Jim Vieira
corrupt.
Yes, everyone is corrupt except our own government. I see now.


We are there now, and we should all work together to make it
Post by Jim Vieira
work, instead of constantly second guessing everything they do
and constantly saying elections will never work, and how it's a
huge quagmire, etc.
Hopefully it will all work out for the better--and by that I mean better for
Iraqis--but the means don't justify the ends. We were wrong to invade Iraq,
and handled it poorly to boot. Pointing that out is not unpatriotic. If
our government would learn to admit mistakes, even just to itself, and learn
from those mistakes, the entire world would be better off. We've done it in
the past--our entrance into World War 2 was an admission that our
isolationist policies of the time were wrong. Now we've gone too far toward
the other extreme, and meddle too much all over the world.
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 13:42:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
It stinks to high heaven, and the whole UN is
Post by Jim Vieira
corrupt.
Yes, everyone is corrupt except our own government. I see now.
You are good at inventing strawmen. I never said that. I never
even came close to implying it.

Do you have anything substantive to add, or do you just argue
like all lefties.. ignore the message, and attack the messanger
and his credibility on every chance you can get. In the vain
and foolish belief that it destroys the credibility of the MESSAGE.
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 14:03:24 UTC
Permalink
"Jim Vieira" <***@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote in message
news:QwDtd.128087
Post by Jim Vieira
You are good at inventing strawmen. I never said that. I never
even came close to implying it.
Ok, fair enough. But you did point a lot of fingers, and none of them at
our own government, which meddles more than most.
Post by Jim Vieira
Do you have anything substantive to add, or do you just argue
like all lefties.. ignore the message, and attack the messanger
and his credibility on every chance you can get. In the vain
and foolish belief that it destroys the credibility of the MESSAGE.
There you go again--"all lefties". You love to lump people into groups you
can hate, don't you? What message am I supposed to be receiving from you
that's so important? That French people deserve your hate? That "lefties"
do?
You tried to have some substance in there, but not much. French businesses
had ties to Iraq. Okay. That doesn't justify racism, and it doesn't make
the "entire UN corrupt".
I know you and many other people would really like to believe that we are
always the good guys, but it's simply not true. There are many shades of
grey. Accusing others of wrongdoing is the oldest trick in the book when
you want to appear right. Politicians are great at it. You've been doing
it here. I'm merely playing Devil's Advocate and employing the same tactic
in reverse.
Doug Jacobs
2004-12-08 07:59:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
Post by Doug Jacobs
They're biased - and d*mn proud of it!
Though their bias isn't so much along political lines, as patriotic ones.
This, IMHO, makes them more dangerous...
MSNBC was being rather patriotic as we were invading Iraq.
I saw no shortage of American Flags on any of the big three
networks after 9-11.
Yup, I agree with you there.
Post by Jim Vieira
I guess it comes down to (as always), what is being covered.
I'd say it's a matter of what is - and isn't - being covered.

What I find disturbing is how reclusive the president has been with
regards to press conferences while at the same time, when the press *does*
have a chance to ask questions, they never seem to ask the questions I
would figure they *really* want to ask. This isn't about being liberal or
right-wing - this is about doing your job, and asking the president to be
accountable for his decisions.

Considering all the rules that the administration has imposed on the press
corp, I find it difficult to understand how you can accuse the media of
being "liberal" when the most difficult question they seem allowed to ask
is something like "Are you a Christian, Mr. President?" The foreign media
doesn't feel it has to "play nice" with the president, which is why it
seems that the president gets "nailed" by the press when he goes
overseas. I find it shameful that I have to turn to foreign sources to
find out about my own government.
Post by Jim Vieira
That is what alot of people don't understand when people say
"the liberal media". It's about what they cover and how they cover it.
I think it was the NY Times that was doing endless exposes on the
Abu Graibe thing for a couple weeks straight. As if it was the crime
of the century. We have a dictator that slaughtered millions, and
some American soldiers who were too gung ho and humiliated some
of them. Most American's roll their eyes and say "So the fuck what?"
We had (probably still have) American soliders acting as bad as that
dictator. Are you OK with that? The United States is supposed to be
setting an example for the rest of the world. If *WE* don't take things
like humane treatment of POWs seriously, what makes you think the rest of
the world is going to? Worse still, there were indications that our
military leaders (including, possibly the president) were aware of the
situation, yet took no action. To me, that would make us *worse* than the
dictator. Why? Because the dictator makes no pretense about what he's
doing. But this is supposed to be America. We're supposed to have rules
- AND - we're supposed to follow them.

Crime of the century? No. Damaging to America's reputation and world
image? Definitely. So why didn't the government respond when the first
story was printed? Were they unaware of the stories being printed?
Post by Jim Vieira
And they are touting this new leaked CIA info about problems
in the war. But they don't press on the CBS forgery scandal,
or the oil for food scandal. Hardly at all.
I thought they covered the CBS thing adequately. As new information was
made available, they covered it.

The oil-for-food thing - yes, there wasn't a lot of coverage about that.
Although, at the same time, you had a president yelling about WMDs while
his own intelligence community was raising doubt after doubt these
claims.
Post by Jim Vieira
Now we have reason to understand why Russia, France and
Germany didn't want us to go in. They had bigtime financial stake
there, and were right in the thick of this thing. And Kofi's own
son was in on it. It stinks to high heaven, and the whole UN is
corrupt.
Actually, I remember reading about why Russia, France, and Germany didn't
want us to go into Iraq, and about how they'd been selling equipment to
Iraq for years, etc. This was months before the Iraq war started, mind
you. Yet, that was from the press - not the administration. As far as
the administration was concerned, they were busily telling the world about
how Iraq had purchased uranium from a defunct African dictator. You'd
think that just maybe you would have seen Bush trying to either shame the
various countries into "doing the right thing" or at the least, allowing
them to save face. But instead, he kept on rambling on about WMDs and
what a threat Iraq was to not just the US, but the entire world. This
allowed the other countries to legitimatly speak out against the US' march
to war, while not even dealing with the underlying corruption issue.

And you know the really sad thing? History will look back and say that
yes, France, Germany and Russia were right to oppose the US' war on Iraq
based on the US' claims of WMDs and threats to the world.
Post by Jim Vieira
People want to keep whining about what happened in the past
in Iraq. Like this recent hoopla over these CIA guys leaking
the stuff about the war, et all. That can only be said to be done
to damage the president's credibility and weaken him. In a time
of war no less. You say one side is overly patriotic. I say one
side is completely unpatriotic and bitterly trying to do whatever
they can to make Bush look bad. It's crying over spilled milk.
We are there now, and we should all work together to make it
work, instead of constantly second guessing everything they do
and constantly saying elections will never work, and how it's a
huge quagmire, etc.
The press isn't the one making damaging the president's credibility. Bush
has done a dandy job of doing that all by himself. Tell me - where are
the WMDs that Bush swore Saddam had, or was developing? Where are the
terrorists he was supporting? Why is it that despite the US intelligence
community publishing conclusive evidence that Iraq had no WMDs or links to
terrorist organizations nor was involved with 9/11 our president and
vice-president haven't changed their tune? While no one's asked what the
president intends to do about such problems, recent memos about having the
head of the CIA weed out anyone in the organization who wasn't "loyal to
the administration", followed by a large number of high ranking
resignations seems to indicate an answer... Speaking of CIA leaks, what's
the progress on that investigation about the operative whose cover was
blown seemingly as a political stunt?

The press isn't trying to undermine the president's credibility. When you
have the CIA itself saying that things aren't going well in Iraq, what do
you want the press to do? I guess if you're FOX News, you stick your
fingers in your ears, while repeating how Bush will lead us to victory.
If the press interviews other members in the military - many who are
serving over in Iraq - about their impression of the campaign, and they
don't give a solid thumbs-up, don't you think perhaps the press has a
responsibility to report that? Remember - traditionally, the military has
always backed the president in times of war. Even during the Korean and
Vietnam wars, the military leadership remained optimistic. The fact that
we are hearing about such basic problems such as failing to establish
secure supply lines should really make you wonder if maybe the
administration really knows what it's doing.

Unfortunatly, the press is only supposed to report on the facts and events.
It's not supposed to tell you how to think (something else FOX News has
forgotten.) I don't know which is scarier now a days - reading about what
our government is doing, or the lack of interest by my so-called
countrymen.
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 13:47:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Jacobs
I thought they covered the CBS thing adequately. As new information was
made available, they covered it.
Really, how about an actual investigation into who forged
the documents? I do believe it's a felony to do that. Someone
deliberately set out to create false military documents very shortly
before an election with the obvious intent of costing Bush the
election.

There needs to be one hell of an investigation. Who the hell
made those documents? Why has no one been fired at
CBS? What the fucking hell mate?
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 03:47:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by Jim Vieira
You people just don't get it. Conservative sources of information
only *validate* to us what we already believed. And I do not yield
that Fox is conservatively biased. They are alot more fair and
balanced than either CNN or MSNBC.
You know, some of your post makes sense, but come on. Fox itself admits to
its bias...sometimes.
That's why I said "alot more balanced". I'm not claiming they
are completely fair and balanced. To some of you, they are
completely and utterly biased. But unlike others on my side, I'll
admit they are somewhat biased. Hannity is way stronger than
Combs, no doubt about it. They could have a stronger liberal on
the show. But they do have very diverse guests and I always feel
that they have a fair and vigorous debate. Everyone get's equal
time. I've heard no shortage of cooks and assaults on the
President on Fox.

And they have O'Reilly of course. But Brit Hume is fair, and
always has an even number of liberal vs conservatives in his panels.
Same with Greta. The Fox report with Shepard Smith doesn't strike
me as blatantly biased. It's like any other normal news cast. Rather
boring. And on the weekends they have that media show that has
Cal Thomas on it. Two of those guys on the panel are pretty far
out on the left wing.

I've seen people who are considered strong liberal voices on
Fox quite often. Lanny Davis, Terry McAulife, Susan Estrich,
many liberal columnists and Senators. I haven't ever seen a
Clinton on there. Kerry wouldn't go on there. You guys would
say it's because they think it's biased and wouldn't get a fair
shake. I say it's because they don't want to answer real, tough
questions, instead of softballs that make them look good.

I just don't think it's fair to say they are completely biased
when they do allow people from both sides to discuss an issue.

They may not be perfect. But CNN is far from fair and balanced.
I feel MSNBC is ok, sort of the antithesis of Fox. But CNN is
way out there in la la land.
Darin Johnson
2004-12-08 04:55:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
That's why I said "alot more balanced". I'm not claiming they
are completely fair and balanced. To some of you, they are
completely and utterly biased.
The difference is that FOX tries to be biased, whereas most of
the other mainstream news outlets go out of their way to claim
they're not biased and present both sides to every issue, even
to the point of absurdity. The mainstream media have gotten
to the point where they don't even want to come out and state
the facts, but instead they get a both Republican senator and a
Democratic senator to give their views on the issue as if the
facts are supposed to be subject to spin. It'd be nice to have
some media just step up and say "we've got a liberal bias so
we're just going to report this latest story without asking
the politicians what it means."
--
Darin Johnson
"Floyd here now!"
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 05:01:26 UTC
Permalink
"Jim Vieira" <***@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote in message news:tOutd.13034$***@twister.rdc-


And I do not yield
Post by Jim Vieira
Post by Jim Vieira
that Fox is conservatively biased.
But unlike others on my side, I'll
Post by Jim Vieira
admit they are somewhat biased.
Okay, these two sentences don't mesh, and you wrote them both today. Flip,
flop. Your credibility is kind of shabby at this point, despite the fact
that (like I said before) some of the stuff you wrote made sense. How am I
supposed to believe that YOU believe the stuff you're writing?
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 13:45:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
And I do not yield
Post by Jim Vieira
Post by Jim Vieira
that Fox is conservatively biased.
But unlike others on my side, I'll
Post by Jim Vieira
admit they are somewhat biased.
Okay, these two sentences don't mesh, and you wrote them both today.
Flip,
Post by Jim Vieira
flop. Your credibility is kind of shabby at this point, despite the fact
that (like I said before) some of the stuff you wrote made sense. How am I
supposed to believe that YOU believe the stuff you're writing?
I simply didn't word it well enough. For crying out loud, those
sentences were just a few lines apart. I think you even cut it a bit
there. I don't feel like going back and looking, but you should know
what the hell I meant. Again, there you are, attacking me personally
and completely ignoring what I said.

I yeild they have conservative leanings. It's just that in the context
I was speaking at that point, I meant to say that I do not yeild that
they are completely and utterly right wing biased. I see many
conservatives that swear up and down Fox is completely fair
and balanced. I say they are, for the most part, but admit that
they have stronger conservative voices than liberals. But as I
pointed out, they are very fair in presenting people from both
sides (even on O'Reilly). I think you don't even watch it at all,
and just keep drinking the kool-aid your side hands out.
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 13:55:02 UTC
Permalink
"Jim Vieira" <***@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote in message
news:MzDtd.128088
Post by Jim Vieira
I simply didn't word it well enough. For crying out loud, those
sentences were just a few lines apart. I think you even cut it a bit
there. I don't feel like going back and looking, but you should know
what the hell I meant. Again, there you are, attacking me personally
and completely ignoring what I said.
No, they were not a few lines apart. They were in two separate posts. In
the first, you said one thing, then you said the exact opposite. Yes, I
know you said they were "more fair" than MSNBC right after that, but that
doesn't change what you wrote. I'm not "attacking you personally", I'm
merely quoting you to show that you don't even pay attention to what you're
saying.
Post by Jim Vieira
I yeild they have conservative leanings. It's just that in the context
I was speaking at that point, I meant to say that I do not yeild that
they are completely and utterly right wing biased. I see many
conservatives that swear up and down Fox is completely fair
and balanced. I say they are, for the most part, but admit that
they have stronger conservative voices than liberals. But as I
pointed out, they are very fair in presenting people from both
sides (even on O'Reilly). I think you don't even watch it at all,
and just keep drinking the kool-aid your side hands out.
I don't watch TV at all. I don't have it. I read my news, if you must
know, on yahoo.com, because they print stories from several other sites and
publications.
i own a yacht
2004-12-08 14:06:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
No, they were not a few lines apart. They were in two separate posts. In
the first, you said one thing, then you said the exact opposite. Yes, I
know you said they were "more fair" than MSNBC right after that, but that
doesn't change what you wrote. I'm not "attacking you personally", I'm
merely quoting you to show that you don't even pay attention to what you're
saying.
obviously he doesn't pay attention, since he quite easily bleated out
foxnews's very own slogan "fair and balanced" in defense of them without
even batting an eyelid. i mean, that was too precious.
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 21:20:03 UTC
Permalink
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action Leon Dexter
Post by Leon Dexter
No, they were not a few lines apart. They were in two separate posts.
In
Post by Leon Dexter
the first, you said one thing, then you said the exact opposite. Yes, I
know you said they were "more fair" than MSNBC right after that, but that
doesn't change what you wrote. I'm not "attacking you personally", I'm
merely quoting you to show that you don't even pay attention to what you're
saying.
obviously he doesn't pay attention, since he quite easily bleated out
foxnews's very own slogan "fair and balanced" in defense of them without
even batting an eyelid. i mean, that was too precious.
I explained what I meant. I'll admit I didn't pay very close attention,
but I did not mean what you guys thought I meant.

If I apologize for ranting (and calling you an idiot a few days ago),
will you cut me some slack?

As I pointed out a few messages back, I have felt and believed
the things I believe in since I was 16, over 20 years. Fox news
doesn't "brainwash" me. I don't even watch it that much.

During the election I was watching MSNBC believe it or not,
because I found it more interesting than Brit & company. And
I was suprised to see it got such a low rating (MSNBC).

But I do think that those of you that loathe Fox as being completely
biased miss the mark. I have stressed a few times now how they
always have an even number of left/right wing panel types in their
discussions. I have seen people like Terry McAulife, James Carville,
Lanny Davis, Susan Estrich... Do these people not represent your
side pretty well? Are you arguing they don't get fair amounts of
time? I really have to ask, how often do you guys even watch
Fox news?

To Leon, I have not seen your post above yet (my newsfeed
sucks). I feel you are personally attacking me because you
didn't get into any of the substance of what I said. Nor did
Ben and some others. Just snip and cut and pick away at
mis-statements and insinuate I was ignorant of Politics because
I said Fox news was more fair and balanced than CNN.

You know what? I'll give you this.. Maybe because of BOTH
of our own biases, we can't see the bias on our side. CNN seems
fair to you, because it represents your views more. Fox seems
more fair to me, because it represents my views more (at least
in so far as O'Reilly and Hannity). But Brit Hume has a very
fair program. And the Fox report with Shepard Smith doesn't
strike me as wildly different than any other newscast.

Fox also spent alot of time on the forged Documents thing,
and the missing explosives. O'Reilly is not universally in
praise of Bush. I've disagreed with him many a time.. It
seems to me that he is trying harder to be more in the
center these days.

I apologize for my rants, I'm pretty much ready to give up
on usenet altogether (hold the applause please). There
just isn't much point in trying to convince each other we
are wrong when it'll never happen. I guess I was arrogant
enough to think I could change peoples minds. And I
was in a bad mood and was overly obnoxious.

Darin Johnson
2004-12-08 04:49:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
You know, some of your post makes sense, but come on. Fox itself admits to
its bias...sometimes.
It's their whole reason for being. They explicitly want to be biased
on the right precisely to counteract what what they see as bias on the
left.
--
Darin Johnson
I'm not a well adjusted person, but I play one on the net.
Doug Jacobs
2004-12-08 08:04:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Darin Johnson
It's their whole reason for being. They explicitly want to be biased
on the right precisely to counteract what what they see as bias on the
left.
And what, exactly, is this bias on the left? Where is this liberal
version of FOX? It seems more and more to me that anyone that dares try
to bring up legitimate questions about the president and his decisions is
immediatly branded as "liberal" and therefore belonging to the "liberal
media".
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 02:19:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by nobody
And CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/MSNBC beam directly into your tiny brain - man - that
Gactimus is right, you guys are becoming unglued - yeah, racism because he
made fun of the French - when libs/dems stop making fun of "trailer trash"
(aka poor whites who are not liberal,) then start throwing stones.
Find a post of me making fun of "trailer trash". I dare you. I called him
on his stupid comment about the French--one of our staunchest allies for
hundreds of years--and somehow I'M the bad guy? Sure. That's great logic.
By the way, I spent about half my childhood in a trailer park.
Gactimus
2004-12-08 02:23:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by nobody
And CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/MSNBC beam directly into your tiny brain - man -
that Gactimus is right, you guys are becoming unglued - yeah, racism
because he made fun of the French - when libs/dems stop making fun of
"trailer trash" (aka poor whites who are not liberal,) then start
throwing stones.
Find a post of me making fun of "trailer trash". I dare you. I called
him on his stupid comment about the French--one of our staunchest allies
for hundreds of years
Bullshit. The French haven't done a thing for us since the 1700s. Lately,
all they've done is try to undermine us at every turn including taking
bribes from our enemies and giving them our secrets. France is not our ally.
James Garvin
2004-12-08 17:20:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Bullshit. The French haven't done a thing for us since the 1700s. Lately,
all they've done is try to undermine us at every turn including taking
bribes from our enemies and giving them our secrets. France is not our ally.
And after all the women we knocked up in France during WWII! ;-)
Doug Jacobs
2004-12-08 03:14:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Find a post of me making fun of "trailer trash". I dare you. I called him
on his stupid comment about the French--one of our staunchest allies for
hundreds of years--and somehow I'M the bad guy? Sure. That's great logic.
Bush made it politically correct (if not required) to hate the French
since 2003. Facts have no place in our political system anymore - much
less a basic understanding of American history... :(

I can still remember reading about pro-war/anti-French protestors marching
into wine stores, buying French wine, and then pouring it down the drain
in defiance. Meanwhile, French's Mustard company did a press release
emphatically explaining that they were NOT a French product, but that
their brand was named after their founder whose family name was "French".

It's times like those that really makes the proud American in me go
"WTF?!?"
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 04:05:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Jacobs
Post by Leon Dexter
Find a post of me making fun of "trailer trash". I dare you. I called him
on his stupid comment about the French--one of our staunchest allies for
hundreds of years--and somehow I'M the bad guy? Sure. That's great logic.
Bush made it politically correct (if not required) to hate the French
since 2003. Facts have no place in our political system anymore - much
less a basic understanding of American history... :(
I have disliked the French for at least 10 years. They are snooty,
arrogant, elitist pricks. Just like most people on the left.. who live
in their little ivory towers and are not exposed to the real world
enough anymore. They don't really understand the things real
people go through every day with overbearing regulations and
taxes. They are too busy looking down their nose at everyone
else. Look at all this red state blue state bullshit. There were
alot of people in both types of states who voted the other way.
The over-all numbers show that it was alot closer than that.

But the left is making endless attacks on the red states and just
digging themselves even deeper in the whole. There are several
conservatives who use the phrase "uncommon common sense".
And it makes sense to me, becuase whenever I hear a liberal
position on anything, it always strikes me as exactly the opposite
of what we SHOULD do. And I see them all stick together and
tow the party line, even in the face of utter defeat.

I keep thinking one day, after these defeats, the left will start
to really soul search about some of the bullshit they stand for
and have the courage to realize they are wrong and try to
come back to the mainstream. All I ever see though is more
and more bitterness and insults from them, every day, about
how it's just that we aren't getting their message.

We are getting it loud and clear, and rejecting it. Don't get
too enthused by the large number of votes Kerry even did
get. Many people voted out of hatred for Bush moreso than
a strong belief in Liberalism. This country is far more
conservative than Liberal.

I know you guys hate the religious nuts and I do too. Both
sides have people they are ashamed to be affiliated with.
But I would never make as big of a fuss over it as you guys
do because I realize a time will come when it'll die away. It
has to, eventually, as technology advances and we move
more and more into the future.. more and more people will
reject it because it's ridiculous. And I see that religion is
a strong part of many peoples lives. It would destroy their
world to take it from them. If they aren't bothering me, I
don't care what they do.
Post by Doug Jacobs
I can still remember reading about pro-war/anti-French protestors marching
into wine stores, buying French wine, and then pouring it down the drain
in defiance.
That was over the top and silly. I don't support any of that. I
take my shots at the French. But I don't go that far.
Post by Doug Jacobs
Meanwhile, French's Mustard company did a press release
emphatically explaining that they were NOT a French product, but that
their brand was named after their founder whose family name was "French".
It's times like those that really makes the proud American in me go
"WTF?!?"
People were bitter about the whole French thing. I think it's understandable
because they are unsufferable arrogant pricks. And now we are learning
more and more about their ties to Sadam and the oil for food scandal.

When is your side going to realize that there was obviously a reason these
guys were against us.. other than because we were somehow wrong.
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 04:50:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
I have disliked the French for at least 10 years. They are snooty,
arrogant, elitist pricks. Just like most people on the left.. who live
in their little ivory towers and are not exposed to the real world
enough anymore.
Someone explain to me again how I was wrong to call this guy a racist?
Anyone who can call an entire race of people what he just did is a racist.


And I've snipped the nice, long rant against "the left". You're a bigot,
too. Congratulations.
Gactimus
2004-12-08 04:46:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by Jim Vieira
I have disliked the French for at least 10 years. They are snooty,
arrogant, elitist pricks. Just like most people on the left.. who live
in their little ivory towers and are not exposed to the real world
enough anymore.
Someone explain to me again how I was wrong to call this guy a racist?
Anyone who can call an entire race of people what he just did is a racist.
And I've snipped the nice, long rant against "the left". You're a
bigot, too. Congratulations.
How is the truth racist or bigoted?
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 05:07:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
How is the truth racist or bigoted?
"The French are pricks" is a racist statement, and it's no more 'true' than
saying "The French are fat". Some are, some are not.
You know what? I can't believe I'm trying to explain this. It's such a
basic truth, and you obviously know it and enjoy acting ignorant.
Babe Bridou
2004-12-08 07:23:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
You know what? I can't believe I'm trying to explain this. It's such a
basic truth, and you obviously know it and enjoy acting ignorant.
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=author:gactimus

Professional troll.
Doug Jacobs
2004-12-08 08:08:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
"The French are pricks" is a racist statement, and it's no more 'true' than
saying "The French are fat". Some are, some are not.
You know what? I can't believe I'm trying to explain this. It's such a
basic truth, and you obviously know it and enjoy acting ignorant.
You're arguing with gactimus - a troll who will take *any* position, no
matter how outlandishly wrong it may be - just so he can earn "points" by
getting people to crosspost to alt.spacebastards. He'd argue that the sun
is made of swiss cheese, if he felt that he could get a good pointless
argument going from it.
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 13:40:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
"The French are pricks" is a racist statement, and it's no more 'true' than
saying "The French are fat". Some are, some are not.
You know what? I can't believe I'm trying to explain this. It's such a
basic truth, and you obviously know it and enjoy acting ignorant.
You obviously have no real clue what racist or bigot means, and
enjoy arguing.
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 13:53:38 UTC
Permalink
Actually, I take it back, I will not killfile you yet, since I just
got done responding to quite a few messages. But you are
getting on my nerves. If you want to talk some specific
policy or action, etc, I'm all ears. If you are just going
to (incorrectly) label me as a bigot and racist for rather
unimpressive insults, I'm not going to continue.

For crying out loud. I think alot of American's are
snotty, arrogant, unsuferable asses. Does that make
me racist too? Do you realize how stupid that point
was? And I have no clue where the bigot thing
came from.

I just get so fed up with lefties who snip away everything
you said of substance, and ignore it all, and then throw out
endless personal attacks. It's like right out of your playbook.

Attack the messenger, not the message. It just never ends.
I never see a good, final conclusion to any debate on a subject
between right and left... It always comes down to us being
called racist, homophobic bible thumping dick heads who
aren't smart enough to think for ourselves or worthy of kissing
your asses.

Meanwhile, we hear and see that, and realize that it just proves
the truth hurts, and you have nowhere else to go but to try to
destroy our credibility. Our side has the right answer/position
on virtually all important topics. It's time you come to grips
with that. But frankly, I doubt you ever will. Your side is
just 180 degrees ass backards in what it thinks is right and
wrong and how things should be done.

Got any other personal insults for me chap?
Babe Bridou
2004-12-08 14:14:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
Actually, I take it back, I will not killfile you yet, since I just
got done responding to quite a few messages. But you are
getting on my nerves. If you want to talk some specific
policy or action, etc, I'm all ears. If you are just going
to (incorrectly) label me as a bigot and racist for rather
unimpressive insults, I'm not going to continue.
For crying out loud. I think alot of American's are
snotty, arrogant, unsuferable asses. Does that make
me racist too? Do you realize how stupid that point
was? And I have no clue where the bigot thing
came from.
me neither.
Post by Jim Vieira
I just get so fed up with lefties who snip away everything
you said of substance, and ignore it all, and then throw out
endless personal attacks. It's like right out of your playbook.
Yeah, that must be hard to bear. Imagine a french guy lurking in this
thread (me) :)

The rest of your post is so true I have to snip it :P So here goes: "<snip>"

It's generally all about temper and nerves; you lost yours on your
couple last posts because of the bigot accusation, which was the
consequence of the guy losing his nerves in the first place. It's a
shame nothing can come out of a troll post. Those posts are definitely
rightful questions in this world.
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 14:21:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
Actually, I take it back, I will not killfile you yet, since I just
got done responding to quite a few messages. But you are
getting on my nerves. If you want to talk some specific
policy or action, etc, I'm all ears. If you are just going
to (incorrectly) label me as a bigot and racist for rather
unimpressive insults, I'm not going to continue.
Sorry--what was your great message again? If I recall, this thread started
as a Pac-Man joke. Then you stepped out of nowhere with a subtle taunt
against the French, and vindicated my question as to whether you are racist
very nicely.
Post by Jim Vieira
For crying out loud. I think alot of American's are
snotty, arrogant, unsuferable asses.
You didn't say "a lot" anytime before now.
Post by Jim Vieira
Got any other personal insults for me chap?
No. I have to go to work. Please put me in your killfile now. Thanks.
Gactimus
2004-12-08 17:19:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by Jim Vieira
Actually, I take it back, I will not killfile you yet, since I just
got done responding to quite a few messages. But you are
getting on my nerves. If you want to talk some specific
policy or action, etc, I'm all ears. If you are just going
to (incorrectly) label me as a bigot and racist for rather
unimpressive insults, I'm not going to continue.
Sorry--what was your great message again? If I recall, this thread
started as a Pac-Man joke. Then you stepped out of nowhere with a
subtle taunt against the French, and vindicated my question as to
whether you are racist very nicely.
Sounds like we've got a bonifide francophone here.

Freak.
Babe Bridou
2004-12-08 17:30:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Freak.
pticon.
nobody
2004-12-08 16:21:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by Gactimus
How is the truth racist or bigoted?
"The French are pricks" is a racist statement, and it's no more 'true' than
saying "The French are fat". Some are, some are not.
You know what? I can't believe I'm trying to explain this. It's such a
basic truth, and you obviously know it and enjoy acting ignorant.
The French are pricks is a generalization based on anger over french actions
AS A NATION - not meant to single out individual frenchmen, people throwing
away French's mustard was a joke, and renaming French Fries was a bit of fun
that hurt liberals to their bleeding hearts for some reason. Why can't they
see that? Good question. I'd say it's more ethnocentrism to dis the French,
buy YMMV.



The good question would be why is (by your definition) racism of other
nations in their seeming hatred of the US is justified? If the Canadians say
some idiotic remark about the US do you in your core say good for them, or
say, those Canadians are assholes? Very few would say that individual is not
indicative of Canada as a whole, why are they putting them on television?
Some might thing there is a bias in the press, seeing individuals, seemingly
representative of their nation, ripping into the US night after night. But
would that be good reporting, or a bias against the current administration?
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 13:39:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Someone explain to me again how I was wrong to call this guy a racist?
Anyone who can call an entire race of people what he just did is a racist.
*rolls eyes*

The French are not a race. How conviently the left always
forgets the difference between race and nationality.

And what I said isn't close to qualifying for such outrageous
sentiments on your part.

I called them snooty and elitist. Wow, get a rope and hang
me right now. I didn't say that they all smell like crap and
have hairy armpits, or call them intellectually inferior, or
imply anything related to their actual customs, traditions,
or nationality.

For as long as I can remember, every time I have either
interacted with a Frenchman, or seen one on TV, they
are snooty, arrogant pricks who think of the US (and
even England) as grotty little backwards countries
nowhere near the sophisitaction of their own great
country.

I have absolutley zero respect for the French. I laugh
in the face of their "superiority". It's actuallly an
inferiority complex. They used to be one of the most
powerful nations on earth. Now they are not, and they
are jealous.

You are French, aren't you... That is the only logical
explanation for your bending over backwards to be
offended by what I am saying. Funny, the French
can call all American's cowboys and idiots and backwards
losers. Isn't that "racist" too? Oh wait, that's right, it's
not racist either. But isn't that just as bad as what I said?

Wow, I called them elitist snobs. I may never get over
the can of whoopass you opened up on me in this post.

Anyhow, I've had enough of you. I really don't like to
respond to posts beyond my initial post. I say what
I want and then leave it at that for others to respond, in
a debate like fashion, because I have little time to engage
in endless flame wars. I usually only respond if it's
something outrageous like what you have been saying.
Otherwise I'm content to let my original comments stand
on their own.
Post by Leon Dexter
And I've snipped the nice, long rant against "the left". You're a bigot,
too. Congratulations.
My rant against the left makes me a "bigot"? You are one
confused person son. You don't even understand the terms
you are throwing around. I demonstrated no racism or
bigotry whatsoever. Get a clue. In the mean time, I am
sad to say that I'm forced to put you in my killfile, for fear
that I may waste even more time arguing a futile fight with
a deaf and blind sheep who will never, ever come to my way
of thinking.

Good luck in the future son.

Jim
Babe Bridou
2004-12-08 14:02:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
*rolls eyes*
<snips>

According to you,

I am :
_snooty
_elitist
_arrogant
_a prick

...and my thoughts are:
_that the US is a grotty little backward country nowhere near the
sophistication of the great country that is France
_that the same applies to England
_that an american is a cowboy
_that an american is an idiot
_that an american is a backward loser

I'm sure there's a mistake somewhere.
Jim Vieira
2004-12-08 21:08:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Babe Bridou
Post by Jim Vieira
*rolls eyes*
<snips>
According to you,
_snooty
_elitist
_arrogant
_a prick
_that the US is a grotty little backward country nowhere near the
sophistication of the great country that is France
_that the same applies to England
_that an american is a cowboy
_that an american is an idiot
_that an american is a backward loser
I'm sure there's a mistake somewhere.
I should not have generalized as such.

I'll conceed that maybe you don't get a fair enough shake in
our country. I only know what I've been exposed to. And
alot of what I described is what I have seen.

Let me try to end this whole thing and just apologize to you
and all French people. It all started just because I was trying
to make a joke, which failed utterly. I then went off on a
rant. I am a manic depressive person so I am very often one
to fall into massive mood swings and rants.

Today I feel more calm and centered, and regret alot of what
I said last night. I realize it's the wrong way to go about things,
as far as bringing people together, by being so obnoxious.

I apologize to you, and Leon, and everyone else, for my
rants. I'd rather not get involved and have tried to steer
clear of the very heated political discussions. But I just
was trying to make a joke and then got defensive and
argued more than I should have.
Leon Dexter
2004-12-08 14:17:08 UTC
Permalink
"Jim Vieira" <***@wiDOT.rrDOT.com> wrote in message
news:quDtd.128085
Post by Jim Vieira
The French are not a race. How conviently the left always
forgets the difference between race and nationality.
Yes, they are. Here, educate yourself--from the Merriam-Webster dictionary,
or go look it up yourself.

2 a : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock b : a
class or kind of people unified by community of interests, habits, or
characteristics <the English race>
Post by Jim Vieira
I called them snooty and elitist.
You called ALL of them that. You fit the definition the the letter.
Post by Jim Vieira
For as long as I can remember, every time I have either
interacted with a Frenchman, or seen one on TV, they
are snooty, arrogant pricks
There, you're improving. At least you're talking about your own experience
now. I never said every Frenchman you've met wasn't an asshole--maybe they
were. Or maybe your perceptions are skewed.
Post by Jim Vieira
You are French, aren't you... That is the only logical
explanation for your bending over backwards to be
offended by what I am saying.
No, I'm not French. Look around, I'm always willing to confront shit like
this. I hate racism. I deal with people on an individual basis as much as
possible. And I've yet to come across a race, region, or culture that
doesn't have decent, honorable people and complete asses, and everything in
between.
Post by Jim Vieira
Anyhow, I've had enough of you. I really don't like to
respond to posts beyond my initial post.
Great. I'm sure everyone reading has had enough of your sick mind.
Post by Jim Vieira
My rant against the left makes me a "bigot"? You are one
confused person son. You don't even understand the terms
you are throwing around.
Here you go, you ignorant soul:

: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions
and prejudices

You fit the textbook description exactly. Congratulations.
Darin Johnson
2004-12-08 05:01:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Vieira
People were bitter about the whole French thing. I think it's understandable
because they are unsufferable arrogant pricks.
Which is exactly what the French say about us. Er, not quite.
The French will say that it's only our government that are arrogant
pricks but that the American citizens can't be universally disliked
for what their government does. And I'd have to agree - our
government has a long history of being unsufferable and arrogant
in foreign policy.
--
Darin Johnson
I'm not a well adjusted person, but I play one on the net.
James Garvin
2004-12-08 17:21:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Jacobs
Post by Leon Dexter
Find a post of me making fun of "trailer trash". I dare you. I called him
on his stupid comment about the French--one of our staunchest allies for
hundreds of years--and somehow I'M the bad guy? Sure. That's great logic.
Bush made it politically correct (if not required) to hate the French
since 2003. Facts have no place in our political system anymore - much
less a basic understanding of American history... :(
I can still remember reading about pro-war/anti-French protestors marching
into wine stores, buying French wine, and then pouring it down the drain
in defiance. Meanwhile, French's Mustard company did a press release
emphatically explaining that they were NOT a French product, but that
their brand was named after their founder whose family name was "French".
It's times like those that really makes the proud American in me go
"WTF?!?"
FREEDOM FRIES!!!!!!!!
/William Wallace
Babe Bridou
2004-12-08 17:26:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Garvin
FREEDOM FRIES!!!!!!!!
/William Wallace
...which is actually a specialty from Belgium.
Keith Schiffner
2004-12-08 17:31:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Babe Bridou
Post by James Garvin
FREEDOM FRIES!!!!!!!!
/William Wallace
...which is actually a specialty from Belgium.
and if you want to eat them they way were meant to be
eaten...you use Mayonnaise NOT catsup. Oh the emotional
angst I suffered when I learned that for over 30 years I'd
been eating my fries improperly!
--
Nefarious Necrologist 42nd Degree
Some people ride, some just like to show off their butt
jewelry once in a while.
Dum vivimus, vivamus
<:(3 )3~~ <:(3 )3~~ <:(3 )3~ <:(3 )3~
<:(3 )~ <:(3 )~
Lynley James
2004-12-08 17:38:56 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 10:31:31 -0700, "Keith Schiffner"
Post by Keith Schiffner
Post by Babe Bridou
Post by James Garvin
FREEDOM FRIES!!!!!!!!
/William Wallace
...which is actually a specialty from Belgium.
and if you want to eat them they way were meant to be
eaten...you use Mayonnaise NOT catsup. Oh the emotional
angst I suffered when I learned that for over 30 years I'd
been eating my fries improperly!
When I was first told to give mayo on chips a try I was sceptical, but
it is much better than catsup/tomato sauce.

Lynley
Babe Bridou
2004-12-08 17:42:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith Schiffner
Post by Babe Bridou
Post by James Garvin
FREEDOM FRIES!!!!!!!!
/William Wallace
...which is actually a specialty from Belgium.
and if you want to eat them they way were meant to be
eaten...you use Mayonnaise NOT catsup. Oh the emotional
angst I suffered when I learned that for over 30 years I'd
been eating my fries improperly!
You probably get the most of your fr/fries when you eat them with a big
casserole of mussels...
Keith Schiffner
2004-12-08 20:42:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Babe Bridou
Post by Keith Schiffner
Post by Babe Bridou
Post by James Garvin
FREEDOM FRIES!!!!!!!!
/William Wallace
...which is actually a specialty from Belgium.
and if you want to eat them they way were meant to be
eaten...you use Mayonnaise NOT catsup. Oh the emotional
angst I suffered when I learned that for over 30 years
I'd been eating my fries improperly!
You probably get the most of your fr/fries when you eat
them with a big casserole of mussels...
Not really. I prefer them with a bit of Halibut or Cod and a
Half Dozen fried oysters. Not anymore though...Google
"Browning, MT" No more fresh QUALITY seafood for me. It's a
shame that even if you can cook it just like the shop it's
never "Quiet as good as theirs" IYKWIM. The wife calls it
the "Sandwich effect" you can make a good one. BUT the one
you buy or someone makes for you is always better.<Shrugs> I
can't explain it so it must be magic.
--
Nefarious Necrologist 42nd Degree
Some people ride, some just like to show off their butt
jewelry once in a while.
Dum vivimus, vivamus
<:(3 )3~~ <:(3 )3~~ <:(3 )3~ <:(3 )3~
<:(3 )~ <:(3 )~
James Garvin
2004-12-08 17:52:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Keith Schiffner
Post by Babe Bridou
Post by James Garvin
FREEDOM FRIES!!!!!!!!
/William Wallace
...which is actually a specialty from Belgium.
and if you want to eat them they way were meant to be
eaten...you use Mayonnaise NOT catsup. Oh the emotional
angst I suffered when I learned that for over 30 years I'd
been eating my fries improperly!
The mayo in Europe is very different from American mayo (IMHO). I quite
enjoyed my time over there and found that mayo with fries is quite good
(though not American mayo).

I also like mustard with fries (is that a Bavarian thing only?)
James Garvin
2004-12-08 17:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Babe Bridou
Post by James Garvin
FREEDOM FRIES!!!!!!!!
/William Wallace
...which is actually a specialty from Belgium.
mmmmmmm....Belgium waffles.
nobody
2004-12-08 15:55:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by nobody
And CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN/MSNBC beam directly into your tiny brain - man - that
Gactimus is right, you guys are becoming unglued - yeah, racism because he
made fun of the French - when libs/dems stop making fun of "trailer trash"
(aka poor whites who are not liberal,) then start throwing stones.
Find a post of me making fun of "trailer trash". I dare you. I called him
on his stupid comment about the French--one of our staunchest allies for
hundreds of years--and somehow I'M the bad guy? Sure. That's great logic.
By the way, I spent about half my childhood in a trailer park.
I never said you did - I'm saying the libs are saying they stand up for the
little guy, but have a field day with poor whites, trailer park people, with
rural folk. This is a problem with people who are so quick to yell racism,
classism, whatever, but don't want a light shined in their back yard.

They won't defend CBS/NBC/ABC/MSNBC/NYTimes/Etc for being liberal, they'll
attack FOX for seeing a gap in the market and making a killing (aka they are
conservative.) Oh well, more money for Fox and less money for liberal
causes/donations to liberal politicians through studio executives, honchos,
and their drug dealers.
stePH
2004-12-07 15:17:36 UTC
Permalink
[snip xpost to alt.spacebastards]
Post by Leon Dexter
Wow, you sound hostile. I guess you're a politician, then? Can't take a
joke? Or are you just racist? What do you know about the French, other
than that it's politically correct to dislike them at the moment?
Is that why my wife and I can never find French crullers when we look
for donuts at the supermarket?


stePH
--
d00d, where's my sig?
Gactimus
2004-12-07 18:17:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by Jim Vieira
How about a nationwide lottery. Or maybe a big Texas Holdem
tournament. Maybe we could have a Frenchman run his finger through a
phone book and pick someone.
Wow, you sound hostile. I guess you're a politician, then? Can't take
a joke? Or are you just racist? What do you know about the French,
other than that it's politically correct to dislike them at the moment?
It's always been correct to dislike the French. They are are a useless
ally who hasn't helped us since the 1700s and they sometimes even work to
thwart us.
Jim Vieira
2004-12-07 19:59:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
Post by Jim Vieira
How about a nationwide lottery. Or maybe a big Texas Holdem tournament.
Maybe we could have a Frenchman run his finger through a phone book and
pick someone.
Wow, you sound hostile. I guess you're a politician, then? Can't take a
joke? Or are you just racist? What do you know about the French, other
than that it's politically correct to dislike them at the moment? Maybe we
should tear down the Statue of Liberty, eh? She's French, you know.
Hostile? No, you are just defensive. *I* was just trying to crack a
joke. Since so many people are beholden to the French and their
opinion on everything. I thought maybe some would like to let
one of them pick our next president.

Relax buddy.
Crackers
2004-12-07 20:24:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon Dexter
No, man, people who are that good at Pac-Man probably don't want to be
President (and who in their right mind would?), and some of them are...you
know...not socially functional.
Yeah, like being socially inept has ever stopped anyone from being President
*cough*nixon*cough*.

Crackers
--
Ghastly's Ghastly Comic
http://ghastlycomic.com
Paul Angstrom
2004-12-07 07:00:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crackers
No seriously guys. Pac Man tournament, winner gets to be president. Everyone
supplies their own quarter. No more corporations buying political influence.
Everyone gets a shot at being President.
Hell, screw all that, just make Pac Man himself President for Life.
What's wrong with that? Pac Man was once named Man of the Year.
See http://www.atari-spielanleitungen.de/pacmantelespiele.html
Crackers
2004-12-07 20:34:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Angstrom
What's wrong with that? Pac Man was once named Man of the Year.
See http://www.atari-spielanleitungen.de/pacmantelespiele.html
Yeah, but so was Hitler.

Oh well. The US may not have gotten Pac Man for President, but it seems they
did get Donkey Kong Jr.

Crackers
--
Ghastly's Ghastly Comic
http://ghastlycomic.com
Doug Jacobs
2004-12-07 22:59:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crackers
Yeah, but so was Hitler.
Careful there...don't want to invoke godwin.
Post by Crackers
Oh well. The US may not have gotten Pac Man for President, but it seems they
did get Donkey Kong Jr.
Hey now, at least Donkey Kong Jr. is a hero.
Post by Crackers
--
Ghastly's Ghastly Comic
http://ghastlycomic.com
Gactimus
2004-12-08 00:07:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Jacobs
Post by Crackers
Yeah, but so was Hitler.
Careful there...don't want to invoke godwin.
Godwin's Law is for cowards.
Crackers
2004-12-08 04:35:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by Doug Jacobs
Post by Crackers
Yeah, but so was Hitler.
Careful there...don't want to invoke godwin.
Godwin's Law is for cowards.
And Nazis... Nazi ghosts that chase pellet gobblers through mazes... to 80s
music.


Crackers
--
Ghastly's Ghastly Comic
http://ghastlycomic.com
James Garvin
2004-12-08 17:13:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gactimus
Post by Doug Jacobs
Post by Crackers
Yeah, but so was Hitler.
Careful there...don't want to invoke godwin.
Godwin's Law is for cowards.
And Godwins
James Garvin
2004-12-08 17:03:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Jacobs
Post by Crackers
Yeah, but so was Hitler.
Careful there...don't want to invoke godwin.
Post by Crackers
Oh well. The US may not have gotten Pac Man for President, but it seems they
did get Donkey Kong Jr.
Hey now, at least Donkey Kong Jr. is a hero.
Na...Donkey Kong Jr. is in bad shape. After his short fame in the 80's,
he turned to drugs. When Danna Plato ODed, it was rumored that DKjr was
there...After that he fell deeper into drugs and finally killed a clerk
at a 7/11 so he could buy a crack rock.

Currently he is serving 14-life in a state pen.
Bateau
2004-12-08 13:36:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crackers
No seriously guys. Pac Man tournament, winner gets to be president. Everyone
supplies their own quarter. No more corporations buying political influence.
Everyone gets a shot at being President.
Hell, screw all that, just make Pac Man himself President for Life.
Crackers
It would never get past the Illuminati.
Loading...