Upcoming war with Iran.
-
Good enough. Hopefully we are here in 10 years and we can discuss with the luxury of knowing the outcome. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
Still hanging out in the Soapbox in ten years...there's a sobering thought.
-
Of course, if Clinton had spent more time doing his job than getting his dick sucked by young interns, maybe he could have nipped all of this in the bud before it came to the state we are in now. Thank God for George W. Bush. "You get that which you tolerate"
From what I understand, he was in the office, doing his job (on the phone, specifically), and eating pizza at 3 AM while getting his dick sucked. That is a level of dedication -- not to mention multitasking -- that I doubt we'll ever see from the illiterate, inarticulate, incompetent, corrupt, draft-dodging, election-stealing, war-mongering fake shit-kicker we currently have in office.
-
From what I understand, he was in the office, doing his job (on the phone, specifically), and eating pizza at 3 AM while getting his dick sucked. That is a level of dedication -- not to mention multitasking -- that I doubt we'll ever see from the illiterate, inarticulate, incompetent, corrupt, draft-dodging, election-stealing, war-mongering fake shit-kicker we currently have in office.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
the illiterate, inarticulate, incompetent, corrupt, draft-dodging, election-stealing, war-mongering fake shit-kicker we currently have in office
You know, personally, I don't like the guy... but damn. :omg: -J
Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect
-
From what I understand, he was in the office, doing his job (on the phone, specifically), and eating pizza at 3 AM while getting his dick sucked. That is a level of dedication -- not to mention multitasking -- that I doubt we'll ever see from the illiterate, inarticulate, incompetent, corrupt, draft-dodging, election-stealing, war-mongering fake shit-kicker we currently have in office.
Ok V, I have to call you on this rant.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
that I doubt we'll ever see from the illiterate
He graduated from Yale.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
inarticulate
Ok, your getting close.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
corrupt
How so?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
draft-dodging
When did he dodge the draft?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
election-stealing
What election did he steal? Is there even a shread of evidence of this? My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
-
Ok V, I have to call you on this rant.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
that I doubt we'll ever see from the illiterate
He graduated from Yale.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
inarticulate
Ok, your getting close.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
corrupt
How so?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
draft-dodging
When did he dodge the draft?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
election-stealing
What election did he steal? Is there even a shread of evidence of this? My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
kgaddy wrote:
He graduated from Yale.
And yet he seems to be mentally challenged. Maybe it's just a down-home, folksy kind of schtick (nu-cu-lar?) but I don't think so.
kgaddy wrote:
Ok, your getting close.
This one is pretty much indisputable, but I'll own up to it also being a cheap shot in and of itself. I do think that the President should be a statesman, but we have had effective Presidents who were not compelling public speakers.
kgaddy wrote:
How so?
Jobs to unqualified cronies is the first thing that springs to mind. His cabinet is full of people with ties to the industries they're supposed to be regulating. "Brownie" was -- and is -- pretty much unfit for any government office above dog-catcher.
kgaddy wrote:
When did he dodge the draft?
Okay, a little more hyperbole. While he didn't exactly flee to Canada, he actually did take the same rich-kid dodge that Quayle did. There wasn't a chance of him ever seeing combat.
kgaddy wrote:
What election did he steal? Is there even a shread of evidence of this?
I don't think there is any conclusive evidence, but I'd say there's at least a shred. From brother Jeb and Katherine Harris's involvement in 2000 to the Diebold fiasco and exit polls way off from actual results in 2004. There is at least the appearance of impropriety all over the place. All that said, you're fair to call me on it. It wasn't a reasoned character assessment, just an end-of-the-day, sick-of-dealing-with-that-jackass-espeir kind of rant. A secular humanist, leftist, Marxist tirade (that one was for Stan's benefit).
-
kgaddy wrote:
He graduated from Yale.
And yet he seems to be mentally challenged. Maybe it's just a down-home, folksy kind of schtick (nu-cu-lar?) but I don't think so.
kgaddy wrote:
Ok, your getting close.
This one is pretty much indisputable, but I'll own up to it also being a cheap shot in and of itself. I do think that the President should be a statesman, but we have had effective Presidents who were not compelling public speakers.
kgaddy wrote:
How so?
Jobs to unqualified cronies is the first thing that springs to mind. His cabinet is full of people with ties to the industries they're supposed to be regulating. "Brownie" was -- and is -- pretty much unfit for any government office above dog-catcher.
kgaddy wrote:
When did he dodge the draft?
Okay, a little more hyperbole. While he didn't exactly flee to Canada, he actually did take the same rich-kid dodge that Quayle did. There wasn't a chance of him ever seeing combat.
kgaddy wrote:
What election did he steal? Is there even a shread of evidence of this?
I don't think there is any conclusive evidence, but I'd say there's at least a shred. From brother Jeb and Katherine Harris's involvement in 2000 to the Diebold fiasco and exit polls way off from actual results in 2004. There is at least the appearance of impropriety all over the place. All that said, you're fair to call me on it. It wasn't a reasoned character assessment, just an end-of-the-day, sick-of-dealing-with-that-jackass-espeir kind of rant. A secular humanist, leftist, Marxist tirade (that one was for Stan's benefit).
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Jobs to unqualified cronies is the first thing that springs to mind.
Well you can count every president in this one.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
There wasn't a chance of him ever seeing combat.
Did you know he volenteered to Vietnam. Sent a letter and everything. Turns out it was late in the war (70-71) and they were starting to bring back pilots. How come you never hear about this?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
but I'd say there's at least a shred.
Ok, you peaked my interest. What is the shred?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
From brother Jeb and Katherine Harris's involvement in 2000
What did Jeb do? And Harris was just doing her job. The votes had to be in at a certain date.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
There is at least the appearance of impropriety all over the place.
Where? Just because people accuse without evidence does make that even a shred. Hell, anybody can do that.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
All that said, you're fair to call me on it. It wasn't a reasoned character assessment, just an end-of-the-day, sick-of-dealing-with-that-jackass-espeir kind of rant.
Fair enough. I think sometimes things get said so often that we start to take them as truth without any evidence of them being true. And they get tend to get repeated. In espeir's defense, he is probably just as tired of hearing all the left wing triades coming from this forum. I think you would agree that there are slightly more liberals than conservative here. Anyway, good to talk to someone from the other side without the conversation getting personal or bitter. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
-
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Jobs to unqualified cronies is the first thing that springs to mind.
Well you can count every president in this one.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
There wasn't a chance of him ever seeing combat.
Did you know he volenteered to Vietnam. Sent a letter and everything. Turns out it was late in the war (70-71) and they were starting to bring back pilots. How come you never hear about this?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
but I'd say there's at least a shred.
Ok, you peaked my interest. What is the shred?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
From brother Jeb and Katherine Harris's involvement in 2000
What did Jeb do? And Harris was just doing her job. The votes had to be in at a certain date.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
There is at least the appearance of impropriety all over the place.
Where? Just because people accuse without evidence does make that even a shred. Hell, anybody can do that.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
All that said, you're fair to call me on it. It wasn't a reasoned character assessment, just an end-of-the-day, sick-of-dealing-with-that-jackass-espeir kind of rant.
Fair enough. I think sometimes things get said so often that we start to take them as truth without any evidence of them being true. And they get tend to get repeated. In espeir's defense, he is probably just as tired of hearing all the left wing triades coming from this forum. I think you would agree that there are slightly more liberals than conservative here. Anyway, good to talk to someone from the other side without the conversation getting personal or bitter. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
kgaddy wrote:
Ok, you peaked my interest. What is the shred?
Jeb publically promised to "deliver Florida". No proven impropriety, but definitely an unwise statement. Some Katherine Harris info[^] The press -- mainstream and otherwise -- was full of these items back in 2000, but most of the links are dead now. Here's a couple of items: THE GREAT FLORIDA EX-CON GAME[^] Hot Recount Docs![^] Again, there is no smoking gun, no incontrovertible evidence. Just a mountain of little things that make me very uncomfortable. Even the appearance of shameless partisanship has no place anywhere near the counting of votes in a Presidential election. The quote attributed to Joseph Stalin rings true, whether he actually said it or not: "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything." Anyway, enough ranting.
-
kgaddy wrote:
Ok, you peaked my interest. What is the shred?
Jeb publically promised to "deliver Florida". No proven impropriety, but definitely an unwise statement. Some Katherine Harris info[^] The press -- mainstream and otherwise -- was full of these items back in 2000, but most of the links are dead now. Here's a couple of items: THE GREAT FLORIDA EX-CON GAME[^] Hot Recount Docs![^] Again, there is no smoking gun, no incontrovertible evidence. Just a mountain of little things that make me very uncomfortable. Even the appearance of shameless partisanship has no place anywhere near the counting of votes in a Presidential election. The quote attributed to Joseph Stalin rings true, whether he actually said it or not: "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything." Anyway, enough ranting.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything."
Yes, but in this case it was a democrat who controled the ballots and the counting was done by joint Democrat and Republicans teams.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Anyway, enough ranting.
Yea, we can put this to rest. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
-
Maybe this will help you figure it out: The Other Lies of George Bush[^] Bush Watch[^] Partisan, sure, but still valid behind the rhetoric. If only 10% is true, it is far worse for the American people than "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." And hiding behind the claim of "faulty intelligence" -- especially when the intelligence is so obviously questionable in the first place -- is the equivalent of saying "it depends on what the definition of 'is' is". Ass-covering. Dissembling. Lying.
He maintained that Saddam Hussein possessed "a massive stockpile" of unconventional weapons and was directly "dealing" with Al Qaeda - From the first link You seem to be forgetting that there were many in the Congress - on both sides - that agreed with this. It was based on faulty information.
-
espeir wrote:
Mature societies embrace adultery.
A mature society should leave marriage and adultery to the people to figure out on their own and stick to making laws only about serious issues like murder, theft and things that harm people, not just hurt their feelings because that's so arbitrary that we're not going to reach any agreement about which "mean things people do" should be against the law. (hurray for run-on sentences!)
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
« eikonoklastes »
What then about all of the murders committed DUE to adultery?
-
What then about all of the murders committed DUE to adultery?
xlr8td wrote:
What then about all of the murders committed DUE to adultery?
Easy, we just create a law against murder.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ~Stephen Roberts
« eikonoklastes »
-
ToddHileHoffer wrote:
Of course he lied to us about why we went into Iraq, but that's OK
:| One president has his cigar sucked and he gets impeached. Another starts a war on false pretenses, on a lie, over a 1000 US citizens are killed along with countless Iraqis and that is OK with you? Holy smokes, Batman. []Let us be clear. I am not saying Bush did or did not lie. I am using what the poster above said and asking how what he believes can be OK but that when Clinton lied about sex (not war, not killing people, not corruption, just some sex (what he did was wrong, I agree)) that is impeacheable.[] regards, Paul Watson Ireland Feed Henry! K(arl) wrote: oh, and BTW, CHRISTIAN ISN'T A PARADOX, HE IS A TASMANIAN!
adapted from toxcct:
while (!enough)
sprintf 0 || 1
do-- modified at 13:21 Thursday 9th March, 2006