Well, there you go again. In the previous thread Bush was a Vietnam deserter, Sharon a murderer and so forth. Now Limbaugh is a drug fiend. Gee, can anyone else see the hatred there?
I won’t address the substance of your comments since you refuse to engage in the arena of ideas but rely on intellectually bankrupt name calling instead. I do however value your opinions and endeavor to change them by hoping to make you more self aware of your thought process. To take a specific example, you are parroting the baseless charge of Terry McAuliff (sp?) of about six weeks ago with the Vietnam deserter line.
If you are on the Democratic payroll, I have no problem with this mindset since you would be getting well compensated for holding this demonstrably false assertion. On the other hand, if you are not renting out your gray matter you should do some introspection on how it is that you are being so easily manipulated by such a person. I think you are a better person than to let that happen.
Bush was a Vietnam deserter…(talk to us about his mysterious disappearance from the Texas Air Natl Guard, plus his ‘good fortune’, not family connections, on getting into the air guard is a whole other story) Sharon a murderer and so forth…(go educate yourself on Sabra and Shatila) Now Limbaugh is a drug fiend…(have you not been following his latest ‘difficulties’?)
Sure, I may be using some inflammatory rhetoric but the facts stand on their own. If Limbaugh wasn’t such a hypocritical pompous asshole I probably would’ve left him out of this argument. But, he just makes another good conservative to pillory. Much like I’m doing to you in this thread.
Let me guess, your response will have something to do with hate speech?
You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. The massacres at Sabra and Shatila were carried out by the Lebanese Christian milita. israel and Sharon were culpable to the extent that they allowed the infiltration while they were concentrating on securing Beirut. I don’t buy that you are upset about the 300 killed unless you shed at least a few tears along the way for the 100,000 killed in the Lebanon civil war. Over the years, ten of thousands have been killed in UN “safe zones” as well. Yet you hate Sharon, and not the UN or Syria. Why? Because you are told to.
Bush’s participation for five years in the National Guard are abundantly documented and the one guardsman who alleged his lack of participation has been discredited. Clinton, on the other hand dodged the draft by lying to his draft board officers and later admittied it in a letter to that officer. Yet you hate Bush, but not Clinton. Why? Because you are told to.
Like millions of Americans with serious medical problems, Limbaugh got hooked on pain medication and eventually sought treatment. Yet you hate Limbaugh and not Whitney Houston, Ozzie Osburn or Elton John. Why? Because you are told to.
Do you sense a pattern here?
As someone who has been there, take my advice and let go of the hate. It only holds you down and allows you to be manipulated to advance the agenda of others.
Sorry, but if your inflammatory rantings constitute my being pilloried (sp?), you really need to raise your game. You haven’t advanced a single thought to refute me, not even that you don’t hate these people. At least admit to yourself that you hate these people, even if you don’t want to admit it on this board.
I hope my points will sway you at some time in the future. You are way too far out on a limb to change your mind now.
More than enough said. You can have the last word.
I hope we meet at a triathlon sometime so you can join the rest of this board in kicking my butt.
The United States of America is the Savior of the World. American citizens are the most generous, benevolent people on the face of Gods great green earth. Think about it…all the charities we sponsor, all the loans and grants that are made, the food we provide. Our ecomony allows the generosity to continue. If the flow of $$ from the U.S. government and our citizens dried up, no one anywhere else on earth would be willing or able to make up the difference.
The USA also has its faults. Like people have character flaws, dark secrets and skeletons in the closet, so do we. But like most people, we are far more good than we are bad.
Europeans have a history of being clueless about the threats that are staring them in the face…and then lacking the testicular fortitude to do anything about it. It’s happening again in Spain.
Amercans have spilled blood all over the world to protect innocent lives and save entire countries, thereby saving civilization. The world would be a much different place today if we hadn’t.
Like it or not, there are bad people in the world. These people need to be killed. The more of them we kill and the sooner we do it, the better.
“Peace” never solved anything. The enemies of civilization must be crushed, not only in body but in spirit. Or civilization will be crushed.
I doubt it; I’m guessing you’re just not much of reader, because if you were, you’d know that Ariel Sharon (a person who I neither know nor hate) is, in fact, a murderer.
Bush’s participation for five years in the National Guard are abundantly documented and the one guardsman who alleged his lack of participation has been discredited.
Wrong, Art. Couldn’t be wronger. Here’s why:
No evidence of the Flight Inquiry Board that would have been convened when he was suspended from flying. No DD214 or NGB 22. No Officer Effectiveness Report (OER) from 1973. No flight logs, among a pilot’s most important records. No attendance sheets, photographs, or unit rosters. And still zero evidence of any actual duty between May 1972 and April 1973.
Unfortunately OBL seems to have won the Spainish election and the Spainiards are out of Iraq faster than a cowardly matador from a ring full ill-tempered bulls.
On this one, the terrorists won. An ominous precident.
Come on Tom, that’s not necessarily the case. Sure, it may appear like that, and it will certainly be protrayed like that by OBL.
However, when 90% of the people DON’T want their government to do something, and they go ahead and do it, then when the people next get a chance to make a choice, you can’t be surprised if they kick the government out of office.
Secondly, and MUCH MORE importantly, when a terrorist atrocity happens in the capital city, and the government immediately tries to spin it to their advantage, and are proved wrong, there’s no way in hell they’d have survived the election.
Trying to spin a terrorist atrocity for your own political gain is absolutely despicable behaviour, and I’d wager that that’s what got Spaniards really riled up.
get a grip your entire argument presupposes rational discourse with a thinking person. bear in mind you are arguing with someone who is defending a president who proudly doesn’t read the papers, recently refused a proposal by kerry’s camp to conduct monthly debates on issues, gets his information from condoleeza rice, and, er…“god”, is generally ignorant of history, and generally oblivious of and impervious to rational thought and fact. that’s the beauty of the bush camp approach. they have figured out that by appealing to our fears, our prejudices, our blind self interest and our arrogance, they can maintain a decent base of popular support. these are some dark days, IMHO. but i think they’ll be changing soon. i gotta hope that…i think folks are going to figure out soon enough that we deserve better.
Unfortunately OBL seems to have won the Spainish election and the Spainiards are out of Iraq faster than a cowardly matador from a ring full ill-tempered bulls.
On this one, the terrorists won. An ominous precident.
I’m pretty sure that’s not the whole story, but it does look that way on the surface., and I bet a lot of the “Arab street” will interpret it that way too. Zapatero should have kept his mouth shut regarding Iraq for a week and focused his comments on responding to the attack, and that perception would have been a little different.
Gee guys, between toadpalmer and tri_larry, I am really not feeling the love here. That of course proves my point.
It is amazing that those with whom you two disagree are never well meaning people with whom you have a disagreement in the arena of ideas. No, they are deserters, murders, ignorant, irrational, close minded and so on from the list of invectives you have thrown my way. You are incapable of sustaining a discusion on these topics without resorting to personal attacks within a few sentences. You should figure out for yourselves why you react that way. It would be a growing experience.
Spend you lives in that intellectual sewer if you must. I won’t be joining you there.
It is amazing that those with whom you two disagree are never well meaning people with whom you have a disagreement in the arena of ideas.
Wrong again, Art.
I have plenty of disagreements with well-meaning people in the arena of ideas, many of them right here on this forum.
You just don’t happen to be one of those people. And not because you’re not well-meaning; you seem pleasant enough to me, what with your philosophy of “love the haters” and all that.
You just don’t seem to have any ideas, besides the belief that anyone who disagrees with you has somehow disqualified themselves from further discourse and is in need of serious self-reflection.
I posted three separate links that demonstrate your grip on the facts is loose/non-existent…and yet in your latest post you assert that all we do is personally attack you because we “can’t sustain a discussion”
Why don’t you refute my assertions about our President’s service record?
I laid them out point by point, without invective against him or you.
Isn’t that the sort of discussion you say you want?
Your lack of substantive response to this post will “prove my point” that when it comes to facts, documentation or anything approaching reasoned discourse, Art Franke is way, way BOP.
I would have replied, but you comments were so filled personal insults that I took a pass.
You were right, I was going on memory about the casulties in the militia massacre. The highest number I found was the CNN article you referenced which specified 1000. I don’t know where you got the 1800 number. How failing to prevent this tragedy rises tp murder on the part of Sharon, I fail to understand. Poor judgment in the heat of battle as concluded by Monday morning quarterbacks, maybe. Same goes for the 1953 event. Sharon follows orders to blow up houses he believes are vacant. Turns out that some of them were not. Sorry, in war time that is not murder.
You are going to have to do better than a hit piece on tompaine.com as a reference. Give me a break. Next you will cite Maureen Dowd as an objective analyst. Lots of other information has been released, which is why the issue went away. It has no legs.
My response was poorly stated. Terrorist hide among civilians for the purpose of causing civilian casualties. When civilians die in this manner, it is the terrorists that killed them, not the guy who fired the stray bullet.
Even my second response is weak. You can tell I am no military expert.
If you want to have someone explain how it is in war time situations, ask Mr. Tibbs. I suppose he would be a murderer by your definition as well, but he has more insight into such matters as you would have the courage to hear. Well, more than I would have the courage to hear anyway.
“The United States of America is the Savior of the World” ?
Hmmm… I wouldn’t use the word - savior… I prefer to say that America is the defender of it’s interests. And being a world leader, we have a lot of interests. To assume we give simply to give is a bit naive… we give mostly to gain influence and favors (note I said… MOSTLY). There are instances where we give without expectations… but, that is extremely rare.
America does not have a monopoly on being right… fortunately or unfortunately (depending on your point of view) we have both the economic and military force to enforce our concept of being right. I don’t know about you, but that’s not a way to win friends and influence people but it is a way to define itself. So, if you wonder why others find our positions to be arrogant, you need to look no further than your post.
As I see it, American’s have spilled blood all over the world (god bless them)… but, less in defense of the innocent but more in the defense of American interests. Question is… are those interest the world’s interests? By the same token, “enemies” of civilization must be defined. As I see it, America does not have a monopoly on the definitions of “the world’s interests” or “enemies of civilizations”. Sometimes we are wrong, sometimes we are right… but, we almost always can’t understand why others are always wrong?
Art - we love man. It’s just that some of us should be allowed to disagree with you on political issues. Our intellect isn’t in the gutter, we’re not under mind control, nor is our ‘gray matter up for rent.’
I’m ready to leave it at that and get on with all things triathlon.
your entire argument presupposes rational discourse with a thinking person. bear in mind you are arguing with someone who is defending a president who proudly doesn’t read the papers, recently refused a proposal by kerry’s camp to conduct monthly debates on issues, gets his information from condoleeza rice, and, er…“god”, is generally ignorant of history, and generally oblivious of and impervious to rational thought and fact. that’s the beauty of the bush camp approach. they have figured out that by appealing to our fears, our prejudices, our blind self interest and our arrogance, they can maintain a decent base of popular support. these are some dark days, IMHO. but i think they’ll be changing soon. i gotta hope that…i think folks are going to figure out soon enough that we deserve better.