billvon 2,473
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
Recommended Posts
kallend 1,679
QuoteQuoteQuote
A "group of PNAC whackos" have taken over the government of The United States of America?
When did this happen?
Six years ago. That's who they're talking about when they say "neocon". Search the forums for PNAC. Or go here:
http://newamericancentury.org/
Things are looking up though. The republican party is (hopefully) now realizing the errors of letting that bunch call the shots.
And Democrats control both houses of Congress. I guess this supposed takeover isn't all it's hyped up to be.
You can't fool the people all of the time. The PNAC agenda has been a dismal failure. The Iraq Study Group Report pretty much confirms it. We have acheived no worthwhile goal in Iraq, we have destabilized the region, made Iran and Syria more influential, lost 2,900 troops, injured 21,000 more, killed uncounted tens of thousands of Iraqis, spent $400B (and rising) to make ourselves look weak and incompetent, and pissed off our traditional allies.
I guess some of us can say "I told you so" now.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
jenfly00 0
QuoteThat's right! I'm saying the same people who are arguing for a suspension of major portions of the Bill of Rights are the same ones that would have been hanging the niggers and burning the witches.
Every society has a good number of such people. It's up to those with a greater capacity for rational thought and ability to see further down the road to stop them before they destroy what you state you want to protect.
Okay, I've seen some really big stretches in SC, but this one takes the cake!!
I'm hardly a neocon, I never insulted you, yet you direct completely outrageous comments toward people who disagree with you. Rather than engage in a (somewhat) civil discussion you rant and insult, that is typical for someone who can't make an actual point. Your comments indicate that you feel intellectually superior, I'd at least expect something a little more clever.
I understand that you sincerely don't get it.
-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".
"O brave new world that has such people in it".
skycop 0
Sadly I do get it, I don't have to use examples that are maybe, just a little, somewhat slightly over the top.
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"
I'm not into fortune telling. Saying what people might have done 200 years ago plus/minus is pure guesswork. I guess if you had an argument with your parents in Salem, Mass over homework, there is no way you would have called them witches as a spiteful teenager. Right? I urge you to look up the the family trees of the Lincolns, Roosevelts, Wilsons, and Bushes and tell us whose who in the lynching and witch business. Maybe it still runs in the family.QuoteQuoteWell, what's your point? I must admit I voted for Bush. Sometimes you get what you wish for and I'm telling. I don't like everything he has done, but when it comes to homeland security, I'm going along with what he's done so far. At least he hasn't brought back the Sedition Act of 1918. If so, Speaker's Corner would be long gone, and we would be getting a knock at the door. Under that act, you could not even critize the flag. The Sediton Act was in addition to the Espionage and Sabotage Act.QuoteQuoteWhen people rate Lincoln and Roosevelt as great presidents, civil liberties are not mentioned. Wilson, a champion of womens rights was probably worse in civil liberties. All three served in time of war. You only have to read history to compare how President Bush is doing compared to other presidents. I believe the majority of Americans think he is doing fine.QuoteQuoteI'm not part of the vast right wing conspiracy, I just make observations based on my experience.
If you think Katrina was bad, just wait until a dirty bomb or worse hits a major American city or event, Marshall Law is the least of our worries.
Hell I am thinking they have done litte to really stop that sort of thing.. perhaps so an attack CAN occur.. then they can declare MARTIAL LAW... like they have been planning to do for a while... ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY not just in the place where it will occur.... that gets rid of silly little details like the Bill of Rights that they have fought so hard against since January of 2000
A majority of Americans (87%) believe wishes come true. Fifty-five percent believe they will not come true if they tell someone about it.
Your point?
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20051016/ai_n15711160
My point is popularity is not a valid measure of what is right thing to do. When they burned the witches and hung the niggers, who do you think 'they' were? Evil, bad people? For the most part, no. They were people with limited insight and vision who get swept up in the emotions of the moment ...much like our prolific neo-con posters here.
That's right! I'm saying the same people who are arguing for a suspension of major portions of the Bill of Rights are the same ones that would have been hanging the niggers and burning the witches.
Every society has a good number of such people. It's up to those with a greater capacity for rational thoughtand ability to see further down the road to stop them before they destroy what you state you want to protect.
Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.
Well, the PNAC had a good run. Got the war it wanted. Ran into a bit too much reality-based stuff, but hey - don't we all.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites