posted on January 26, 2003 12:21:23 AM new
I heard there were a bunch of pathetic liberal weenies on this board. Well I'm here to convert them to the right way of thinking!
I will try to lead America-haters, Bush-bashers, enviro-wackos, tyrant-appeasers, and other unAmerican socialist-types to see the error of their ways and embrace the Republican philosophy of personal responsibility, limited government & taxes, a strong military, free-enterprise, and individual rights.
posted on January 26, 2003 06:50:16 AM new
Not every Democrat is a Liberal. Not every Republican is a Conservative. Therefore, converting Liberals to Republican may be your agenda, but some may find it more palatable to stop in the middle and embrace Democrat philosophy. BTW- if you are going to use a sicko handle at least spell it right. BTW2- if you are on a mission here you will fail, as I don't know of any conversions that have taken place.
posted on January 26, 2003 10:46:59 AM new
So - here's my question. If I am ...
1) Anti -Bush - think he's a small minded man trying to prove himself in the world community by playing the tuff guy (and failing miserably)
2) Pro-Abortion
and - hold it guys - I'm about to mess you up here
3) Staunchly pro death penalty
which cute little pigeon holed, stereotype do I fit into? I mean before I jump into the RT mix I figure I should define my label.
[ edited by neonmania on Jan 26, 2003 10:55 AM ]
Exactly. And there are hundreds of variations in individuals' political philosophy today. Not to mention great confusion about what the terms liberal and conservative mean and how they ought to be used to define a particular position about a particular issue.
posted on January 26, 2003 07:12:48 PM new
yeah no kidding Borillar, you bring the words Republican or Bush is a: fill in the blank into any thread. I swear, someone brings up their dog, their kids, their home decorating tips, and I'll be danged, you start in that its either the Republicans fault or Bushs fault...
posted on January 26, 2003 08:25:54 PM new
When he found that the liberals were not weenies, the america haters were really lovers and the Bush bashers - envronmental wackos were good people and that all of his other intolerant attitudes were wrong, he headed back to the ebay board to discuss the pros and cons of negative feedback. LOLOL!
posted on January 26, 2003 10:49:07 PM new
"free-enterprise"
excluding, oil, & arms manufacture and sales for SOME.
"limited government & taxes" especially for large corporations
"personal responsibility" apart from tariffs which support inefficient industries.
And those which are morally impaired,
"strong military" except for Muslim Countries.
"individual rights" especially for entities with large political bribes, ..oops I meant to say contributions.
In Australia the Liberal Party with Prime Minister John Howard, ARE the 'conservative' party.
But that certainly doesn’t make the labour party radicals.
I would personally say they were the 'Liberal-right' and 'Labour-centre right'.
From a neo-nazi perspective, one might view them both as extreme left.
Or a communist idealist may view them as extreme right.
posted on January 26, 2003 11:43:14 PM new
My liberal friends, mark my words: George Bush will surpass Ronald Reagan and he will considered the greatest US president since Abe Lincoln. Scream and howl all you want, but there's not much you can do about it.
I question the intelligence of those who question Bush's intelligence. Just because someone is not articulate doesn't mean they are stupid. Bush graduated from Yale and he was a trained fighter pilot. I doubt that most of his critics are smart enough to achieve just one of those accomplishments. In my experience, some of the most book smart and articulate people I've known have shown poor common sense.
posted on January 27, 2003 01:47:05 AM new
most of the world think he's all dollars and no cents.
I'm sure there are many many Americans with more inteligence than him but it will be a while before some minority groups ever have a president from their ranks.
You reckon he's such a genius, just a coinsidence his daddy was president.
posted on January 27, 2003 06:35:03 AM new
saddamhussien
You are rating Bush's military record and his graduation from Yale too highly. His admission to Yale was based on the fact that his father attended Yale University....not on his scholarship as most students must rely. Without this "legacy admission" and an SAT score of only 1240, his application would have been tossed into the trash.
BUSH'S MILITARY RECORD
- According to a Boston Globe Story on May 23, 2000, "In his final 18 months of military service in 1972 and 1973, Bush did not fly at all. And for much of that time, Bush was all but unaccounted for. For a full year, there is no record that he showed up for the periodic drills required of part-time guardsmen. . . From May to November 1972, Bush was in Alabama working in a US Senate campaign, and was required to attend drills at an Air National Guard unit in Montgomery. But there is no evidence in his record that he did so. And William Turnipseed, the retired general who commanded the Alabama unit back then, said in an interview last week that Bush never appeared for duty there.
- The tattered piece of attendance record (which lists no months, years, or last name) which the Bush campaign presented as evidence of attending Air National Guard training is not even from the Air National Guard. This incomplete scrap of paper is from the Air Force Reserve punishment unit, not the Air National Guard. . .
- In the fall of 1973, as an automatic disciplinary action, Bush was reassigned to the Obligated Reserve Section in Denver, because he disobeyed orders to show up for a mandatory flight physical and therefore was unable to fulfill the last two years of his six-year obligation as an Air National Guard jet fighter pilot. . .
- Sunday Times London (11/05/2000): "The Bush camp was equally dismissive of a claim by Bill Burkett, a former lieutenant colonel in the Texas National Guard, that the governor's aides had doctored his military record. Burkett said Bush aides had visited the National Guard headquarters at Camp Mabry 'on numerous occasions' to make sure that records available to the public about his military service would tally with his autobiography's version of his time as a reserve pilot during the Vietnam war."
posted on January 27, 2003 06:55:51 AM new
Is the 'Left' Marching with Stalinists?
This is whom the left now marches with. The left marches with the Stalinists. The left marches with those who would maintain in power the leading oppressors of humanity in the world. It marches with, stands with and cheers on people like the speaker at the Washington rally who declared that "the real terrorists have always been the United Snakes of America." It marches with people like the former Black Panther Charles Baron, who said in Washington, "if you're looking for an axis of evil then look in the belly of this beast."
posted on January 27, 2003 04:11:07 PM new
Hey, I never said that Bush was an angel. My point was that you don't graduate from Yale if you are an idiot. They also don't hand over the keys to a fighter jet to just anybody. Only the pilots with the highest aptitude are trained to fly fighter jets.
As I said before, I doubt that most of Bush's critics are smart enough to achieve just one of those accomplishments.
posted on January 27, 2003 06:46:06 PM new
>My point was that you don't graduate from Yale if you are an idiot. They also don't hand over the keys to a fighter jet to just anybody.
One would think so. However, upon investigation, you'd be surprized just how easy it is for rich alumni to buy their education from Yale or other schools. Each one has a price.
Also, the milliatry is not stupid. Bush, Sr was head of the CIA before he was Ronald Reagan's Vice President. If you'll recall, rich people get to drive nuclear submarines for fun ~ even into Japanese fishing vessals! If Bush, Sr. told them to let his son fly a plane, you can be sure that they would do it. That's no surpize to most people.
posted on January 27, 2003 07:16:34 PM new
Yale admissions are very selective but it's just as easy to navigate as any other university...in fact, in some respects easier.
posted on January 27, 2003 07:17:19 PM new
“Only the pilots with the highest aptitude are trained to fly fighter jets.”
To be more honest you should have said ‘Only the MILITARY pilots with the highest aptitude’
But then again you should consider that, given the $ and power they would control, the major weighting in considering their suitability would be given to their ability to blindly follow orders, beyond their peers that is.
A close friend, who is a solicitor, pointed out to me that some of the law students, who flunked out when studying, went on to be Police Prosecutors.
I think you would similarly find such a 2nd rate profile when looking at our armed forces.
If you are looking for geniuses, there may be better places to look than the millitary.
As far as your desire for “limited government & taxes”, how do you think it stacks up against this.
I was just listening to ABC News on radio in Australia.
Professor William Northouse, Prof of Economics at Yale.
Was estimating economic costs of going to war against Iraq.
Millions, billions, trillions, He said its hard for people to comprehend all these 0’s.
He put it in terms of direct $ cost to each US family.
Best case scenario $1000 per family.
Bad case Scenario $20,000 (assuming no major use of biological or chemical weapons and assuming war is limited within Iraq and not into Israel or other countries).
Any major disruption to oil supply from there would see a rise in the price of oil to $75/barrel (approx. 3 X higher than present).
Imagine what that would do to the price of gun lubricant, perhaps that would give some of you great concern.
posted on January 27, 2003 09:10:47 PM new
From what I understand, Australia was originally a prison colony and that today the men outnumber the women 4 to 1...
