BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 08:44 PM

"Quisling was just doing things the way he saw fit, right?"

Well, of course he was, Bruce. He figured, no doubt, that the Germans had the winning ticket and were ushering in a "new era", and he decided it was time to get on board. So did hundreds of thousands of willing Ukranians, Lithuanians, French, Danes, Dutch, Estonians, Latvians, Belgians....and MILLIONS of Hungarians, Rumanians, Finns, Bulgarians, Croatians, Italians, and God knows who else who joined up with the Wehrmacht, or the SS, or became allies with the Germans in World War II.

Do you really think they did not, at the time, think they were doing "the right thing"?

If their side had won, they would never have doubted it, in light of the successful outcome. That's what wars are like. The winners sanitize their own record, and damn that of the losers.

I am not saying Quisling did the right thing. I am saying that he, with his own limited and pragmatic view of the situation in 1940, most likely thought he was doing the right thing.

By the way, Churchill was also planning to invade Norway in 1940. Both the Germans and the British had already decided that a neutral Norway was simply too dangerous and inconvenient to their cause, and that Norway had to be occupied and utilized as a base to control access to and from the Baltic and into the North Sea. The British plan to invade Norway was in an advanced stage and the Germans knew it, but the Germans beat them to the punch by invading first. If Hitler had been a little slower off the mark, someone like Mr Quisling (maybe even Mr Quisling himself!) would have been cooperating with the British occupation forces, and would now be remembered as a very good guy in our history books.

Do you know that Vichy France very nearly declared war on Great Britain in 1940 after the Royal Navy bombarded the French fleet in Oran on July 3rd 1940, sinking some battleships and killing over a thousand French sailors? Mainland France would then have been at war with England and allied with Germany. How would that play back now?

Would that, Bruce, have made the French instantly and overnight evil people to their core? No. It would have made them emotional people, reacting to an extremely bad situation as emotional people do...and doing what they thought was "right".

You cannot get so hung up on the incredible awfulness of Nazis that you fall into the trap of assuming that everyone was ever associated with them in any way must have been automatically satanic or something like that. Life just isn't that simple.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 08:55 PM

Actually, Martin, it's you who is here on this computer 24/7... Maybe you like to explain how that levels with yer assessment that its the "socialists and late 60's hippies" who haven't "made mauch of their lives"...

If my life revolved around sitting in fron a computer attacking folks 24/7 I'd hardly go looking at other folks as the failuers...

This "late 60's hippie", as well as most of my olf "late 60's hippie" friends are still very much in the game and, guess what??? We are not only sucessfull people but not given in to sitting in front of a danged computer to define who we are...

Bobert ("late 60's hippie" and still in the game...)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: GUEST,Mrs. Beasley (former English teacher)
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 09:01 PM

"There IS ARE socialists and late '60s hippies here who never grew up and really made much of their LIFE LIVES since."

D FOR CONTENT, E FOR GRAMMAR.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 09:31 PM

Whew!!!

I saw Mrs. "Ballbuster" Beasley's name on the last post and was afraid to read it... I just knew it had to be poor ol' me gettin' yet another well deserved butt whup but...

...na-na-na-na-na-nuh, Martin, ol' buddy.

Yeah, I might be a socialist and "late 60's hippie" but I can at least keep my garmmerizin' half up to snuff...

And as fir content, you got lucky, Martin... I would have given you an "I" for "imcomplete", just like most of yer danged thoughts... Something always seems to be missing...

(Did you use the word, "thought", Bobert?)

Nevermind, Martin. I've juast had a break-though here...

Bobert

p.s. How'd I do, Mrs. Beasley? BTW, I really like the way you've been wearing your hair lately... It makes you look like a young Morgan Fairchild... Is that new dress? It makes you look like a cover-girl model...

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Peace
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 09:31 PM

Vicious ol' broad with that red pen, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 10:03 PM

Doug R--

You no doubt mean to say that since the lives of Dr. King and his wife were so blissfully free of politics, a memorial service for Coretta King should likewise be so.

Anything you say, since you're always right.

In fact, far right.


It would also be instructive to hear Azizi's comments on your views. Though it's remotely possible it would not be pleasant reading for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: GUEST,Mrs. Beasley (former English teacher)
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 10:24 PM

Quite good, Bobert. Your spelling and grammar may not earn you a Rhodes Scholarship, but your reasoning powers (aided, perhaps, by your Wes' Ginny slide rule) are first rate.

I was gentle with Martin Gibson on the matter of content because everyone has a right to an opinion, even if he does get his opinions from those spittle-spraying right-wing radio talk show hosts.   Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of that going around. My initial impulse was to give him an "I." Not for "Incomplete," though. "I" for "Imbecile." But I don't want to offend the imbeciles in the world who have pleasant dispositions.

Morgan Fairchild? Why, thank you, Bobert. Although I like to think of myself as looking a bit more like a young Audrey Hepburn.

Carry on.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Peace
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 10:34 PM

OK. Sorry about callin' you an ol' broad.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: WooBerry
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 10:52 PM

"And from Doug, as usual, a breath of stale air."

"Douggie's just being his normal asshole self. "

" La dee da." (huh?)

I may just go above the line for a breath or two of fresh air!
If I want verbal abuse I can get it at home, for free!

D

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Peace
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 10:54 PM

Have a nice trip.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Amos
Date: 08 Feb 06 - 11:59 PM

You are mistaken, Mister "Gibson"; sadly mistaken. In all the times I have seen the two of you trade insults, you have always come out the loser, not to put too fine a point on it. Worse, a loser who consoles himself by telling himself he actually won.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Ironmule
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 02:14 AM

I'm inclined to think neocon is a short version of "kneejerk conservative," unfortunately used to avoid considering the value of some ideas that might just possibly come from a conservative source. Those guilty of kneejerking also come in liberal varieties as well, and mostly they like to use the term neocon liberally (often). ;^)


As someone who thinks for himself, sometimes taking liberal, and sometimes conservative positions; I find kneejerkers on the far reaches of either side annoying. And too often loud.

As for my brother calling me a neocon, I think he's got a fine sense of humor, and I can laugh at a joke where ever it comes from. ;^)

Jeff Smith

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: HuwG
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 04:13 AM

I must quibble with Little Hawk's post above.

Vidkun Quisling was a man of fixed, if unpleasant, political convictions. I doubt whether he would have had the moral elasticity to act for British occupying forces as he did for the Germans.

With regard to "mainland France", read what is referred to as "Vichy France" in most postwar works. There were those in that regime who would collaborate with the German occupiers, only to whatever extent would mitigate the worst effects of the occupation. There were also some outright far right-wing sympathisers (such as Darnand, the Minister of the Interior) but far more many trimmers and time-servers.

A declaration of war against Britain by the Vichy government would not have been supported by the bulk of the French population, regardless of actions by British forces at Mers-el-Kebir (and later at Dakar, and in Syria and Lebanon).

...

My personal distaste for right-wing sympathisers relates mainly to their flawed revisionist logic. For example, you occasionally hear some people referring to the "American occupation of Britain in World War II". In a very narrow sense of logic, the presence of US troops in Britain can be compared to that of, say, German troops in Hungary, in that in both cases, the foreign troops were invited by an indigenous government by treaty or agreement with their more powerful allies.

However, this puerile logic fails when the results are compared. Numbers of population forcibly dispossessed, deported and even murdered by the "occupiers" ? In Britain, none. In Hungary, several hundred thousand Jews, along with gypsies and slav minorities.

Other acts detrimental to the host nation ? Property looted, women raped, natural resources plundered, citizens executed for overt or concealed hostility to the occupiers? In the entire war, there were fewer than two hundred serious crimes reported involving American (and Canadian) soldiers stationed in Britain; and considering the numbers which at various times were stationed in Britain, this is remarkably low. Land might be temporarily requisitioned for military buildings; it was handed back when no longer required. Whatever amenities or facilities were diverted to the "occupiers" was more than compensated for by generous donations of goods and materials.

And so on. (And however galling it may have been at the time, I will not regard seduction by nylons and Luckies as any form of coercion.)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 09:15 AM

Nope, Jeff, it stands for Neo-Conservative with or without the hyphen and is a partcularly pernicious, mean-spirited & reactionary political philosophy as espoused by Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, Robert Kagan, Carl Rove, Grover Norquist, et. al. and as practiced by the BuShite junta.

"Google" it, (with & without hyphen) and you'll probably find more than enough to disgust you.

For good measure, look up the "Project for a New American Century".

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: WooBerry
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 10:09 AM

I don't like unpleasantness from either side

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Ironmule
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 11:15 AM

For me, it's a kneejerk attempt to categorize and thus dismiss, ideas I think worth examining thoughtfully, and I see kneejerkers on the far sides of both camps.

The loudness with which the kneeo's monopolize what would otherwise have been thoughtful discourse, keeps most center right and center left from being able to cooperate to get good things done.

I've been watching politics for over forty years, and the middle used to be able to ignore the far out wings. There's been a capturing of the primary process lately that works to the advantage of organized far right and far left activists, and leaves the disorganized center with little voice. I don't think the country is nearly as polarized as the media and activists want us to believe.

But nobody seems to listen to me........

Jeff Smith

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Amos
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 11:42 AM

Dear Ms. Beasley:

In grading Martin's essay, up-thread from here, you gave him a "D" for content and and "E" for grammar.

In my school years, there was no grade between "D" and "F". Is E an intermediate grade now? In my preschool years it stood for "Excellent" on such opinions as "plays well with others", for example. But I know that does not apply in the present case.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: leftydee
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 11:46 AM

Diana,
Since you won't answer my question about traitors, how about answering this. You said in an earlier post your did not approve of Bush's entitlement spending. Which entitlements do you disapprove of?

Bob

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: DougR
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 11:46 AM

Who would be more deserving of a tribute similar to the one accorded Mrs. King, Amos? Why you, of course, you! :>) And Alba of course, and one would not want to forget old optomistic Greg F. too, of course (it's never a good idea, I know, to name names ..one always leaves someone out and they feel slighted). You are all deserving of a six hour tribute. You all contribute SO much!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Amos
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 11:53 AM

Oh, Doug -- sarcasm? Isn't that a little low for you to stoop?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 12:18 PM

Douggie's grumpy, missed his nap.

Go back to sleep, Douggie, everything's fine.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: GUEST,Mrs. Beasley (former English teacher)
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 01:34 PM

Amos, the grade of "E" in the school district where I taught indicated a failing grade.

A = Excellent, B = Good, C = Acceptable, and D = Poor. The use to the "E" was merely a progression through the alphabet. There was an addition grade of "S," which indicated that the student had completed the work, but it was of such a nature that it indicated that he or she would not be going on to college. And, of course, "I," which indicated "Incomplete." The student had not finished the course.

I agree that "F" would be more specific, as in "F = Fail." This, of course, is what was intended. The "D" for content, as I mentioned above, was pure mercy in my part. Undeserved. But that was my method (undoubtedly in vain) of attempting to encourage the student to do better. Hope springs eternal.

Peace, although I like to think of myself as looking like a young Audrey Hepburn (at one time, it believe I did), I must confess, I AM a bit sensitive about the word "broad."

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: WooBerry
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 02:26 PM

Bob, I don't mind discussion, but these days comments seem to result in torrents of name calling. I am not going to convince you, and you are not going to convince me, so what is the point?

It's sad!

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: leftydee
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 08:08 PM

Diana,
You'll see that I'm not a name caller. But I have asked these questions so I can try and figure out where you're coming from. I have some conservative views myself but still can't understand how people can consider themselves patriots and be so stingy with their fellow citizens. I am one of the 60s hippies that where slammed here earlier, but, believe me, I have grown up and am a responsible citizen. I have been very fortunate in life and earn a very nice living. That being said, I'll also say that I'm proud to pay taxes that help the less fortunate and help build and defend America. I also consider it a duty to speak out against things that are wrong and do not appreciate my patriotism questioned when I do. So.... where are you coming from? What would make America a better place? I have a few ideas.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Ron Davies
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 10:05 PM

Diana--

I feel slightly stronger about this than some, perhaps.

You "don't like unpleasantness from either side". Please consider how calling someone a "traitor", as you have done, comes across. You may possibly grant that it qualifies as "unpleasant". At the very least, it's intemperate. So it may call forth an intemperate response.

Exactly who are you fingering for this crime and what exactly did the person do?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: GUEST,!!
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 10:48 PM

I sincerly hope that the post attacking Ron Davies and the remark regarding Ron using his real name here on the Mudcat is not an attempt at some kind of threat!
For if it was indeed intended to be threatening that would, in fact, be not only plain foolish but a seriously unwise thing to do. Seriously. Might be wise to explain the meaning and intent behind that post.

Diana...Ron was addressing you I think.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Amos
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 11:16 PM

Please let me implore on you that he is not.

I am sure this is not poetic license at work, so I can only assume that is ineptitude and illiteracy -- especially considering the abysmal truth value of the rest of the message. And I think you've been corrected on that "ooo! I won, i won" crap before, Martin. It's just self-aggrandizement, but you don't even do that well.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 01:26 AM

Neo-cons are not conservatives. They are the opposite of conservatives. They are radicals.

And they are about as far from being fiscal conservatives as it is possible to get. They're borrow and spend, big government radicals.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 08:00 AM

Using one's real name on Mudcat I don't believe is a very wise thing to do. With all of the anti-semitism, I sure would not.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 08:06 AM

If I were a Jewish impersonator, I wouldn't either...

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Ron Davies
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 11:20 PM

So sorry, Martin, to see that you're still suffering from being "dehumanized every day". It shows.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Peace
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 11:27 PM

'For good measure, look up the "Project for a New American Century".'

I posted a link to the document about three years ago, Greg. One of the writers of it was a certain fellow named Paul Wolfowitz. He seems to have a connection with the World Bank. (That was a tongue-in-cheek statement.) However, indeed do read the document. It is a 'blueprint' of exactly what's been going on. Interesting also that the term "New World Order" has been kicking around for over a hundred years.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: michaelr
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 11:59 PM

Go away, Martin.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Arne
Date: 12 Feb 06 - 08:32 PM

'Martin Gibson':

Using one's real name on Mudcat I don't believe is a very wise thing to do. With all of the anti-semitism, I sure would not.

Imagine my surprise.   ;-)

I'd note, however, that I use my given name, despite your threats to bring the (supposed) massive firepower of FLAME to bear on me. I don't take unnecessary risks, but I'm not about to let any incipient fascists, brown-shirt wannabees, or blustering bullies dissuade me from proudly and publicly making my points, and attempting to enlighen people when appropriate. Say, 'Martin', still got your duct tape and plastic wrap at the ready?

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: autolycus
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 06:02 PM

Er ---   h-h-h-h-hello. (Ducks, fearful of being accused of ...................(complete to your heart's content.

   Carol C. Neo-cons are not conservatives? They're the opposite? They're radicals?

Doesn't that need more unpacking, (as we say in philosophy circles)

Please?

pretty please?

Thanks in advance.

P.S. Just want to advance the discussion, rather than fire blanks.

P.P.S. What is supposed to be gained by mere insults?

          Anyone?

          g-g-g-g-g-g-oood-d-d-d-d-db-b-b-b-b-bb-ye.

Auto.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 06:24 PM

She means that they are not oldtime conservatives, such as we knew prior to the 1980's. Oldtime conservatives were fiscally responsible. Neo-Cons are not. Oldtime conservatives did not rush to war when war is inadvisable. Neo-cons do. Oldtime conservatives were loyal to the Constitution of the United States. Neo-Cons regard it as an impediment.

That sort of thing...

Some oldtime conservatives support the neo-cons, because they haven't realized that an insane alternative to "liberalism" is not a good alternative nor is it the only alternative. Some oldtime conservatives do not support the neo-cons, but can't bring themselves to support the Democrats either, which is not surprising! (The Democrats are corrupt.)

Here's one more difference: oldtime conservatives were in favour of creating jobs in America, through American free enterprise. Neo-cons are in favour of moving most of the traditional American jobs to Asia, because a multi-national corporation has no loyalty to any society, only to its own bottom line.

And more: Oldtime conservatives believed in saving money and paying off debts. Neo-cons are in favour of buying on credit and never paying your debts if you can possibly avoid it. Just pass them on to the general public.

And more: Oldtime conservatives believed in the middle class. Neo-cons believe in only 2 classes: the very rich...and the poor. The middle class is now steadily withering away and vanishing under their tenure, as it gradually joins the ranks of the poor.

She's right. They are not conservatives, they are radicals. The Nazis also pretended to be conservatives, but were extreme radicals, and they appealed to the same basic emotions in people as the neo-cons do.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 10:28 PM

Gee "Martin"--somebody sure is focusing on me a lot. For somebody who claims I am responding to him a lot, when it comes to obsession you really should look in the mirror.

Sorry to tell you--somebody who uses his own name is likely to be more credible than a denizen of the sewer (sorry, I meant a profile of courage) who has never yet used his own name on Mudcat. Of course it also doesn't really help your credibility that you have told us that you don't take seriously what you say on Mudcat.

Fine. Neither will we.

That gives you... uh....let's see... exactly zero credibility on any topic.

I stand behind everything I've ever written. If you stood behind your "contributions", you'd likely be missing a few teeth. But, who knows, maybe you have no more to lose.

Dick Greenhaus, among others, is not afraid to use his name--perhaps it's because he does not just live to "pull chains", and he believes in discussion, as most of us do. You ought to try it sometime.

He also knows that anti-Semitism exists--and that it is something other than disagreeing with the utterances of a foul-mouthed fool--recognize anybody.?

Hope you can stay out of the gutter. Maybe you can-if the moderators have you on a tight enough leash.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 11:28 PM

Anybody for making birth control retroactive?

Don Firth (my real name)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: DougR
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 12:34 PM

I doubt that anyone on the Mudcat has more fun than Martin Gibson.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Wolfgang
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 12:45 PM

Anybody for making birth control retroactive? (Don Firth)

'Life not worth to live' was a Nazi euphemism for murder. You have added a new euphemism.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 02:38 PM

While I completely understand the term "Neo-Con", I have a bit of trouble with it. It makes them sound like they ought to glow in the dark or something.

Stephen Lee

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 10:39 PM

Doug R--

Au contraire. Based on the foul vitriol (look it up) of many of his posts, "Martin" actually doesn't seem very happy--even though I've told him over and over our only purpose here is to make him happy. Can't understand what the problem could be.

Maybe his bad humor has something to do with being "dehumanized every day"-- (he certainly has a way with words.)

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 11:17 PM

Making Martin Gibson happy isn't my only purpose. I also hope to secure at least one dinner engagement with Winona Ryder, and I am determined to redecorate this room at some point...

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Peace
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 11:20 PM

She any relation to Red?

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 11:21 PM

No. She is the niece of some counter-culture icon...Timothy Leary or someone like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Peace
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 11:30 PM

Oh. Thought she was related to someone famous like Red Ryder. Timothy Leary was a figment of his own imagination.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 15 Feb 06 - 09:36 AM

Let me understand the point of this thread.   To make this forum better, we should remove all conservatives and their point of view. Than all liberals and progressives can live together in perfect peace and harmony.   Just like on West Wing before it was cacelled.

The best part of being a liberal is that thinking is optional.

If republicans are the "angry" party, what do you call Howard Dean "yeaaaaaaaah", Hillary "power to the peeeeeeeeebbbbbbbbllleee", Al "he betrayed this country" Gore, Ted "the swimmer" Kennedy, Smucky Shumer, and our favorite Cindy Sheehan.

Ok OK, lets look at the Republican candidates for president in 08 to be fair.   McCain, George Allen, Bill Frist, Rudy Gulliani, Condalisa Rice.   Wow, what a bunch of loud obnoxious angry people.

In order for humor to work, there has to be a thread of truth to it to make it seem possible.   As I said, the best part of being a liberal is that thinking is optional.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Feb 06 - 11:53 AM

The best part of being Larry K is that thinking is not an option.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: Wesley S
Date: 15 Feb 06 - 01:11 PM

" To make this forum better, we should remove all conservatives and their point of view. "

Larry, Larry , Larry - Go back and read the first post in this thread and see if you can find where I suggested that all the conservatives vacate the premises. Lighten up a little.

"Let me understand the point of this thread"

The point of this thread was to have a little fun. If you are offended. Gee - I'm sorry. I'll make it up to you someday. I promise.

Subject: RE: BS: Mudcat Neo-con invasion
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Feb 06 - 01:15 PM

"He needs a blowjob more than any white man I ever met."