 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Libs....get your numbers straight....
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Susu's Hubby Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:23 PM I guess all of you libs out there feel like you're in Florida once again by the way you're attributing the numbers of the war dead as all "civilians". (Yes, Bobert, you keep referring to all 100,000 as civilians.) It's as if you're still trying to discover the intent of the voter by looking at a blank ballot and willing it to be a vote for Gore or Kerry or whomever you're putting all of your hope and faith in at the moment. Let's get to the count. In another thread, a Catter asked for "proof" of where the 100,000 number came from. A fellow poster listed two links which, while putting on a seatbelt to keep out the river of sh*t because of the liberal slant (actually only one was severly slanted, the other was trying as hard as they could to actually list the numbers with some accuracy), I actually took time to read, once I got home from work. (Because I always try to take PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to try and care for me and mine.) First, I'll admit that the 100,000 is an accurate number but the accuracy of the "facts" dreamed up by our fellow catters as to what exactly the 100,000 refers to is way off base. I shall explain. Both sites listed that only 15000-20000 of the dead were actually Iraqi CIVILIANS. A number that I actually quoted in one of my first posts on the Cat (if my memory serves me correctly). The rest of the 100,000 are attributed to Saddam's regular army, Republican guard, and the special guys in the white jump suits ( sorry, I forgot their names). Oh…let's throw in quite a few terrorists into the mix as well as well as other fighters that came in from Syria, and other terrorist supporting countries. They make up the remaining 80,000-85,000 dead. In other words, by far, the HUGE majority of the dead were BAD GUYS. Now let's throw this out for some analysis. Out of the 15000-20000 civilians killed, how many of these were, perhaps, killed by the 80000-85000 bad guys that we managed to kill? If memory serves me right, our troops in Fallujah stumbled across scores of individuals and entire families that were wiped out due to the bad guys holding the town for so long. How quick you libs are to forget that little fact. Here is where I will state that although the number of civilians killed is still way too many, civilians do get killed in war. Don't forget 9/11/01 and 12/7/41. 6000+ of our innocent people were killed. So before you go and start spouting off your manufactured "facts", please take a little time to read the whole article from the source where you pull your numbers. You sure will save A LOT of embarrassment in front of your loyal throngs of lemmings. Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: CarolC Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:29 PM What does 9/11 have to do with the war in Iraq? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Susu's Hubby Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:33 PM Carol, I'm not attempting to make that tie in this thread....my point is that civilians die in War. It's happened to all countries that go to war with other countries. It's happened to us, it's happened to everybody else. Please don't read it while still in your liberal frame of mind. You'll just get confused with the true facts. Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Stilly River Sage Date: 18 Mar 05 - 11:58 PM Susu's Hubby said to CarolC:
What a self-serving, dismissive piece of trash you've contributed, "Hubby." Anything you don't agree with is in quotes, and your "facts" are the accurate ones, right? Except you can't remember some of the names "( sorry, I forgot their names)" or figures "A number that I actually quoted in one of my first posts on the Cat (if my memory serves me correctly)" or places. . . or the truth. If you're going to trounce people with what is your dilusional version of the truth, pal, you should at least go back and check your own facts! Hubby said:
What Bullshit. Are you adding these events from sixty years apart? Or are you saying each one had that many dead? Talk about a disorganized argument. You're good at inflation--the kind of man Dubya wants on his team. The latest authoritative figure for September 11, 2001 is under 3,000. 2,977 comes up at a topical encyclopedia site Wikipedia. I've seen your name a couple of times around here, and in the 126 posts you've contributed so far, not a single one has to do with MUSIC, the raison d'être of this place. I can see we're not going to get along, for a lot of reasons. And you needed to start a new thread for this, eh? SRS (And they still don't add up to 6000 when lumped together, since Pearl Harbor was 2,403). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: GUEST Date: 19 Mar 05 - 12:17 AM Ask SRS what instrument she plays |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Troll Date: 19 Mar 05 - 12:32 AM SRS, using argumentum ad hominem makes you no better than the person you disagree with. 9/11 and 12/7 are both instances where US civilians died in enemy attacks. The total number of deaths in both attacks was around 6000. The fact that the two events were 60 years apart is really irrevalent. They took place on US soil or in a US Territory. They were innocent civilians, killed in an enemy attack. I think that was his point. We, too, have had civilian casualties over the years and though others have had more than we have, it happens in war. Even one is too many but it happens. The Russian civilian losses in WWII make Iraq look like a minor fender-bender. There are STILL too many Iraqi civilian deaths but to attribute them all to US troops smacks strongly of ideological wishful thinking. And what is the reason for pointing out Hubbys lack of musical posts? Last time I checked, this forum was open to all, not just the musically inclined. Or would you rather have a quota system: one BS post for every three music posts? That which is not compulsory is forbidden! Jawohl, Herr Oberst! And from what I've seen over the years, you don't tend to get along with the people who don't agree with you anyhow. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: GUEST,Miss Manners Date: 19 Mar 05 - 01:04 AM Oh dear me, now you too Mr or Ms Troll have contributed a 'self-serving, dismissive piece of trash.' All too soon the entire website may become filled with those who dare to disagree with SRS. You must leave at once, before this thread is closed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: GUEST,Stilly River Sage Date: 19 Mar 05 - 01:23 AM Piano. And processing a collection of folk music. Carol's the only other bona fide musician I see on this thread. But this thread is beyond BS, it's just plain stupid, as are so many of the self-serving political threads. This one was started by one who is a hanger-on, only here to find a place to vent his off-kilter views, not to really participate in what the site is about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: CarolC Date: 19 Mar 05 - 01:28 AM Susu's hubby, do you consider everyone in the world who isn't Susu's hubby to be a "liberal". I sure don't. Please don't read it while still in your liberal frame of mind. You'll just get confused with the true facts. That's a hell of a big assumption to make based on one little eleven word question. And what an abusive little shit you are, too. I pity your poor wife for getting her screen name all contaminated with your vitriolic bile. BTW, 9/11 wasn't a war. It was a terrorist attack. Just like the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City was a terrorist attack. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: CarolC Date: 19 Mar 05 - 01:33 AM troll's a bona fide musician. I know. I've seen/heard him play. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Boab Date: 19 Mar 05 - 03:39 AM Deletion of the self-praise and abuse of others in the "leader" here would condense a long-winded, convoluted load of eyewash to about four lines. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: robomatic Date: 19 Mar 05 - 04:20 AM Nanki Poo: I'm not really a musician Yum Yum: I knew it directly I heard you play! - from "The Mikado" It's my understanding that the 100,000 'civilian' deaths came from an article out of Johns Hopkins which came up with that figure as an 'average' probability, whereas the actual count of 'collateral' civilian deaths was about one tenth of that. I haven't seen any other source for that figure. If the original poster could cite sources for his arguments this thread might be able to settle into something capable of dealing with reality. Otherwise, it's just a mud throwing contest (fun as that can be). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Barry Finn Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:12 AM There's nothing correct in this number game with the exception that playing it is only a distraction. Wither the number of dead is 10,000 or 1,000,000 the death of one innocent child is to much. Iraq & 9/11 no connection, Iraq was not a threat to the US. We needed to free the Iraqi people, it's a part of the war on terrorism. Why are we there & are we having fun yet. All after thoughts when the WMD didn't pan out like the rock solid intelligence that was presented to the world assured us it would. Numbers!! Can anyone come up with the amount spent as of today on the war? Can anyone come up with an amount that this invasion/occupation will cost when it's over? Can anyone tell us when it will be over? It seems to me that a privileged few thinks that war is good for business, their business. All the while the numbers that all this is costing will most likely remain untold. The number on jobs lost, the number social services slashed, the number it's done to our educational system, our health care, our future, our dead, our good name, our FREEDOM, are these any of the numbers that anyone would care to or dare to put an amount to? NUMBERS, no one will ever be able to put a number on what this has cost or what we have lost. We can take all the statistics, the polls, the numbers, the surveys, the outcome of all the investigations, panels & inquiries and put them to good use as toilet paper. The bottom line is America & the world were sold a lot of shit & the price we will pay for generations to come will be dear, if it can be paid at all. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: GUEST Date: 19 Mar 05 - 06:16 AM Susu's hubby is one of our long time flamers who has been here many years stirring up shit. He is not a new person in the forum. His name is Will. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Bobert Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:42 AM First of all, since Hubby mentioned me in this thread, I like to clear up one point. I am very much a boni-fide musican and many Catters have heard me play... Second, when it comes to numbers, it's tough to put a handle on the actual numbers as the Bush ahministration is doing everything in its powers to keep these numbers from seeing the light of day but... The Pentagon bragged after the initial invasion that it had flown over 30,000 sorties. A sortie is an air strike. In other words, over 30,000 bombs of some sort were dropped on on a country the size of Texas, most of them in densely populated areas. Now I know that they like to brag that some of these bombs were smart bombs but if that smart bomb just happens to land next to you there ain't nuthoin' yoo smart about it!!! So we have over 30,000 bombs dropped over a populated area. Now, let throw in the millions of tank, artillery and small arms rounds being fired in this populated country and it becomes apparent that if only 20,000 people died then God Hisself was certainly redirecting one heck of a lot of bombs and bullets away from people... I mean, think about it. This don't take a Wes Ginny Slide rule to figure out here, folks... And lastly, yeah Pearl Harbor and 9/11 really sucked. They were carried out by some purdy danged God-less and evil people. Sho nuff were. So was the invasion of Iraq... Same mentality... I don't blame the troops but I do hold Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, Wolfowitz, Pearle, Kerry, Clinton, etc. accountable... And fir gosh sakes, hubby, pleeeease stop falsely associating me with Democrats, thank you... That blank ballot statement with "Gore and Kerry" reference was out of bounds. I am a Green Party guy and have no more use for Kerry than I have for Bush... If you make that reference again I will start making references to you and Adolf Hitler of Charles Manson. Would you like that? No, I didn't think so. Plus, when you do rhose kinds of things it just adds to an image that you are ignorant of the facts. I have stated my Green-ness here going back a long time so, knock it off. Okay? Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: harpgirl Date: 19 Mar 05 - 09:42 AM To the republican and other war mongers at mudcat: We went to war so the republican elite could line their coffers with war generated profits, so George could seek revenge for the attempted murder of his father and prove that he can win the Oedipal contest, and so America could control more of the world's oil production ( doesn't seem to be happening), The "war on terror" was the official excuse. Anyone who believes that human deaths of any number are an unfortunate byproduct of this sanctioned global violence is not only in denial about what evil really is, but is also dangerously misguided and not thinking independently. I am truly frightened by these folks, many of which are right here on this thread. You have seen what can happen when too many people begin to accept the party line. I guess you folks would fight WWIII if George made up a reason. How about "all arabs are an inferior race?" Let's exterminate them. Does that float your boat? disgusted, harpgirl |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: GUEST Date: 19 Mar 05 - 10:23 AM Bobert, I would never dispute that you are a musician, and you hadn't posted here! I was simply getting to the argumentative motive of the original poster. Thanks to the 'catter who clarified the troll status of Mr. Hubby. That possibility occurred to me as I considered the matter. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Frankham Date: 19 Mar 05 - 01:31 PM As long as we're engaging in "fuzzy math" here, let's try this on for size. How many insurgents are Iraqi citizens fighting for their country? How many American troops really have been killed in Iraq? Not just the ones that the news reports. (Those are only the ones listed as having died in combat.) How many American soldiers are going through Walter Reed Hospital? How many American ex-soldiers are living on the streets of America? As for blog sites, how reliable are they? I guess it depends on which ones you choose to believe. And once more with feeling, 911 had nothing to do with Iraq. It has been stated by so many sources you would think that people would understand that. We are not getting accurate numbers from any source about casualties or torture by both Americans and Sunni Guards. You can't talk about numbers when they are being distorted by the media, the government and by partisan hawks. Frank |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: DougR Date: 19 Mar 05 - 01:57 PM My, my, my, Hubby, you do have a way of stirring up a liberal amount of discontent among the faithful don't you? Welcome to the Mudcat (although you have been here awhile I know). You probably are aware that anyone who does not spew forth the Liberal line on this forum is a candidate for being bludgeoned with abuse. If you weren't, this thread should introduce you to true blue liberal tolerance. They have tolerance for anyone they agree with, and anyone who introduces a different point of view is sentenced to walk the plank. Come on in, the water's fine! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Peace Date: 19 Mar 05 - 02:10 PM "(Yes, Bobert, you keep referring to all 100,000 as civilians.)" The figure of 100,000 came from the British medical publication entitled "The Lancet". Hubby, stop with the bullshit, OK? I am on occasion a lib; on other occasions I am to the right of Stalin. Regardless of how many civilians were killed in Iraq, as one poster said above, one is too many. The US has no reason to be in Iraq--at least none that the government ever mentioned. Let me ask you one thing: Hussein has been taken down and no WMD were found. So why the hell is the US still there? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: CarolC Date: 19 Mar 05 - 02:15 PM My problem with Mr. Hubby, DougR, has nothing whatever to do with "liberal" vs anything whatever. It has only to do with Mr. Hubby's abusive behavior and stereotyping of me based only on my having asked that one question. It is the assumption the he knows what my political inclinations are, based on that question, that I have a problem with, along with his abusive way of communicating those assumptions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Don Firth Date: 19 Mar 05 - 03:08 PM GUEST (19 Mar 05 - 12:17 AM), that is a cheap shot. SRS has answered your question, but let me just say that I do know a fair amount about her background in folk music, and it's extensive. There are many folklorists, ethnomusicologists, archivists, and others associated with various aspects of folk music who are not what one might call "practicing folk musicians," in that they don't perform folk songs in front of audiences—or perform at all. One of the most knowledgeable (about folk music) people I knew didn't sing or play a musical instrument at all, but for decades his house was available almost any weekend if a group of folksingers wanted to get together and have a songfest. He also had a huge collection of folk music records, which, as long as we were careful with them, we were welcome to borrow to learn songs from. Let me ask you this: would you raise a question if, by some miracle, Francis James Child posted on Mudcat? F. J. Child was an English professor at Harvard. There is no record that he ever played a musical instrument. You do know who F. J. Child is, don't you? Obviously Susu's Hubby is here strictly for the politics. By the way, Doug, how long has it been since you've posted to a music thread? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: DougR Date: 19 Mar 05 - 03:13 PM Carol: it is not my intention to defend Hubby. He can do that pretty well on his own. Perhaps he has read some of your posts in the archives and believes that your leanings are to the left. But the attacks on him by SRS, brucie and others is, in my opinion, unwarranted. It seems perfectly reasonable to me if someone posts something that another catter questions, for that someone else to challenge them on what they postedwithout being personally attacked. But that does happen frequently. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: GUEST,CarolC Date: 19 Mar 05 - 03:20 PM DougR, the opening post to this thread is more abuse than it is substance. The response he is getting is entirely in keeping with the tone he, himself, set in that opening post. And I don't care what he has read of mine in the archives. He doesn't get to tell me what my political philosophy is. I'm the only one who gets to do that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Amos Date: 19 Mar 05 - 03:24 PM Not only is it rude, ill-mannered and abusive, it isd also short in tyhe analysis department, riddled with factual and logical flaws and layered with rather ham-handed rhetopric. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Peace Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:14 PM Doug: Think what you want. The US has no right being in Iraq. You know that as well as I do. Hubby's post was a bullshit attempt to stir the pot. The Lancet reported the 100,000 figure. A more conservative and maybe accurate group gave a figure closer to 20,000. I posted the link on another thread. You can no more determine from people's posts how they vote than you can determine from Bush's words what he means. As I siad, think what you want. So will I. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Peace Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:34 PM Please don't read it while still in your liberal frame of mind. You'll just get confused with the true facts. "Please don't read it while still in your liberal frame of mind. You'll just get confused with the true facts." This was Hubby's remark to Carol near the top of this thread. Carol has lots more class than I ever will; I'd a told ya to GFY. Carol is so far beyond liberal it's great. She has, IMO, a great sense of right/wrong, an intellect that is worthy of admiration, a tenacity I think is great and a patience I can but view from afar, because I have never had that sort of equanimity in my life. I was the fellow catter you mentioned who posted those links (see your first post, Hubby). You, my friend, do NOT piss on me. I posted those links to give a balanced view. Your game with the numbers means to me that you put your bullshit political aganda ahead of human life. I think that sucks. One guy to another, I do not give a rat's ass how much you like the Republicans or George Friggin' Bush, but I care very much for some of the folks you get off slagging. Your intent was to cause trouble. You have done so. Congratulations. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: DougR Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:42 PM Brucie: I just read Hubby's post again. I do not see why what he posted would get everybody so upset. His post is not nearly as rude or insulting as Amos' or SRS's in reply to him. It appears to me that he was merely trying to set the record straight as he sees it. The fact that others see it differently is no big news and certainly not surprising. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Peace Date: 19 Mar 05 - 05:52 PM The links I provided on another thread give the following 1) 100,000 dead 2) 20,000 dead He slurred me. I don't give anyone free shots, ever. Just the way it is. You want nice from me you give nice. Ya got somethoing to say, say it. But no one f#cks with me and gets away with it. Never have and never will. That's all I have to say. If this guy has a problem with me he can friggin' well explain what it is. If he wants a problem with me, he just got it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Greg F. Date: 19 Mar 05 - 06:14 PM I do not see why what he posted would get everybody so upset. Precisely so. A quite idiotic observation. Stupidity - not political affiliation- is the root problem. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: DougR Date: 19 Mar 05 - 06:37 PM Thank you Greg. I can alway count on you for an insult and you didn't disappoint. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Mar 05 - 06:40 PM "And I don't care what he has read of mine in the archives. He doesn't get to tell me what my political philosophy is. I'm the only one who gets to do that. " I agree with you on this, CarolC. I just hope that you will be just as indignent when those on mudcat use the same tactic against myself, or others that they disagree with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: CarolC Date: 19 Mar 05 - 06:50 PM Thanks for the kind words, brucie. beardedbruce, I don't like it when it is done to anyone, no matter what their political views are, and I wish people wouldn't do it. I think it causes more problems than it solves, and it gets in the way of real dialogue. But I don't consider myself anyone's nanny, and therefore I try to put careful thought into whether or not I will interject anything on behalf of others. In your case, I see that you give pretty much as good as you get, so you clearly don't need my help. But I do reserve the right to stick up for myself under any circumstances. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: CarolC Date: 19 Mar 05 - 06:52 PM BTW, beardedbruce, I have on some occasions, when I thought it needed to be done, gone to bat for people with political points of view that are quite the opposite of my own. And I have taken plenty of hits for it as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Mar 05 - 06:54 PM And while I often disagree with your views, I support your presenting them in a reasonable fashion. ALL sides of issues should be discussed, not just those that the (here) Liberal dictatorship want brought out. And when EITHER side brings up "statements" they should be based on fact. We can differ as to the meaning of facts, but there has to be some basis of reality before any discussion can have meaning. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Mar 05 - 06:55 PM The second paragraph above was a general comment, and NOT directed at CarolC. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Amos Date: 19 Mar 05 - 07:09 PM OF course the notion of condoning the random death of 1, 2 or 20 or 100 thousands of human beings, no matter what rationalization you use, is conceivable only to those who feel they have the power to decide on life or death for non-combatants. Folks like George and Osama. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: artbrooks Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:12 PM BTW, did you all notice that, like all good trolls, he threw out a idiotic comment and is now gleefully watching everyone elses' reaction? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Don Firth Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:15 PM "Liberal dictatorship??!??!???" Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: CarolC Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:30 PM LOL artbrooks, do you have a secret "troll-cam" hidden at the H's house? If so, please tell me where you got it. I want one too! Or at least post the pictures... ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Bobert Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:47 PM My, my, my... Well, ain't this somethin'... Here I go off and play a little blues and come home and there sho nuff been one heck o' a food fight going on here in Mudville.. (But, Bobert, why do you think they call it Mudville?) Okay, never mind the food... We'll clean it up later but to... Dougie: Hey, it's very much okay to disagree with Hubby's tactic shile not disagreeing with his politics. Might even make some of your arguements more credible since hibby's ain't and... bb: Good on you for supprting CarolC. Now I would hope that you would see that what hubby does in inventing other people's poiltics is what you also have done repeatedly. It's not only irritating, but dishonest. It also hurts your arguments... and Amos: Good to see you back in the fray... Not sure where you been hidin' but we don't need you in hidin', thank you. Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:53 PM Bobert And you have called me a bushite how many times? Maybe you should think before you comment. For a change. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Mar 05 - 08:55 PM And how many times have you stated I get my information from sources I do not listen to? And I am STILL waiting for any evidence to back your "statements" about conservative control of media..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Bobert Date: 19 Mar 05 - 09:00 PM Okay, "Bush apologist". Like that any better? You support everything that Bush does, bb, so you pick the name... You are one of the most *patisan* people in Mudville. It doesn't seem to matter the issue. If Bush is for it, yer for it. If he's against it, you are agianst it. Then you attack anyone who is against what ever Bush is for ot against... Seems like blind loyalty to me... You look at my positions. They aren't *partisan*. They are pro-human and pro-earth. I couldn't give a rat's butt about either Repubs or Dems... They are nuthin' but rival fraternities... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 19 Mar 05 - 09:05 PM Not everything, as you might realize if you bothered to read my statements before passing judgement. I can see that you are anti-Bush, Sounds like blind hatred to me... As for pro-human and pro-Earth, perhaps we should look at the effects of the principles you seem to be pushing, and let people decide if you can claim that- Perhaps I am pro-Earth, and you are not. It really depends on what the RESULT of out policies would be, NOT the intent. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: CarolC Date: 19 Mar 05 - 09:07 PM Ok, I'll step up to the plate for bb this time... I have actually seen beardedbruce criticize GW on at least one occasion. I saw him say once that he wasn't happy about the Bush adminisration dragging its feet on the subject of Sudan. But really, bb, "liberal dictatorship" isn't any better than the kinds of things you don't appreciate other people saying. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: GUEST Date: 19 Mar 05 - 09:07 PM And what, exactly, do you know about what I support and what I don't? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: CarolC Date: 19 Mar 05 - 09:15 PM GUEST, 19 Mar 05 - 09:07 PM, who are you and whom are you addressing? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: Bobert Date: 19 Mar 05 - 09:21 PM Well, excuse me... Looks as if bb has, over the 1000 things that Bush has been fir or aginst disagreed with him 1 time.... Wow, real disgruntled worker... Okay, Dougie is the most partisan, bb... Now yer running a close 2nd... That feel better? And as fir policies, you wanta argue them? Like where you want start? Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Libs....get your numbers straight.... From: heric Date: 19 Mar 05 - 09:23 PM I think I can wrap this up. 1. Progressive taxation is good. 2. Social safety nets should be strengthened. 3. War is bad. 4. Global markets oppress the citizenry of poorer nations. 5. Third World aid is good. 6. Propoganda is prevalent and bad. 7. The Bush administration makes all decisions in accordance with oil industry objectives. There you have it. |
