>>It will never cease to amaze me that almost anything you discuss >>comes back at some point to celebrity gazing.
It's a reasonable comparison. The right wing media are fanatical about celebrity gazing and the left wing media's idea of a scandal is when Joe Citizen does something they disagree with (the affirmative action bake sale was a good case in point...)
Hey, Rich...maybe I was a bit too harsh with my response. You sound shook up. Here's the idea, I'm going to speak for myself not for the Democrats, being that I'm not a member of that party, and you instead of riding your elephant try to respond to what I'm saying and not what you imagine I am (let me guess, a communist loon, wearing a Karl Marx t-shirt, typing away here with a big red flag draped over the wall behind me, and my copy of the Koran in my lap). You pretty much ignored what I said now didn't you...I said the issue was not the shirts but where they were being sold. I also said I agreed that Franken should not be speaking at a Democratic fundraiser. Personally, I think I was being balanced, where as you come across as unhinged.
>I think the only thing more bizarre is your mindless partisanship.
LOL... this is not disimilar to being called a tree-hugger on a Bruce Cockburn message board. I thought mindless partisanship was one of the staples of this board?! Or if my mindless partisanship had a more marxist tone, I'd be `normal`.
Well, I'm happy I could give you a laugh. See the thing is, reading your rantings it seems your on some sort of twisted crusade to prove the left wing has destroyed our country and perhaps the world. Mighty large agenda you're swinging around in here no? If reading comprehension was your strong suit, you'd find there are no Marxist noodlings in my response to you, just a general confusion as to where you're coming from.
>>There are not different rules being applied here as much as you'd >>like to insinuate that idea.
Yes there are. When boundless stupidity eminates from the left side of the spectrum (like an Al Franken book tour) that's protected speech, when boundless stupidity eminates from the right (fill in the name of the current conservative author you dislike) then it's `hate`.
See, you're stuck in the midst of this partisan battle between left and right. I could care less about Al Franken or Ann Coulter or any of these chumps. You are still side stepping what I said the issue was, it's not the shirts it's where they were being sold and the lie about not knowing. It's sort of like Dean's people saying, "Ah, we didn't know Franken was going to show up and we can't control what he says." All you're shooting for here is to promote the idea that the left is full of what makes the grass grow. There are people on the left and right that are off the wall...personally I wouldn't attempt to defend either.
>>Where are the factual errors? Well, if you want to promote the idea >>that all Musilms are terrorists .
Read Serge Trifkovic's `Sword Of The Prophet` and get back to me. It does seem as though Islam has taken the place of Communism as the new thing the left will defend at all costs when it comes to either that or the USA. They appeased Communism as Pol Pot was rocking and rolling and now they'd appease Islam regardless of how much innocent blood is spilt.
Here's the thing Rich, I'm not defending Muslims, I'm trying to promote the idea here that trying to understand eachother is a far better way to go than to start stereotyping an entire section of the population. Isn't that what Hitler did with the Jews? And before you burst into your "Hitler was a socialist" rhetoric, the idea of which is of course to make me (guilt by association I guess) and all lefties look closer to Hitler than the right, I'm not trying to call the right wingers Nazi's in any way. But am I too understand that what you're saying is "ALL MUSLIMS ARE TERRORISTS AND SHOULD BE ERADICATED" or am I missing the point? I'm not quite sure what you mean by Islam being the thing that the left will defend at all costs...frankly I don't see that at all...but I guess the main thing is what is it you would suggest we do with the Muslims of the world? This seems to be the most troubling aspect of what you're suggesting. I mean come on, I just don't understand so I think you need to explain your stance and go a little deeper than just "the left are the defenders of communism and Islam".
>>Well, this has got to go down as the dumbest hog twaddle
And I'm the one who popped out from under a rock?
Ok, as I said, perhaps I was a bit harsh. I'm sorry and I know you didn't pop out from under a rock.
Since it sounds like you've never left the main street of No-Neck, South Dakota
I've never actually been to South Dakota but what is it you have against the people there? I'm not sure but I don't think they have a large Muslim population in No-Neck so you may actually like it there. Detroit on the other hand, I think they have a lot of Muslims.
this `opinion` is borne out from public declarations from Osama Bin Laden, Sheikh Aidid & Uday Hussein. They looked at Vietnam, they knew Clinton posed no threat to them and they looked at the current `dissenters` and concluded that the USA was weak. Since the general will of the country is driven by cowards, they thought they could get away with attack after attack.
Ok, let's run with this a little. If they saw that Clinton was so weak, why didn't they just go absolutely hog wild while he was in office and start crashing planes into buildings then? Why did they wait until Bush was at the helm? I mean, you say they looked at Clinton, saw this weakness...would not this have been the best time to pull their biggest stunt ever? The planes crashing into the Pentagon and the Trade Center and all their other targets? So, we're supposed to see it as Clinton loosened things up for them, left Bush helpless with our weak underbelly exposed, Bush and his crew were scrambling around in August while on vacation trying to figure out how the hell to fix the problems Clinton had created and boom...that was it...Osama saw the perfect moment to unload on us. Is that it then? I just am still pretty much seeing your take as "the left screwed us" and no matter what you want to lay all responsibilty for any terrorist act no matter when it occured at some leftie's feet. Am I also to understand things as "If you don't want to kill Muslims you're a coward." because I mean taken as a whole this seems to be where you're headed. I'm just looking for clarification.
Instead of the folksy insults, do you have some source to prove that Bin Laden/Aidid etc had some respect for America since they knew they'd have Clinton to answer to next time they kill a few more Americans?
bin Laden and company have a deep seeded hatred for our country because of our policies in the Middle East and Israel. There would be little I would surmise we could do about that including severing all ties with Israel. There's just too many years of bad blood there. To try and portray the acts of these terrorists as directly related to the actions of the left wing is disingenuous in the extreme and a pathetic show of blatant partisanship. These terrorists could care less if there's a Democrat or Republican administration in place here the fact is to them we represent evil...they don't differentiate between right and left. Knowing that they had to answer to Bush had a huge effect on their choice to carry out 9/11 right? Look if you want to debate this stuff at least try and be honest and not sell us on the Big Bad Left. And stop stereotyping all the people who come here as such. You're always hostile in tone so you get it back when people respond. Sorry if I insulted you.
>>I've ever read Rich. By this logic Bush would be the weakest on >>defense in our history because 9/11 happened on his watch.
After 8 years of inaction (WTC 1, USS Cole, Mogadishu, the embassy bombings etc) it could be argued that the terrorists had eight years of practise and appeasement. Had there been a prior admin of prinicple, there would be no need for a war on terror if they'd only dealt with the root of the terrorism back in the 90's.
Look you could argue that Mickey Mouse was responsible but it would still be off the wall. Face it Rich, these guys didn't need practice...WE TRAINED THEM. When we need them, it's not terrorism...when we get treated to blowback because we gave them the means then we stand up and take notice. So, in general it's ok for these guys to run around the globe blowing up whatever they please as long as it something we don't care that they blow up or it's someone we see as an enemy. Look, argue the whole thing from an honest perspective and fine we can talk...argue it as "oh the left and their PC ways caused this whole thing" and you sound like a loon. So, I promise no more snide remarks from me if you can actually promise to discuss this stuff from somewhere closer to reality and not from the top of your elephant.
Reg
