McCain up in polls. 20% of White Woman voters shift.

People moving to Canada? Damn, you guys are dumb.

Canada has massive oil production and no army to protect it.

I'm not saying America will "annex" Canada a la Fallout, but I'm sure Canada will sell their oil to America at a profitable discount after some discussions.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Heh. Some people just shut their ears off to the truth.

Let me make two statements:

Sarah Palin was always in favor of the bridge to nowhere, never gave back the nearly $300 million Alaska received for it, and became circumstantially against it only after it was canceled by a federal government that decided to stop funding it.

OR

Sarah Palin was always against the bridge to nowhere, gave back the $300 million, and said "stop wasting taxpayers' money!"

I'm curious which you agree with. I mean, I know which one you agree with, but I just want you to say it out loud so we're all aware of the fact that you're lying to yourself. I can't change your mind, but I can evoke enough cognitive dissonance in ya to cause a migraine.[/QUOTE]



For starters, you need to keep your ego in check, your not enough of a wordsmith to cause me any problems. I think if you looked at your own candidate, and while your at it wipe some of that brown off your nose, you'd see that two other people voted for the bridge, ready for this OBAMA AND BIDEN! I know you like facts so he's a link...http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/obama-and-biden-voted-for-bridge-to-nowhere,1628/ and you'll also see that they loved the bridge so much that they voted for it instead of in favor of Katrina relief. Oh well we'll just ignore that as it's makes them look bad. But while we are on the subject of earmarks, something Emperor Obama is totally against as he will go through the budgets "line by line" to eliminate wasteful spending we should also mention earmarks, while I admit that some of very good and I don't mind seeing money going to certain causes, I just love the first sentence of the article I link below. "Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has released a list of $740 million in earmark requests he made in the past three years, and it includes $1 million for the hospital where his wife Michelle is a vice president. " He also gave $713,000 for Soybean Disease Research, that's up there with AIDS and Heart Disease. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1985933/posts So it wouldn't be smart to bring up earmarks in any more posts, remember the liberal motto, tax and spend, tax and spend.

And to answer your original question I will say that there was plenty of people now that did vote for said bridge among them everyone's favorite Democratic tag team, although Palin at one time did favor it, she was against the size of it and eventually decided to keep the money, which was legal, and most of it was used for the good of Alaska while more of it is sitting in the bank. I'm sure if I cared enough to research, I could find plenty more inaccuricies in statements made by Obama.
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']For starters, you need to keep your ego in check, your not enough of a wordsmith to cause me anything problems. I think if you looked at your own candidate, and while your at it wipe some of that brown off your nose, you'd see that two other people voted for the bridge, ready for this OBAMA AND BIDEN! I know you like facts so he's a link...http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/obama-and-biden-voted-for-bridge-to-nowhere,1628/ and you'll also see that they loved the bridge so much that they voted for it instead of in favor Katrina relief. Oh well we'll just ignore that as it's makes them look bad. But while we are on the subject of earmarks, something Emperor Obama is totally against as he will go through the budgets "line by line" we should also mention earmarks, while I admit that some of very good and I don't mind seeing money going to certain causes, I just love the first sentence of the article I link below. "Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has released a list of $740 million in earmark requests he made in the past three years, and it includes $1 million for the hospital where his wife Michelle is a vice president. " He also gave $713,000 for Soybean Disease Research, that's up there with AIDS and Heart Disease. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1985933/posts So it wouldn't be smart to bring up earmarks in any more posts, remember the liberal motto, tax and spend, tax and spend.

And to answer your original question I will say that there was plenty of people now that did vote for said bridge among them everyone's favorite Democratic tag team, although Palin at one time did favor it, she was against the size of it and eventually decided to keep the money, which was legal, and most of it was used for the good of Alaska while more of it is sitting in the bank. I'm sure if I cared enough to research, I could find plenty more inaccuricies in statements made by Obama.[/QUOTE]

Did someone just fart?
 
[quote name='SpazX']There are always stupid people, I'd say at least 20%.[/quote]


That's a solid start. I'd raise it to 50.7 percent, though. :whistle2:#
 
[quote name='Msut77']Did someone just fart?[/QUOTE]

Debate over, I can't think of a comeback to that. Thank You for that enlightening and thoughtful almost Oprah like moment.
 
[quote name='lilboo']Tears. They are showing white women on the news who are talking about how Palin "speaks for them" and how "I can relate to her"

:wall:

This is making me so nervous.[/QUOTE]

It made me nervous when people were fainting at Obama rallies so I know how you feel.
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']For starters, you need to keep your ego in check, your not enough of a wordsmith to cause me any problems. I think if you looked at your own candidate, and while your at it wipe some of that brown off your nose, you'd see that two other people voted for the bridge, ready for this OBAMA AND BIDEN! I know you like facts so he's a link...http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/obama-and-biden-voted-for-bridge-to-nowhere,1628/ and you'll also see that they loved the bridge so much that they voted for it instead of in favor of Katrina relief. Oh well we'll just ignore that as it's makes them look bad. But while we are on the subject of earmarks, something Emperor Obama is totally against as he will go through the budgets "line by line" to eliminate wasteful spending we should also mention earmarks, while I admit that some of very good and I don't mind seeing money going to certain causes, I just love the first sentence of the article I link below. "Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has released a list of $740 million in earmark requests he made in the past three years, and it includes $1 million for the hospital where his wife Michelle is a vice president. " He also gave $713,000 for Soybean Disease Research, that's up there with AIDS and Heart Disease. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1985933/posts So it wouldn't be smart to bring up earmarks in any more posts, remember the liberal motto, tax and spend, tax and spend.

And to answer your original question I will say that there was plenty of people now that did vote for said bridge among them everyone's favorite Democratic tag team, although Palin at one time did favor it, she was against the size of it and eventually decided to keep the money, which was legal, and most of it was used for the good of Alaska while more of it is sitting in the bank. I'm sure if I cared enough to research, I could find plenty more inaccuricies in statements made by Obama.[/QUOTE]

You're forgetting one important rule of thumb in talking about this stuff: Obama doesn't make mistakes or say stupid things. If ever it appears that he does, there is a perfectly rational explanation for it and the Republicans are just back to their "swift boating" attacks without substance.

Obama went to Harvard, and organized communities for years. That makes him vastly more intelligent and experienced than anyone here or in this campaign.

Remember these things, and you'll do better here.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']You're forgetting one important rule of thumb in talking about this stuff: Obama doesn't make mistakes or say stupid things. If ever it appears that he does, there is a perfectly rational explanation for it and the Republicans are just back to their "swift boating" attacks without substance.

Obama went to Harvard, and organized communities for years. That makes him vastly more intelligent and experienced than anyone here or in this campaign.

Remember these things, and you'll do better here.[/QUOTE]


Your right I apologize for my valid points with documentation. Do you think if I make fun of Jesus and Christianity and there damn charity, rag on Fox news, and people with views against abortion I will feel the love here? Will Michelle Obama and Ellen ever let me dance with them again? Maybe if I make fun of McCain cause he's old or Palin because she's an inferior women to us dominate men I can fist bump Obama?
 
[quote name='SpazX']I think that's the most effort you've ever spent to not answer a question, juputahraptor.[/QUOTE]

JPUTAHRAPTOR* if your going to spell my fake name at least spell it right. I did answer which nobody here does and choose to make some other brilliant post, like who farted. And thank you for not making any counterpoints to my quickly thrown together post and completely missing my second paragraph. If I asked you whether your stupid or a dumbass you could choose to respond without actually choosing either. Just because someone sets up two answers to trap me doesn't mean they are valid. Now look to the left of my post because Tiffany is going to wink at you...cool huh!
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']For starters, you need to keep your ego in check, your not enough of a wordsmith to cause me any problems. I think if you looked at your own candidate, and while your at it wipe some of that brown off your nose, you'd see that two other people voted for the bridge, ready for this OBAMA AND BIDEN! I know you like facts so he's a link...http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/obama-and-biden-voted-for-bridge-to-nowhere,1628/ and you'll also see that they loved the bridge so much that they voted for it instead of in favor of Katrina relief. Oh well we'll just ignore that as it's makes them look bad. But while we are on the subject of earmarks, something Emperor Obama is totally against as he will go through the budgets "line by line" to eliminate wasteful spending we should also mention earmarks, while I admit that some of very good and I don't mind seeing money going to certain causes, I just love the first sentence of the article I link below. "Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has released a list of $740 million in earmark requests he made in the past three years, and it includes $1 million for the hospital where his wife Michelle is a vice president. " He also gave $713,000 for Soybean Disease Research, that's up there with AIDS and Heart Disease. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1985933/posts So it wouldn't be smart to bring up earmarks in any more posts, remember the liberal motto, tax and spend, tax and spend.

And to answer your original question I will say that there was plenty of people now that did vote for said bridge among them everyone's favorite Democratic tag team, although Palin at one time did favor it, she was against the size of it and eventually decided to keep the money, which was legal, and most of it was used for the good of Alaska while more of it is sitting in the bank. I'm sure if I cared enough to research, I could find plenty more inaccuricies in statements made by Obama.[/quote]

To save myke the effort of blasting you, a liberal spending money isn't a big deal. That's like a Republican fucking up the economy and starting pointless wars. The point of the two options was to select one instead of criticizing Obama. Now, it appears you selected the first option. Good. The second option, I believe, was in Palin's acceptance speech at the RNC.

Now, let's ground your rationalization into reality. Assume you're a painter. My wife, Wonder Woman, is away doing good. I hire you to paint her invisible jet. I pay you up front on the condition that work must be completed in full. My wife, Wonder Woman, comes home. Upon seeing you with clean paint brushes and sealed paint cans, she freaks out and the three of us come to the conclusion that the invisible jet shall not be painted.

Assuming you have receipts for all of your materials and you can expend your labor elsewhere without any loss of income, how of the money should you be allowed to keep for the canceled job?

...

Before you go with the angle of "The money belongs to the Alaskan people", I would advise that the money for the bridge to nowhere was extracted from all US taxpayers as opposed to being raised through a local bond issue. Thus, the money should be returned to the Treasury and applied to towards the deficit or, possibly, returned to the people the money was taken from.
 
Hospital = pork barrel, jputah? You can't be serious... especially funding as low as $1mil, which is chump change for a hospital.

It's rare for someone to lose every shred of credibility in a single post, but I think you pulled it off. Congrats, I guess?
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']To save myke the effort of blasting you, a liberal spending money isn't a big deal. That's like a Republican fucking up the economy and starting pointless wars. The point of the two options was to select one instead of criticizing Obama. Now, it appears you selected the first option. Good. The second option, I believe, was in Palin's acceptance speech at the RNC.

Now, let's ground your rationalization into reality. Assume you're a painter. My wife, Wonder Woman, is away doing good. I hire you to paint her invisible jet. I pay you up front on the condition that work must be completed in full. My wife, Wonder Woman, comes home. Upon seeing you with clean paint brushes and sealed paint cans, she freaks out and the three of us come to the conclusion that the invisible jet shall not be painted.

Assuming you have receipts for all of your materials and you can expend your labor elsewhere without any loss of income, how of the money should you be allowed to keep for the canceled job?

...

Before you go with the angle of "The money belongs to the Alaskan people", I would advise that the money for the bridge to nowhere was extracted from all US taxpayers as opposed to being raised through a local bond issue. Thus, the money should be returned to the Treasury and applied to towards the deficit or, possibly, returned to the people the money was taken from.[/QUOTE]


No offense but I'd rather get blasted by myke, his posts at least make some kind of sense. And to the guy with the chess piece um you missed the point because there are a lot of hospitals but only one that his wife is the VP for. It's like if I gave my wife an invisible jet because she's my wife and not some other women who I don't sleep with, or some nonsense like that.
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']JPUTAHRAPTOR* if your going to spell my fake name at least spell it right.[/quote]

Eh, I knew I'd miss a letter or something and you'd act like it was a big deal. I could call you on your spelling mistakes if I felt like it mattered.

[quote name='jputahraptor']I did answer which nobody here does and choose to make some other brilliant post, like who farted. And thank you for not making any counterpoints to my quickly thrown together post and completely missing my second paragraph. If I asked you whether your stupid or a dumbass you could choose to respond without actually choosing either. Just because someone sets up two answers to trap me doesn't mean they are valid. Now look to the left of my post because Tiffany is going to wink at you...cool huh![/quote]

I didn't miss your second paragraph, but it wasn't really an answer either, it was just some weird excuse. The question is:

Would you describe someone who fought for earmarks and supported an earmark for the "bridge to nowhere" as being against earmarks and saying "thanks, but no thanks" to said bridge?

Can you answer that question without referring to other people and/or saying liberals spend money?
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']No offense but I'd rather get blasted by myke, his posts at least make some kind of sense.[/quote]

Which point do you need clarification on?

Do you not understand you cannot keep money for incomplete work?

Do you not understand the money taken from the Treasury to build a bridge does not belong to Alaska?

Do you not understand why I wanted to paint the invisible jet?

Do you not understand how you can be employable in a hypothetical situation?
 
I was joking about my name, I really don't care about it and as for my spelling mistakes who cares, that's not the issue here. I'm not proofreading for a bunch of people who don't like me or at least my views. I just like to be difficult :) around here. Anyway about yours and his question I don't see how one thing she supported now totally disquallifes here while Obama talks about change but he spent millions doing the exact same thing. None of the candidates are perfect and both have misspoken and will continue to. Do you not see the irony that Obama accusses Palin of flip flopping on this issue while at the same time he is just as bad or not worst on earmarks? He promotes this change but he's just as corrupt as any other politician and has done everything most every Democrat and Republican has done, just in a shorter time. Does that answer the question, yes the statement she made was not completely valid nor was Obama's since he supported the bridge to. I find it hard to give Obama a free ride either though.
 
jputa,

You did, at some point, answer the question I asked. But you didn't, still, answer the question.

;)

I'm not suggesting that keeping the money was illegal. It isn't.

The point was that she received between $250-300 million in federal funds towards this project.

This was not the full amount to build said bridge.

Congress, not Sarah Palin, decided against funding the bridge, surely as a result of the public uproar it caused (thanks in no small part to McCain speaking out against such porkbarrel projects).

So, with a partially funded project, it was canceled.

Here's a question: who deserves more responsibility for killing the bridge project? The federal congress who opted to not fully fund it, or the governor who decided to not pursue a project for which they had insufficient funds (ignoring the PR embarrassment the project was)?

The governor canceled a project she didn't have money for and kept the money she was already allocated. With the resource limitations, I wouldn't applaud that. Period.

You can't be proud of something you think you did when decisions and limitations elsewhere had a significantly greater impact on whether or not it would happen.

Now, that all said, everything's above board and fully legal. That's correct.

But this governor has repeated her "thanks, but no thanks" lie over two dozen times (well, really once, I suppose, since she's on a short enough leash that she hasn't said anything in public save for a well-rehearsed stump speech, since they're scared to let her be interviewed by a journalist who asks questions).

She said "thanks" for the money that she kept. That's the main problem. You have two candidates speaking out against government misspending. One of those candidates received a heaping portion of that very misspending and prides herself on not building a frivolous bridge.

In the process, you overlook the fact that the state kept the money.

Thanks, for the money!

No thanks, for deciding to stop funding a project I favored! Guess I'll "decide" to not implement it now.

A real maverick would have handed the check right back and said something like "pay down the debt, you nitwits!"

A real maverick would have not accepted, or applied for, such funding.

A liar would have accepted the money, been out of the power loop deciding to not fund a porkbarrel project, kept the money, and then taken credit for being against government misspending.

Capiche?

It's not about who voted for it or against it. It's about who was in favor of it until there wasn't anything to be in favor of, took the money and ran, and then postured as if they fought against government excess.

That's what it's about.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Ok between his "slap der libruls" sig and his use of Freeperville as a source could there be any more reason to ignore this dunderhead?

Let us fire up the way back machine and find out:

http://www.cheapassgamer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13421[/QUOTE]

Uh-oh 4 years ago I had a disc of downloaded games on it, guess I can't run for president now :(. Don't you have better or more intelligent things to do or say? Of course not.

And Myke, I understand what your saying, I have slightly more respect for you now :) just school these other guys so we can have debates around here and not name calling. I'm tired of going down to everyone else's level although I secretly love it.

And candidates will embellish their resumes. I don't think what she said or did was exactly wrong, I guess that's where we disagree. I think that she was doing what was in the best interest of her state and that she didn't waste the money or use it for her own gain. I'm not sure what Obama did with all that spending was in the best interests of the people of Chicago and I find it questionable that he would attack her so strongly on an issue that he supported to and I think his spending especially so closely with his wife should be questioned a little more.
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']Uh-oh 4 years ago I had a disc of downloaded games on it, guess I can't run for president now :(. Don't you have better or more intelligent things to do or say? Of course not.[/QUOTE]

Well you also managed to blatantly lie while being owned so that counts for something.

Perhaps before acting all butthurt you should you know not have something silly like "dur slap libruls *fart noise*"
right where anyone can see it?
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']It's like if I gave my wife an invisible jet because she's my wife and not some other women who I don't sleep with, or some nonsense like that.[/quote]

That's all I had to read...
 
[quote name='Msut77']Well you also managed to blatantly lie while being owned so that counts for something.

Perhaps before acting all butthurt you should you know not have something like "dur slap libruls *fart noise*"
right where anyone can see it?[/QUOTE]


Why am I bothering with you? When did I lie? And what does some idiotic post I made 4 years ago have to do with what we are discussing here. And when the most intelligent post you can reply with concerns fart and butt, you've lost most of your credibility. Put a little thought into your posts and maybe people will take you seriously or maybe quote you and not have an insult beneath it. Let us adults talk about grown up things and when you get out of high school maybe you can say something that doesn't relate to biological functions.

And for the record it was a disc of GBA games that I enjoyed so much that I now collect them. I've made numerous posts attesting to that in hopes that someone would care but nobody has yet.
 
It's not a matter of not wrong. It's a matter of saying one thing and doing another.

Now, normally I'm in favor of slashing earmarks. But seeing as how the annual amount of "pork" we spend is equal to 6 weeks of war in Iraq, I think that talking about vetoing pork project won't result in us being financially better off, federally, than we are now.

Again, look at the past 3 Republican administrations: responsible for 7.3 Trillion of our 9.6 Trillion dollar national debt. (It was under $1T before Reagan, and went from 4.4 to 5.7 under Clinton - and from 5.7 to 9.6 under Bush (and we're not done with that yet!)).

Cutting $18B from our annual expenditures is a nice start, but it won't do a thing to resolve debt issues; cutting corporate taxes (unless you consider the wind and solar energy R&D tax credits Bush let expire - but he's not an oil man!) won't spurn economic growth; cutting individual taxes won't spurn economic growth or stop the shedding of jobs (how well did your $600 check do in keeping the job drop from reaching over 620,000 jobs lost since the start of 2008?).

And, most easily as a basis of comparison, cutting $18B in spending is a nice start, but fiscally meaningless when more than that is spent every 6 weeks fighting a war that the "fiscally responsible" McCain/Palin ticket show no interest in ending (the very same war that Obama plans to use to implement an 18-month drawdown strategy - the same one Iraqi Prime Minister Al-Maliki agrees with. But, you know, he's just "some guy.")

I don't disagree with cutting pork. But I think it's so, so, so, so much lower on our national priority list than the McCain/Palin ticket leads you to believe. Moreover, the rest of their proposals show the same sort of "damn the deficits, full speed ahead!" philosophy of improving the economy that we've had during 8 years of Reagan and 8 years of Bush (not as much during Bush Sr., since he raised taxes). How many more years of draconian supply-side economics policies do we need to suffer through before we realize that they deliver 180 degrees opposite of its promise?

Their collective fiscal recklessness renders moot the idea of slashing pork, and Palin's record and false claims put a remarkable deal of doubt with regards to her sincerity about fiscal reform.
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']When did I lie?[/QUOTE]

Whip Smart Banky pointed it out:

Originally Posted by jputahraptor
And while I do have the disc I wasn't actually gonna trade it, it's far to valuable and im not going to get in trouble if by some chance someone had it out for me.

Oh really?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CheapAssGamer.com Forum Index -> Cheap Ass Trading

Posted: Sat Jul 10, 2004 20:42 Post subject: I gotta disc of downloaded games, don't arrest me!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jputahraptor
I should probably keep my mouth shut but i got a disc with about 300 assorted game boy games, mostly advanced and color and about 30 or so original, plus it has 50 nintendo games, all games are complete as i've played through many of these over the few months i've owned it. Now i know i can't sell it because that's wrong but would anybody want it as a trade?
-------------
So anyhoo you are right, we are done here. You have shown yourself to be a compulsive liar and just another mindless palindrone with delusions of adequacy.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I don't disagree with cutting pork. But I think it's so, so, so, so much lower on our national priority list than the McCain/Palin ticket leads you to believe.[/quote]

The problem with pork is that most, if not all of the time, it's added to a bill after it's signed by the President. By cutting some pork you do lower the federal budget some, or, most likely that money will go somewhere else.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']The problem with pork is that most, if not all of the time, it's added to a bill after it's signed by the President. By cutting some pork you do lower the federal budget some, or, most likely that money will go somewhere else.[/quote]


Pork is nothing in the grand scheme of things. With about 10 Bill a month for the War, whether you or for it or against it you have to admit that is a ridiculous amount of money. "The 2008 Pig Book identified 11,610 projects at a cost of $17.2 billion in the 12 Appropriations Acts for fiscal 2008." That is less than 2 months of the war. Also there is a chance that some of the pork is actually important projects. We have much greater financial problems out there, and they really need to stop pretending Pork is a real important issue.

oh and just in case you are curious here is the state that received the most pork per capita

1 Alaska 2008 Pork = $379,699,715 population 683,478 per person $555.54

 
Has Hillary been blamed yet? I know Senator Claire McCaskill has essentially threatened Hillary to deliver her voters to Obama, as if their votes are owed to the democratic party.
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']oh and just in case you are curious here is the state that received the most pork per capita

[/FONT][/FONT]1 Alaska 2008 Pork = $379,699,715 population 683,478 per person $555.54

[/QUOTE]

What needs attention is that Wasilla got about 28 million federal dollars, for a 6k town, when Palin was mayor... thanks to the lobbyist she hired, a lobbyist associated with Jack Abramoff.

That's $4,000 per person...
 
[quote name='Koggit']What needs attention is that Wasilla got about 28 million federal dollars, for a 6k town, when Palin was mayor... thanks to the lobbyist she hired, a lobbyist associated with Jack Abramoff.

That's $4,000 per person...[/QUOTE]

I think she also left the place 22 million dollars in debt.
 
[quote name='Msut77']I think she also left the place 22 million dollars in debt.[/quote]

Should have gotten 60 million....
 
[quote name='Koggit']22 + 28 = 60![/quote]

I mean...obviously, she wanted 10 for herself...

fuck off, it's late...
 
[quote name='KingBroly']The problem with pork is that most, if not all of the time, it's added to a bill after it's signed by the President. [/QUOTE]

Which should be illegal.
 
[quote name='JMEPO']My ass is going to kill McCain if Obama isn't elected.[/QUOTE]


don't forget the apprentice Palin,
 
Just to help illustrate the type of "home stretch" this race is in....

I got both of these videos forwarded to me this morning from different people. So the frequency of this sort of thing is only going to increase. As much truth, or lack thereof, these sorts of things contain, they DO affect elections.

PLEASE NOTE - Before you get your panties in a bunch, I do not endorse these, nor did I pass them along. I don't know how to embed the second video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9GlWS8

This one was sent with the caption "Pass it on. Really scary".

http://www.eyeblast.tv/Public/Video.aspx?rsrcID=2036
 
Oh will people ever tire of the idea that the US military always fights for freedom? Or that any time you question whether or not it was a good idea to attack any given place you're disgracing every soldier who went there?

Jesus, are there really still people who think the war in Vietnam represented a fight for freedom and that it was a good idea to go to war with them?
 
[quote name='SpazX']are there really still people who think the war in Vietnam represented a fight for freedom and that it was a good idea to go to war with them?[/QUOTE]

McCain, who to this day believes we could've and should've stayed (& won).
 
I don't think the US military fights for freedom but they are very limited in what they can do when they're told to plan an invasion of Iraq. What were the Joint Chiefs going to say? No? That's a quick road to early retirement and that's the one thing any officer truly fears. Being relieved of command is the death knoll for any military career.
 
[quote name='depascal22']I don't think the US military fights for freedom but they are very limited in what they can do when they're told to plan an invasion of Iraq. What were the Joint Chiefs going to say? No? That's a quick road to early retirement and that's the one thing any officer truly fears. Being relieved of command is the death knoll for any military career.[/QUOTE]

Nobody's blaming military officers -- they're blaming, rightfully so, the executive branch under GWB & the GOP.
 
Loyal, and depending on where the loyalty is placed, honorable. In the case of US soldiers in the middle east, they're loyal to their country, which is indeed honorable. America is a great country, regardless of the fuckoffs we currently have in the executive branch.
 
[quote name='Jesus_S_Preston']She Has A Vagina?

I Have A Vagina Also!

Let's Vote!!![/quote]


There should be an general aptitude test for voters. Nothing difficult. Just something simple like:

"1. Why are you voting for whom you intend to vote?

a. Only to spite my spouse/family/friends.
b. Because I can relate with the ideas of their genitals.
c. All of the above.
d. Because I support their ideas and beliefs."
 
It's Red vs Blue :( Pretty sad. I wish Murdoch let the news air Ron Paul more often, considering he is the rightful recipient of the presidency. Winning every poll, and standing firm for what is right. It would be amazing if people had the energy to write him in, but they won't :( They see Red vs Blue... and they pick. /wrists


^Chase..... perfect :)
 
[quote name='Koggit']Nobody's blaming military officers -- they're blaming, rightfully so, the executive branch under GWB & the GOP.[/quote]

I agree with that but it just gives the perception that soldiers are out there proselytizing for Bush at the same time. Should've said "Does everyone really think Bush is sending the military out to fight for freedom?" I'm not arguing that these wars are justified but it's just the small hits against the military that get left in and start to poison people's minds against the everyday soldier. It's the same thing that started in Vietnam and ended with a generation of soldiers being denigrated because of the actions of Johnson and Nixon. I'd just rather nip that in the bud before it starts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top