Scott Mclellan tells us what those of us with brains already knew.
- Thread starter pittpizza
- Start date
- Status
[quote name='Msut77']dmaul is the only one that has even come close to being reasonable although I do not care for his broderesque wanking about the tone of the discussion.
.[/QUOTE]
Because for whatever reason you're unable to make a post without tossing out juvenile insults.
.[/QUOTE]
Because for whatever reason you're unable to make a post without tossing out juvenile insults.
pittpizza
CAGiversary!
Msut is not tossing out juvenile insults.
Good points about the name calling though, and I too am guilty of it. It doesnt get us anywhere but it sure is fun. IMO at least. Plus it is nice to take advantage of opportunities to twist the knife in a little further (e.g. Mclellan) into an already dieing animal.
I guess it stems from the back peddling of the right/cons/republicans/whatever you want to call them. It's asanine and unsporting; yet understandable. I'd jump off a sinking ship to, or at least try to claim that it was never my ship to begin with.
And Dmaul, I've stated repeatedly that the world is not black and white. One of my favorite NoFX songs (titled, The Black and the White) is about what happens when you try to view the world this way. Still, a vs. debate about the left or right, Ds or Rs, libs or cons, doesn't get very far if all everyone does is repeat some variation of "Well so-and-so isn't purely conservative" or "Well both parties are in the middle." DUH!!! Huge no shit Sherlock there. I only simplify things into broad general categories b/c Bush/Mccain/republicans/the right is more conservative than obama/clinton/dems/the left. Of course nobody is 100%. Hell I'm even conservative on some issues and not liberal on everything.
Moreover the cons (at least in this thread) aren't trying to bury thier messy sheets. They're trying to say that they were never their sheets to begin with. WHich IMO is an even more wormy position which may be (in large part) responsible for why most are so pissed at republicans.
Good points about the name calling though, and I too am guilty of it. It doesnt get us anywhere but it sure is fun. IMO at least. Plus it is nice to take advantage of opportunities to twist the knife in a little further (e.g. Mclellan) into an already dieing animal.
I guess it stems from the back peddling of the right/cons/republicans/whatever you want to call them. It's asanine and unsporting; yet understandable. I'd jump off a sinking ship to, or at least try to claim that it was never my ship to begin with.
And Dmaul, I've stated repeatedly that the world is not black and white. One of my favorite NoFX songs (titled, The Black and the White) is about what happens when you try to view the world this way. Still, a vs. debate about the left or right, Ds or Rs, libs or cons, doesn't get very far if all everyone does is repeat some variation of "Well so-and-so isn't purely conservative" or "Well both parties are in the middle." DUH!!! Huge no shit Sherlock there. I only simplify things into broad general categories b/c Bush/Mccain/republicans/the right is more conservative than obama/clinton/dems/the left. Of course nobody is 100%. Hell I'm even conservative on some issues and not liberal on everything.
Moreover the cons (at least in this thread) aren't trying to bury thier messy sheets. They're trying to say that they were never their sheets to begin with. WHich IMO is an even more wormy position which may be (in large part) responsible for why most are so pissed at republicans.
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']uhhhh, we all seem to be pretty active in the thread, but i understand your need to try and throw in another insult.[/QUOTE]
You can call it an insult if you want but that does not make it untrue. The problem is that some of the other posters in this thread were not active, they made for the most part the same easily disproved assertions got smacked down and then vanished in a cloud of cheeto dust.
You can call it an insult if you want but that does not make it untrue. The problem is that some of the other posters in this thread were not active, they made for the most part the same easily disproved assertions got smacked down and then vanished in a cloud of cheeto dust.
[quote name='Msut77']You have been reduced to bitching about my tone because you have little else, excuse me for being a bit pissed off.[/QUOTE]
No, I have the reasonable approach.
I'm very unhappy with the direction Bush and the republican's have taken the country, so I've done what I can to support Obama. Voted for him, encouraged everyone I know to do so. Donated what I could etc.
What I've not done is act like a child pissing and moaning and calling people names over politics on a video game website.
At any rate, I won't be responding to your posts from now on, as it's clear you have nothing to add beyond rhetoric and name calling.
And the great shame in all this is you're so incapapable of doing anything but name calling and being a dick in general that you're even insulting me, when I am fairly liberal, hate the Bush administration and support Obama strongly. All because I don't want to waste time engaging in petty name calling--just like Obama who has done a great job of attacking McCaine on the issues while praising him as a person. That's the way to bring about change. It's not to toss out playground insults and reflect poorly on the democratic party/liberalism.
No, I have the reasonable approach.
I'm very unhappy with the direction Bush and the republican's have taken the country, so I've done what I can to support Obama. Voted for him, encouraged everyone I know to do so. Donated what I could etc.
What I've not done is act like a child pissing and moaning and calling people names over politics on a video game website.
At any rate, I won't be responding to your posts from now on, as it's clear you have nothing to add beyond rhetoric and name calling.
And the great shame in all this is you're so incapapable of doing anything but name calling and being a dick in general that you're even insulting me, when I am fairly liberal, hate the Bush administration and support Obama strongly. All because I don't want to waste time engaging in petty name calling--just like Obama who has done a great job of attacking McCaine on the issues while praising him as a person. That's the way to bring about change. It's not to toss out playground insults and reflect poorly on the democratic party/liberalism.
[quote name='pittpizza']
I guess it stems from the back peddling of the right/cons/republicans/whatever you want to call them. It's asanine and unsporting; yet understandable. I'd jump off a sinking ship to, or at least try to claim that it was never my ship to begin with.[/quote]
You're still missing the point. Thrust and most of the other conservatives here never were on the Bush ship. Again, at best he was seen as the lesser of two evils in the past election, but with his high spending and big government policies, he's not going to be supported by any real conservatives. Just by social conservatives who only care about forcing religion on people, banning abortion and oppressing gays.
My point that Bush is much closer to the middle than someone like Thrust who is much farther to the right and never supported Bush much if at all. He's not jumping ship, Bush has always been against his and other's libertarian beliefs.
I don't see that at all, for the most part the people in this thread have NEVER liked Bush, he was just better to them that Gore or Kerry. That doesn't mean they were a big supporter of him--they just new the libertarians couldn't win the oval office so the republican is generally the lesser of two evils.
I guess it stems from the back peddling of the right/cons/republicans/whatever you want to call them. It's asanine and unsporting; yet understandable. I'd jump off a sinking ship to, or at least try to claim that it was never my ship to begin with.[/quote]
You're still missing the point. Thrust and most of the other conservatives here never were on the Bush ship. Again, at best he was seen as the lesser of two evils in the past election, but with his high spending and big government policies, he's not going to be supported by any real conservatives. Just by social conservatives who only care about forcing religion on people, banning abortion and oppressing gays.
My point that Bush is much closer to the middle than someone like Thrust who is much farther to the right and never supported Bush much if at all. He's not jumping ship, Bush has always been against his and other's libertarian beliefs.
I don't see that at all, for the most part the people in this thread have NEVER liked Bush, he was just better to them that Gore or Kerry. That doesn't mean they were a big supporter of him--they just new the libertarians couldn't win the oval office so the republican is generally the lesser of two evils.
[quote name='dmaul1114']Thrust and most of the other conservatives here never were on the Bush ship.[/quote]
I really do not trust a damn thing thrust says. Finding a Bush supporter nowadays is like finding someone who admits to having bought a Spice Girls CD.
I edited all your references to the concept of a point because it is an insult to the English language and everyone on this forum.
You have no point because "real" conservatives using the term in any useful manner supported Bush
and his policies until quite recently.
Even if a the few of the "Real" cons did it grudgingly or they did just to stick it to the Libs it does not matter, it still counts and it far, far too late now to wish they did something else. Some have gone so far as to say Bush is not just not a "real" conservative but a liberal which is pathetic as it is untrue.
I really do not trust a damn thing thrust says. Finding a Bush supporter nowadays is like finding someone who admits to having bought a Spice Girls CD.
I edited all your references to the concept of a point because it is an insult to the English language and everyone on this forum.
You have no point because "real" conservatives using the term in any useful manner supported Bush
and his policies until quite recently.
Even if a the few of the "Real" cons did it grudgingly or they did just to stick it to the Libs it does not matter, it still counts and it far, far too late now to wish they did something else. Some have gone so far as to say Bush is not just not a "real" conservative but a liberal which is pathetic as it is untrue.
pittpizza
CAGiversary!
I see what you're saying Dmaul. I really do. I understand your point completely.
See if you can get mine:
Bush is/was the conservative/republican candidate. The right, the conservatives, the republicans were represented (though I understand you're saying that they were not represented perfectly) by him.
Now that the country has gone to shit, and 8 years of a republican/conservative/right executive (again,I get that their ideals were not represented perfectly) they quite understandably want to distance themselves from him as much as possible.
No candidate represents ANY persons (whether left, right or middle) views with 100% precision, so saying "Well he wasn't REALLY conservative" doesnt get us anywhere. He was MOSTLY. He was their candidate, and he sucked ass even by their standards.
SO people like Thrust are jumping ship, even though they were never 100% happy with the ship to begin with.
Saying Bush isn't repub/con/right is akin to saying Obama is not dem/lib/left. Sure, neither candidate fits EXACTLY, but none do.
Am I gettin through to you at all?
** Again, not trying to be combative. I was in an orny mood the other night, but overall I think there is some good stuff going on in this thread.
See if you can get mine:
Bush is/was the conservative/republican candidate. The right, the conservatives, the republicans were represented (though I understand you're saying that they were not represented perfectly) by him.
Now that the country has gone to shit, and 8 years of a republican/conservative/right executive (again,I get that their ideals were not represented perfectly) they quite understandably want to distance themselves from him as much as possible.
No candidate represents ANY persons (whether left, right or middle) views with 100% precision, so saying "Well he wasn't REALLY conservative" doesnt get us anywhere. He was MOSTLY. He was their candidate, and he sucked ass even by their standards.
SO people like Thrust are jumping ship, even though they were never 100% happy with the ship to begin with.
Saying Bush isn't repub/con/right is akin to saying Obama is not dem/lib/left. Sure, neither candidate fits EXACTLY, but none do.
Am I gettin through to you at all?
** Again, not trying to be combative. I was in an orny mood the other night, but overall I think there is some good stuff going on in this thread.
[quote name='pittpizza']I see what you're saying Dmaul. I really do. I understand your point completely.
See if you can get mine:
Bush is/was the conservative/republican candidate. The right, the conservatives, the republicans were represented (though I understand you're saying that they were not represented perfectly) by him.
Now that the country has gone to shit, and 8 years of a republican/conservative/right executive (again,I get that their ideals were not represented perfectly) they quite understandably want to distance themselves from him as much as possible.
No candidate represents ANY persons (whether left, right or middle) views with 100% precision, so saying "Well he wasn't REALLY conservative" doesnt get us anywhere. He was MOSTLY. He was their candidate, and he sucked ass even by their standards.
SO people like Thrust are jumping ship, even though they were never 100% happy with the ship to begin with.
Saying Bush isn't repub/con/right is akin to saying Obama is not dem/lib/left. Sure, neither candidate fits EXACTLY, but none do.
Am I gettin through to you at all?
** Again, not trying to be combative. I was in an orny mood the other night, but overall I think there is some good stuff going on in this thread.[/QUOTE]
dmaul took the whiny titty baby route, he is merely going to repeat the exact same spiel verbatim.
See if you can get mine:
Bush is/was the conservative/republican candidate. The right, the conservatives, the republicans were represented (though I understand you're saying that they were not represented perfectly) by him.
Now that the country has gone to shit, and 8 years of a republican/conservative/right executive (again,I get that their ideals were not represented perfectly) they quite understandably want to distance themselves from him as much as possible.
No candidate represents ANY persons (whether left, right or middle) views with 100% precision, so saying "Well he wasn't REALLY conservative" doesnt get us anywhere. He was MOSTLY. He was their candidate, and he sucked ass even by their standards.
SO people like Thrust are jumping ship, even though they were never 100% happy with the ship to begin with.
Saying Bush isn't repub/con/right is akin to saying Obama is not dem/lib/left. Sure, neither candidate fits EXACTLY, but none do.
Am I gettin through to you at all?
** Again, not trying to be combative. I was in an orny mood the other night, but overall I think there is some good stuff going on in this thread.[/QUOTE]
dmaul took the whiny titty baby route, he is merely going to repeat the exact same spiel verbatim.
[quote name='pittpizza']I see what you're saying Dmaul. I really do. I understand your point completely.
See if you can get mine:
Bush is/was the conservative/republican candidate. The right, the conservatives, the republicans were represented (though I understand you're saying that they were not represented perfectly) by him.
Now that the country has gone to shit, and 8 years of a republican/conservative/right executive (again,I get that their ideals were not represented perfectly) they quite understandably want to distance themselves from him as much as possible.
No candidate represents ANY persons (whether left, right or middle) views with 100% precision, so saying "Well he wasn't REALLY conservative" doesnt get us anywhere. He was MOSTLY. He was their candidate, and he sucked ass even by their standards.
SO people like Thrust are jumping ship, even though they were never 100% happy with the ship to begin with.
Am I gettin through to you at all?[/QUOTE]
I get your point. I just think it's overstated.
Bush was the "lesser of two evils." Most of the "true" conservatives (i.e. the libertarians) have realized that even with that said, he has still been a terrible president and have backed off from any support of him now that he's a lame duck. Now they're hopping that this time's lesser of two evils--John McCain--will be at least a bit better.
I don't see a problem with that. It's not like they were super emphatic supporters throwing their former idol under the bus. Thrust and others would have VASTLY preferred a libertarian president, Bush was just the lesser of two evils since the libertarians have no chance at winning office now (and probably never).
They've just realized that the lesser of two evils was still pretty
ing bad. I don't see a huge contradiction in that. I don't think the guys in this thread were donating to his campaing or knocking on doors for him, and have now reneged. They were just like, " it, he's better than Gore/Kerry."
So I don't see all the fuss over this. The people who were knocking on doors, donationg a lot of money are probably mostly those who still approve of him--his approval ratings are still in the 30s--so 30% of the country still likes him. I'm not sure thrust and others would have ever given him a favorable rating--as again he's just the less of two evils.
So I just don't see the point of this uproar your in at these guys. They never really liked him, they just semi-accepted him as the best they could reasonably hope for in the Oval office the past 2 elections. The true conservatives/libertarians didn't have a viable candidate. The social conservatives did--and they're probably the 30 some percent still supporting him.
100% true. But that doesn't mean that the most conservative people every really supported Bush. That's my point. Bush never really stood for the things that thrust believes in. For the social conservatives, Bush was great. For the Libertarians, he's only slightly the lesser of two evils.
At any rate, I just think this is all overblown. I'm very liberal in general, and I'm damn excited about the prospect of an Obama white house.
I just hate to see this kind of name calling and silly partisan bickering. Bicker over the issues, not whether some conservatives who loved Bush have now distanced themselves from him. That's normal. If Obama does a shitty job in office, I'll distance myself from him as I'd acknowledge that he didnt' live up to my expectations. Thrust and other's in this thread haven't done that as I don't think these uber-conservatives every had much faith in Bush. Bush wasn't a libertarian, he was a republican and thus just a bit better than the democrats to these guys.
See if you can get mine:
Bush is/was the conservative/republican candidate. The right, the conservatives, the republicans were represented (though I understand you're saying that they were not represented perfectly) by him.
Now that the country has gone to shit, and 8 years of a republican/conservative/right executive (again,I get that their ideals were not represented perfectly) they quite understandably want to distance themselves from him as much as possible.
No candidate represents ANY persons (whether left, right or middle) views with 100% precision, so saying "Well he wasn't REALLY conservative" doesnt get us anywhere. He was MOSTLY. He was their candidate, and he sucked ass even by their standards.
SO people like Thrust are jumping ship, even though they were never 100% happy with the ship to begin with.
Am I gettin through to you at all?[/QUOTE]
I get your point. I just think it's overstated.
Bush was the "lesser of two evils." Most of the "true" conservatives (i.e. the libertarians) have realized that even with that said, he has still been a terrible president and have backed off from any support of him now that he's a lame duck. Now they're hopping that this time's lesser of two evils--John McCain--will be at least a bit better.
I don't see a problem with that. It's not like they were super emphatic supporters throwing their former idol under the bus. Thrust and others would have VASTLY preferred a libertarian president, Bush was just the lesser of two evils since the libertarians have no chance at winning office now (and probably never).
They've just realized that the lesser of two evils was still pretty
ing bad. I don't see a huge contradiction in that. I don't think the guys in this thread were donating to his campaing or knocking on doors for him, and have now reneged. They were just like, " it, he's better than Gore/Kerry."So I don't see all the fuss over this. The people who were knocking on doors, donationg a lot of money are probably mostly those who still approve of him--his approval ratings are still in the 30s--so 30% of the country still likes him. I'm not sure thrust and others would have ever given him a favorable rating--as again he's just the less of two evils.
So I just don't see the point of this uproar your in at these guys. They never really liked him, they just semi-accepted him as the best they could reasonably hope for in the Oval office the past 2 elections. The true conservatives/libertarians didn't have a viable candidate. The social conservatives did--and they're probably the 30 some percent still supporting him.
100% true. But that doesn't mean that the most conservative people every really supported Bush. That's my point. Bush never really stood for the things that thrust believes in. For the social conservatives, Bush was great. For the Libertarians, he's only slightly the lesser of two evils.
At any rate, I just think this is all overblown. I'm very liberal in general, and I'm damn excited about the prospect of an Obama white house.
I just hate to see this kind of name calling and silly partisan bickering. Bicker over the issues, not whether some conservatives who loved Bush have now distanced themselves from him. That's normal. If Obama does a shitty job in office, I'll distance myself from him as I'd acknowledge that he didnt' live up to my expectations. Thrust and other's in this thread haven't done that as I don't think these uber-conservatives every had much faith in Bush. Bush wasn't a libertarian, he was a republican and thus just a bit better than the democrats to these guys.
That has got to be a damn record for a prediction.
Someone better tell 99% of all Conservatives that they are not "true" Conservatives.
Food for thought:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
Facepalm X 9,000, the problem is that Conservatives have not really distanced themselves from Bush'sing issues.
Things like torture, the neverending war and illegal wiretapping are remaining an inseparable part of the Conservative movement.
Someone better tell 99% of all Conservatives that they are not "true" Conservatives.
Food for thought:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
Facepalm X 9,000, the problem is that Conservatives have not really distanced themselves from Bush's
ing issues.Things like torture, the neverending war and illegal wiretapping are remaining an inseparable part of the Conservative movement.
pittpizza
CAGiversary!
That "No TRUE Scotsman" link is spot on MSUT.
They (And Dmaul, I've never been specifically referring to anybody in particular. As I've said, I use "they" generally to cover all conservatives, not anybody specifically) now want to say that Bush is not a TRUE conservative.
A fallacy to be sure. But like I've repeated, can you really blame them? Trying to find a Bush supporter is like trying to find a Nazi in Germany during the immediate aftermath of WWII. Of course Bush is not NEARLY as bad, but the reasoning is the same.
[quote name='dmaul1114'] I'm very liberal in general, and I'm damn excited about the prospect of an Obama white house.[/quote]
Me too bro. Me too.
They (And Dmaul, I've never been specifically referring to anybody in particular. As I've said, I use "they" generally to cover all conservatives, not anybody specifically) now want to say that Bush is not a TRUE conservative.
A fallacy to be sure. But like I've repeated, can you really blame them? Trying to find a Bush supporter is like trying to find a Nazi in Germany during the immediate aftermath of WWII. Of course Bush is not NEARLY as bad, but the reasoning is the same.
[quote name='dmaul1114'] I'm very liberal in general, and I'm damn excited about the prospect of an Obama white house.[/quote]
Me too bro. Me too.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
[quote name='pittpizza']
Now that the country has gone to shit, and 8 years of a republican/conservative/right executive (again,I get that their ideals were not represented perfectly) they quite understandably want to distance themselves from him as much as possible.
[/QUOTE]
The part you still aren't getting, that dmaul has tried to explain, is that you are wrong to assume that people in this thread that are more conservative than you ever voted for, supported, liked, Bush.
You have absolutely zero evidence to support your belief that I or anyone else in this thread/forum ever cared about Bush or his agenda. This is the single biggest reason you get so many people arguing with you.
How can we all be "jumping a ship" we never even boarded? How does that make any kind of sense to keep accusing? I have no intention of voting for McCain. I refuse to vote just to vote against someone.
Stop assuming that I, or anyone else, backed "the wrong horse". I never did any suching thing. You're beating a slanderous dead horse with that talk, and it needs to stop. I don't go telling you or anyone who you backed, voted for, what you believe in, and how you should somehow feel bad when they suck. All without knowing a single damn fact about them. Do you not see how this is pure outright fantasy, and that it's run totally amuck?
Now that the country has gone to shit, and 8 years of a republican/conservative/right executive (again,I get that their ideals were not represented perfectly) they quite understandably want to distance themselves from him as much as possible.
[/QUOTE]
The part you still aren't getting, that dmaul has tried to explain, is that you are wrong to assume that people in this thread that are more conservative than you ever voted for, supported, liked, Bush.
You have absolutely zero evidence to support your belief that I or anyone else in this thread/forum ever cared about Bush or his agenda. This is the single biggest reason you get so many people arguing with you.
How can we all be "jumping a ship" we never even boarded? How does that make any kind of sense to keep accusing? I have no intention of voting for McCain. I refuse to vote just to vote against someone.
Stop assuming that I, or anyone else, backed "the wrong horse". I never did any such
ing thing. You're beating a slanderous dead horse with that talk, and it needs to stop. I don't go telling you or anyone who you backed, voted for, what you believe in, and how you should somehow feel bad when they suck. All without knowing a single damn fact about them. Do you not see how this is pure outright fantasy, and that it's run totally amuck?[quote name='pittpizza']
They (And Dmaul, I've never been specifically referring to anybody in particular. As I've said, I use "they" generally to cover all conservatives, not anybody specifically) now want to say that Bush is not a TRUE conservative.
[/QUOTE]
I get this. I do. The problem is you're posting it in the wrong place. The conservatives that post here, by and large, are the uber conservatives that probably never voted for Bush.
Case in point, again quoting Thrust since you have him on ignore:
[quote name='thrustbucket']The part you still aren't getting, that dmaul has tried to explain, is that you are wrong to assume that people in this thread that are more conservative than you ever voted for, supported, liked, Bush.
[/QUOTE]
That's the biggest problem with this forum.
1. It's a politics forum on a game geeks website.
2. Too many people from both side are extremists. Be it the uber conservative libertarians, or the tree hugging liberals, it's hard to get a typical viewponit here.
And again, all this aside, the super social conservatives ARE sticking by bush--hence him still having an approval rating int he 30s. He's lost some support there, but not all of it obviously.
They (And Dmaul, I've never been specifically referring to anybody in particular. As I've said, I use "they" generally to cover all conservatives, not anybody specifically) now want to say that Bush is not a TRUE conservative.
[/QUOTE]
I get this. I do. The problem is you're posting it in the wrong place. The conservatives that post here, by and large, are the uber conservatives that probably never voted for Bush.
Case in point, again quoting Thrust since you have him on ignore:
[quote name='thrustbucket']The part you still aren't getting, that dmaul has tried to explain, is that you are wrong to assume that people in this thread that are more conservative than you ever voted for, supported, liked, Bush.
[/QUOTE]
That's the biggest problem with this forum.
1. It's a politics forum on a game geeks website.
2. Too many people from both side are extremists. Be it the uber conservative libertarians, or the tree hugging liberals, it's hard to get a typical viewponit here.
And again, all this aside, the super social conservatives ARE sticking by bush--hence him still having an approval rating int he 30s. He's lost some support there, but not all of it obviously.
[quote name='pittpizza']Trying to find a Bush supporter supporter of the democratic congress is like trying to find a Nazi in Germany during the immediate aftermath of WWII. [/QUOTE]
fixed.
Bush approval rating: 33%
Congress approval rating: 22%
NPR poll no less.
fixed.
Bush approval rating: 33%
Congress approval rating: 22%
NPR poll no less.
level1online
Banned
Uh.... right around the 2:40 mark
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auqRgzuLaK8[/media]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auqRgzuLaK8[/media]
pittpizza
CAGiversary!
Just goes to show you NPR isn't liberal. GOod point Ramstamia, and an even better explanation for that point Msut. Maybe we oughta give them something to go unrefuted, otherwise they might stop playing, lol.
And Dmaul, (and thrust) I've stated repeatedly I'm not talking about any poster in this thread specifically. So you can go on and saying you never voted for bush or that my points don't apply to you in particular. I've never said they did. I've only been referring to Cons/repubs/the right in general.
Now to lighten the mood a little bit, a joke:
G. Bush Senior says to G. Bush junior: "Son, you're making the same mistake with Iraq that I did with your mom: You didn't pull out in time."
And Dmaul, (and thrust) I've stated repeatedly I'm not talking about any poster in this thread specifically. So you can go on and saying you never voted for bush or that my points don't apply to you in particular. I've never said they did. I've only been referring to Cons/repubs/the right in general.
Now to lighten the mood a little bit, a joke:
G. Bush Senior says to G. Bush junior: "Son, you're making the same mistake with Iraq that I did with your mom: You didn't pull out in time."
Little good every comes from speaking in generalities. Particularly when you are tossing out insults in generalities.
The latter point was that there was needless back and forth in this thread as the cons posting in this forum don't seem to be the blind bush supporters--they've either realized Bush sucks or never supported him to begin with so the arguments were going in circles as they weren't really applicable to the cons who post here.
But it's all good!
The latter point was that there was needless back and forth in this thread as the cons posting in this forum don't seem to be the blind bush supporters--they've either realized Bush sucks or never supported him to begin with so the arguments were going in circles as they weren't really applicable to the cons who post here.
But it's all good!
[quote name='level1online']Uh.... right around the 2:40 mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auqRgzuLaK8[/QUOTE]
Good vid. I especially appreciate around the 3:50 mark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auqRgzuLaK8[/QUOTE]
Good vid. I especially appreciate around the 3:50 mark.
thrustbucket
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 7 (100%)
[quote name='pittpizza']
And Dmaul, (and thrust) I've stated repeatedly I'm not talking about any poster in this thread specifically. So you can go on and saying you never voted for bush or that my points don't apply to you in particular. I've never said they did. I've only been referring to Cons/repubs/the right in general.
[/QUOTE]
[quote name='pittpizza']This made me LMFAO at all the conservatives on CAG. What do you think of this ya dipshits?[/quote]
This might be new sig material.
And Dmaul, (and thrust) I've stated repeatedly I'm not talking about any poster in this thread specifically. So you can go on and saying you never voted for bush or that my points don't apply to you in particular. I've never said they did. I've only been referring to Cons/repubs/the right in general.
[/QUOTE]
[quote name='pittpizza']This made me LMFAO at all the conservatives on CAG. What do you think of this ya dipshits?[/quote]
This might be new sig material.
[quote name='pittpizza']Just goes to show you NPR isn't liberal. GOod point Ramstamia, and an even better explanation for that point Msut. Maybe we oughta give them something to go unrefuted, otherwise they might stop playing, lol.[/QUOTE]
A lot of them already have, this placed used to be infested with W loyalists. It is pretty amazing how conservatives rely on being able to live in a fantasy world and how quickly their house of cards can collapse.
And those are the ones that are not just simple sociopaths or outright bug insane.
A lot of them already have, this placed used to be infested with W loyalists. It is pretty amazing how conservatives rely on being able to live in a fantasy world and how quickly their house of cards can collapse.
And those are the ones that are not just simple sociopaths or outright bug
insane.- Status
bread's done