sorry, i should have been alerted to the immense comedic content of your post by its total plausibilty as an opinion held by someone on the internet. my badGeebs wrote:Seriously, that article was originally posted in alt.underage.political.groupie.grooming, as an attempt to bore a 13 year old into watching him skullfuck a sheep in a dumpster behind a Long John Silvers'.seremtan wrote:because it fits with everything else we know about US/UK involvement in iraq. are you angling for geoff's tinfoil crown now?Geebs wrote:Lol, the lefties clutching at straws again. How do you know he didn't just make that stuff up to impress some minor?
Here's the link
The coup that wasn't (Ritter)
A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke
You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.
There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.R00k wrote:A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke
You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.
You seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact that this happened during Clinton's administration.
i don't think he's "conveniently ignoring" that. it just isn't relevant. it's been standing US policy since 1991 to ditch saddam and replace him with someone more compliant, regardless of the administration. clinton tried the covert way, bush went for the overt, in your face approach
this administration, that administration: it makes no difference in washington since the foreign policy goals are the same. the only variation is technical, the exact means
this administration, that administration: it makes no difference in washington since the foreign policy goals are the same. the only variation is technical, the exact means
-
Nightshade
- Posts: 17020
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am
Geebs wrote:There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.R00k wrote:A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke
You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.
There's no shortage of information to make this administration look bad because they're a bunch of soulless, lying, corrupt, greedy, baby-eating douchebags.
I know that information to make this administration look bad is far from scarce - hence my "as if." I only said that because you seemed to be implying it, by saying that liberals are desperate.Geebs wrote:There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.R00k wrote:A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke
You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.
You seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact that this happened during Clinton's administration.
If you meant that our liberal politicians are desperate, then I completely agree, because they only bungle every opportunity that falls in their lap.
As for the liberal bias in the media... It's a real shame the republicans are at such a disadvantage here. I feel so sorry for those poor guys.
BTW, I know all this happened during the Clinton administration. But the war happened during the Bush administration, and I hold him responsible for it, for 2 reasons.
1) After 9/11, we had a clear public enemy, and Iraq would have never come into the picture - even considering our long-standing foreign policy regarding Iraq - if the Neocons hadn't been whispering in the president's ear about how this is our perfect chance. Regardless of foreign policy, the public has to be made to get behind such an aggressive attack, and it was this administration who told all the lies to get us into it.
2) When something like this happens, the people have to hold the acting officials accountable for it, to let the apparatus know that the war is not supported by the public, regardless of what happened in the past. And all the mistakes that have been made during the war have been made by this administration.
1) After 9/11, we had a clear public enemy, and Iraq would have never come into the picture - even considering our long-standing foreign policy regarding Iraq - if the Neocons hadn't been whispering in the president's ear about how this is our perfect chance. Regardless of foreign policy, the public has to be made to get behind such an aggressive attack, and it was this administration who told all the lies to get us into it.
2) When something like this happens, the people have to hold the acting officials accountable for it, to let the apparatus know that the war is not supported by the public, regardless of what happened in the past. And all the mistakes that have been made during the war have been made by this administration.
Nightshade wrote:Geebs wrote:There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.R00k wrote: A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.
You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.
There's no shortage of information to make this administration look bad because they're a bunch of soulless, lying, corrupt, greedy, baby-eating douchebags.
-
HM-PuFFNSTuFF
- Posts: 14376
- Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2001 8:00 am
lol @ liberal media biasGeebs wrote:There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.R00k wrote:A subtle hint that the lefties are desperate for the scarce information that would make this administration look bad (as if), followed by an insinuation of the right-wing smear machine that this guy is a complete pedo. When somebody calls you on it, you act like commie-liberals just don't know how to take a joke.Geebs wrote: jeezwhycantyoucommiestakeajoke
You could get paid good money by Fox for that kind of repartee.
You seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact that this happened during Clinton's administration.
-
Nightshade
- Posts: 17020
- Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am
That's right. Dick Cheney and Karl Rove start their day with a plate of toddlers, sunny-side up.seremtan wrote:Nightshade wrote:Geebs wrote: There's no shortage of information that makes this administration looks bad, because of the liberal bias in the media.
There's no shortage of information to make this administration look bad because they're a bunch of soulless, lying, corrupt, greedy, baby-eating douchebags.