Moderator: Community Team
strike wolf wrote:Right or wrong. You are fighting a losing battle if you are trying to support Bush. At this point, he could go back in time and prevent WWII and the Holocaust from ever happening and his approval rating would still go down.
I never said I was supporting Congress. Quite frankly both parties disgust me.protectedbygold wrote:strike wolf wrote:Right or wrong. You are fighting a losing battle if you are trying to support Bush. At this point, he could go back in time and prevent WWII and the Holocaust from ever happening and his approval rating would still go down.
Right or wrong, you are fighting a losing battle if you are trying to support the Democrat-controlled Congress.
Gottal love that 9% approval rating
Maxleod wrote:Not strike, he's the only one with a functioning brain.
Now now, I don't look down on anyone because of their nationality. I'm a liberal after all. Having said that, your inanity is chafing, but ignorable. Try again when you grow up.GabonX wrote:I made a mistake in my first post where I wrote "2 tons" of uranium. After re-reading the article I would like to correct my error. It was "550 metric tons" of uranium. I was worried when I thought it was 2 tons but just think how many whales 550 metric tons of uranium would have killed!
I agree, I'm sick of the United States acting alone. George W. Bush is worse than Hitler. So what if 39 other countries were so dedicated to the cause that they sent their own troops as a gesture of support. NONE OF THOSE COUNTRIES COUNT FOR ANYTHING!Neoteny wrote:
Gee! You'd think with all those troops in Iraq, they would have been able to defend/relocate/feed to the whales all that uranium! Or at the very least decide to do it together. I say we hand it all over to the army of Tonga and let them handle it! I'm sure the Moldovans think it's a great idea!
This could go on. The fact of the matter is that we cannot expect to continue on the path of doing whatever the hell we want to as far as international relations is concerned. We expect France, Russia, and China to bend to our whim, but refuse to give at all when it comes to our policy. A little diplomacy can go a long way. Or maybe we should just let the Nicaraguans handle it.
I agree with your stance on diplomacy, and by that I mean that we should do whatever France, Russia, and China think is best for the world. Clearly these countries have the world's best interests at heart, just look at the historical record of Russia and China. I haven't personally but Keith Olbermann told me that it's pretty good.
I think the world would be a much safer place if Saddam Hussein was alive and had his 550 metric tons of uranium. It's better than George W. Bush having it. Everybody knows that George Bush is way worse than Saddam Hussein.
P.S. Good job on choosing countries like Moldova and Nicaragua as examples of countries which supported the war. The people there are subhuman at best. No really though, if you had mentioned a country like the U.K., The Netherlands, Spain, Poland, Italy, Australia etc. as your example you may have made the United States sound good and that's the last thing we would want to do!
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
... But probably still be better than Congress' rating ... 9% for Congress. . . wow.strike wolf wrote:Right or wrong. You are fighting a losing battle if you are trying to support Bush. At this point, he could go back in time and prevent WWII and the Holocaust from ever happening and his approval rating would still go down.
Just wow.Neoteny wrote:Now now, I don't look down on anyone because of their nationality. I'm a liberal after all. Having said that, your inanity is chafing, but ignorable. Try again when you grow up.GabonX wrote:I made a mistake in my first post where I wrote "2 tons" of uranium. After re-reading the article I would like to correct my error. It was "550 metric tons" of uranium. I was worried when I thought it was 2 tons but just think how many whales 550 metric tons of uranium would have killed!
I agree, I'm sick of the United States acting alone. George W. Bush is worse than Hitler. So what if 39 other countries were so dedicated to the cause that they sent their own troops as a gesture of support. NONE OF THOSE COUNTRIES COUNT FOR ANYTHING!Neoteny wrote:
Gee! You'd think with all those troops in Iraq, they would have been able to defend/relocate/feed to the whales all that uranium! Or at the very least decide to do it together. I say we hand it all over to the army of Tonga and let them handle it! I'm sure the Moldovans think it's a great idea!
This could go on. The fact of the matter is that we cannot expect to continue on the path of doing whatever the hell we want to as far as international relations is concerned. We expect France, Russia, and China to bend to our whim, but refuse to give at all when it comes to our policy. A little diplomacy can go a long way. Or maybe we should just let the Nicaraguans handle it.
I agree with your stance on diplomacy, and by that I mean that we should do whatever France, Russia, and China think is best for the world. Clearly these countries have the world's best interests at heart, just look at the historical record of Russia and China. I haven't personally but Keith Olbermann told me that it's pretty good.
I think the world would be a much safer place if Saddam Hussein was alive and had his 550 metric tons of uranium. It's better than George W. Bush having it. Everybody knows that George Bush is way worse than Saddam Hussein.
P.S. Good job on choosing countries like Moldova and Nicaragua as examples of countries which supported the war. The people there are subhuman at best. No really though, if you had mentioned a country like the U.K., The Netherlands, Spain, Poland, Italy, Australia etc. as your example you may have made the United States sound good and that's the last thing we would want to do!
... Your sarcasm is a little (GabonX wrote:I agree with you 100%. Thank goodness for selective reporting!strike wolf wrote:Right or wrong. You are fighting a losing battle if you are trying to support Bush. At this point, he could go back in time and prevent WWII and the Holocaust from ever happening and his approval rating would still go down.
For the record I never liked Bush. I wanted McCain/Gore to win in 2000 and Kerry to win in 2004. In retrospect Kerry may not have been any better, maybe even worse. The fact of the matter is Bush is the President and sometimes you have to work with what you have.
) thick. We all get your points without being beaten about the head and shoulders with ludicrous comparisons.
He should have done it before they became one.william18 wrote:I heard rumors bush is gonna bomb China since they became a superpower.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
Fixedwilliam18 wrote:I heard rumors bush is gonna bomb China since they became the superpower.
PBS's nightly new did a story on it a while back. We aren't going to just bomb a superpower, it would start WWIII. But, we may refuse to pay our debt, our switch our money system, which would F them over. Too much of America's, and the world's trade moves through cheap Chinese labor. Not to mention how American's would shit themselves(not just without Wal*Martwilliam18 wrote:I heard rumors bush is gonna bomb China since they became a superpower.
). That is very true. No matter what, the media will never accept that Hussein was trying to reestablish his weapons program as well as biological and chemical capabilities.Nobunaga wrote:... It makes little difference to the folks you're arguing with if that yellow cake was found 4 years ago or if it was found yesterday, if the media ignored it or no (everybody with a brain knows they did, so we don't need to be reminded).
God, the media are such bastards. They must be in cahoots with the lizardmen.protectedbygold wrote:That is very true. No matter what, the media will never accept that Hussein was trying to reestablish his weapons program as well as biological and chemical capabilities.Nobunaga wrote:... It makes little difference to the folks you're arguing with if that yellow cake was found 4 years ago or if it was found yesterday, if the media ignored it or no (everybody with a brain knows they did, so we don't need to be reminded).
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Actually, I agree.Neoteny wrote:God, the media are such bastards. They must be in cahoots with the lizardmen.protectedbygold wrote:That is very true. No matter what, the media will never accept that Hussein was trying to reestablish his weapons program as well as biological and chemical capabilities.Nobunaga wrote:... It makes little difference to the folks you're arguing with if that yellow cake was found 4 years ago or if it was found yesterday, if the media ignored it or no (everybody with a brain knows they did, so we don't need to be reminded).
Yeh its unbelievable how the Media has kept Bush away from TV for 5 years, he had so much proof that in 2 minutes even the Pinko Liberals would have got the message.protectedbygold wrote:That is very true. No matter what, the media will never accept that Hussein was trying to reestablish his weapons program as well as biological and chemical capabilities.Nobunaga wrote:... It makes little difference to the folks you're arguing with if that yellow cake was found 4 years ago or if it was found yesterday, if the media ignored it or no (everybody with a brain knows they did, so we don't need to be reminded).
The point is that the media can only control so much, if Bush wanted to get a message across then nothing would have stopped him.Juan_Bottom wrote:I don't get it.
I for one, think that our major media outlets work with the government. I can't figure out another reason that Builderberg, or Bohemian Grove recieve no media attention. And I'm not trying to sound like a conspiracy nut here. But it does make sense to me.joecoolfrog wrote:The point is that the media can only control so much, if Bush wanted to get a message across then nothing would have stopped him.Juan_Bottom wrote:I don't get it.
