O'reilly Vs. Moore

[hobbes]

Originally posted by vidcc@30 July 2004 - 16:31
the secret service point was raised because you suggested that our government is pure and any mischief is solely down to individuals in not so many words.

I did?

I was making a distinction between the actions of a few individuals vs the support of a terrorist group by a government.

I fail to see any evidence that I am portraying our government as "pure".

Hell, if RF sees this he will be posting 1000 pages of counter evidence. Save it RAt, I read your posts the first time.

[SuperJude™]

Sometimes in life as with nations, there are two trains of thought. Wait and see what happens, and if something does try to run as far away as possible, and the contrary handle matters as they arise, making decisions.

It seems much of the world (still) cannot stand the US for our power, but what I also see is people abroad as well as many liberals here seem to resent the fact that some people take action. What do you think we have a military for?

What I really wanted to do was this:

Guiliani really hammered Kerry pretty good, but instead of using one source to quote (avoiding any accusations of using tainted sources) here is the Google News Page with plenty of links.

The makover continues too. Kerry is now coddling both the far left and the conservative left(if that is the correct term for those types of dems).

-SJ™

[Biggles]

SJ

Two trains of thought implies reason and strategy. For example, in the debate on Health Care the choice whether to use a privately owned system or a National Health Care system are two trains of thought, both widely used to good effect. The example you then provide "cower" or "be decisive" are not two trains of thought - they are value laden statements where one action is clearly more sensible, practical and effective than the other. This is a classic trick most often utilised by the political hack to emphasise his way is the only way by associating the other way with a negative image.

On a related issue, and I have not bothered to go back and check, but it seems like every post you have made has used the word Liberal in a negative sense - yet I am unaware of you using the word Conservative in a negative sense. This is surprising as I was sure you said you were in the centre where one normally has the freedom throw brick bats in all directions.

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by SuperJude™@29 July 2004 - 16:33
the US makes the world a little nervous.

why would the U.S. make the world nervous?

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Biggles@31 July 2004 - 06:54
On a related issue, and I have not bothered to go back and check, but it seems like every post you have made has used the word Liberal in a negative sense - yet I am unaware of you using the word Conservative in a negative sense. This is surprising as I was sure you said you were in the centre where one normally has the freedom throw brick bats in all directions.

Hmmm...you noticed that too huh.

A masquerading conservative? Maybe.
(not that being conservative is wrong)

[SuperJude™]

Originally posted by Biggles@31 July 2004 - 11:54

On a related issue, and I have not bothered to go back and check, but it seems like every post you have made has used the word Liberal in a negative sense - yet I am unaware of you using the word Conservative in a negative sense. This is surprising as I was sure you said you were in the centre where one normally has the freedom throw brick bats in all directions. 

If I must I will find the statement, but the gist of it was this: The Liberals are becoming just like the conservative assholes I always couldn't stand.

So yes, I am in fact using the term liberal with a negative connotation, and if you read through the threads I make my case for why, personally, I think most of the liberals should practice more restraint in their beliefs. I really do not respect the turn the liberal left has taken in terms of beliefs and politics.

Don't forget, these are the same people that would have elected Howard Dean. Remember him? Cause the Dems sure seem to be burying him pretty deep, and yet all I heard (up till Iowa luckilly) was about Dean. It showed me how clueless many of the liberal left truly are about real life.

And now (as previously stated) they act like the conservatives they claim to oppose in the way they (the people I deal with irl as well as the opinions I read online) flagrantly will not consider an opinion that may counter their own, when I used to think liberal meant open minded.

Like I said, if it's an issue, I will find my previous statement (it's in one of these threads)

-SJ™

[Biggles]

No that is fine for me. It was more of an observation than an issue.

I think the term Liberal is perhaps the difficulty for me - but we have covered these geographical term variations in other threads.

The far right and the far left, are actualy pretty close in many ways especially in their intolerance of others viewpoints and lifestyles. For myself, the meaning of Liberal is synonymous with tolerance but I appreciate that such labels change with time and location.

I know know nothing of Dean other than his enraged gerbil impersonation.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by SuperJude™+31 July 2004 - 13:47--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SuperJude™ @ 31 July 2004 - 13:47)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by Biggles@31 July 2004 - 11:54

On a related issue, and I have not bothered to go back and check, but it seems like every post you have made has used the word Liberal in a negative sense - yet I am unaware of you using the word Conservative in a negative sense. This is surprising as I was sure you said you were in the centre where one normally has the freedom throw brick bats in all directions.

If I must I will find the statement, but the gist of it was this: The Liberals are becoming just like the conservative assholes I always couldn&#39;t stand.

So yes, I am in fact using the term liberal with a negative connotation, and if you read through the threads I make my case for why, personally, I think most of the liberals should practice more restraint in their beliefs. I really do not respect the turn the liberal left has taken in terms of beliefs and politics.

Don&#39;t forget, these are the same people that would have elected Howard Dean. Remember him? Cause the Dems sure seem to be burying him pretty deep, and yet all I heard (up till Iowa luckilly) was about Dean. It showed me how clueless many of the liberal left truly are about real life.

And now (as previously stated) they act like the conservatives they claim to oppose in the way they (the people I deal with irl as well as the opinions I read online) flagrantly will not consider an opinion that may counter their own, when I used to think liberal meant open minded.

Like I said, if it&#39;s an issue, I will find my previous statement (it&#39;s in one of these threads)

-SJ™ [/b]

Liberals, conservatives....who cares?

Some Liberals are assholes. Move on.

<!--QuoteBegin-SuperJude™
So yes, I am in fact using the term liberal with a negative connotation, and if you read through the threads I make my case for why, personally, I think most of the liberals should practice more restraint in their beliefs.[/quote]

Ok, Ok already&#33;&#33;&#33;

[SuperJude™]

Oh Busyman you make me smile. You have this way of making it seem like I post hysterical things, when in fact mostly I just respond to previous posts. But I do read your posts, so it means nothing but good.

However, move on? Geez man, then why ever post about anything? I make my statements because I have something to say and will continue to make my points, whether here or elsewhere.

After the elections we should have a thread about what our political beliefs are, you know, issue by issue or something, it would be facinating to see where people stand on abortion, taxes, the Pledge of Allegience, gay marriage, drug laws, incarceration in America, etc.

For now though, I must stick to my guns and say many of you who hate Bush and like anybody but need to look deeper into things.

However I see no comments about Giuliani&#39;s bashing of Kerry and Moore, nor about how the left were willing to embrace a small timer like Dean, or how so many people who have influence in the media, who also happen to be on the left, are dictating a huge amount of the news that gets to us (as well as what the actors we watch getting in the mix), with rampant shocking comments about our President, while mostly nobody on their side says "Hey we can do this another way".

And no comments about how the only people in the Democratic party ATM who seem to be TRYING to send a different message than the Bush is evil/Blood for Oil crowd are Kerry&#39;s speechwriters.

Hmmmm.

Next thread?

-SJ™

[Rat Faced]

SJ,

Just so you know where I stand on this, although you&#39;ve probably guessed.

I am one of those Bush haters.

Its not that I favour Democrat over Republican, like yourself I see no basic difference in the 2 main US parties.

Simply put, I believe he is the most dangerous man on the planet at this moment in time.

If i had the choice this second, and i know im gonna upset a LOT of people here, to remove either Bush or Bin Laden from the world equation... I hate to admit that the world would be better off without the guy in the whitehouse.

That doesnt mean i support Bin Laden... I&#39;d like to see them both gone.

I will leave it to you to investigate why... however I&#39;ll point you in the right direction.

It was a belief I had before he was even President.

Therefore its something prior to any election fixing (alegedly) or 9/11 or either invasion.... although all of these could have been predicted in hindsight. (Amazing what can be isn&#39;t it?)

Its also something that is in the public domain, and indeed even publicised...and involves many neo-conservatives.

Its this whole group I consider dangerous... Bush is only so bad because of the position of power he is in. I could say the same about a number of the administration.

Suffice to say, when you publicly announce a new age for the USA, then the other 3 Billion on the planet aint gonna be over the moon about things... especially those that will, by that visions definition, be the losers if that ever comes about.