View Full Version : Hell yes, we're taking our country back!!
http://www.theage.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1071125662075_2003/12/12/howard_dean,0.jpg
Governor Dean's GWU Speech Transcript
Remarks made by Governor Howard Dean on the Future of the Democratic Party. Given at The George Washington University on December 8, 2004.
Thank you for that introduction. It's a pleasure to be here.
Let me tell you what my plan for this Party is:
We're going to win in Mississippi
...and Alabama
...and Idaho
...and South Carolina.
Four years ago, the President won 49 percent of the vote. The Republican Party treated it like it was a mandate, and we let them get away with it.
Fifty one percent is not a mandate either. And this time we're not going to let them get away with it.
Our challenge today is not to re-hash what has happened, but to look forward, to make the Democratic Party a 50-state party again, and, most importantly, to win.
To win the White House and a majority in Congress, yes. But also to do the real work that will make these victories possible -- to put Democratic ideas and Democratic candidates in every office -- whether it be Secretary of State, supervisor of elections, county commissioner or school board member.
Here in Washington, it seems that after every losing election, there's a consensus reached among decision-makers in the Democratic Party is that the way to win is to be more like Republicans.
I suppose you could call that philosophy: if you didn't beat 'em, join them.
I'm not one for making predictions -- but if we accept that philosophy this time around, another Democrat will be standing here in four years giving this same speech. we cannot win by being "Republican-lite." We've tried it; it doesn't work.
The question is not whether we move left or right. It's not about our direction. What we need to start focusing on... is the destination.
There are some practical elements to the destination.
The destination of the Democratic Party requires that it be financially viable, able to raise money not only from big donors but small contributors, not only through dinners and telephone solicitations and direct mail, but also through the Internet and person-to-person outreach.
The destination of the Democratic Party means making it a party that can communicate with its supporters and with all Americans. Politics is at its best when we create and inspire a sense of community. The tools that were pioneered in my campaign -- like blogs, and meetups, and streaming video -- are just a start. We must use all of the power and potential of technology as part of an aggressive outreach to meet and include voters, to work with the state parties, and to influence media coverage.
The most practical destination is winning elective office. And we must do that at every level of government. The way we will rebuild the Democratic Party is not from consultants down, but from the ground up.
We have some successes to build on. We raised more money than the RNC, and we did so by attracting thousands of new small donors. This is the first time in my memory that the DNC is not coming out of a national campaign in debt. We trained tens of thousands of new activists. We put together the most sophisticated get-out-the-vote operation our Party has ever had. We registered millions of new voters, including a record number of minority and young voters. And we saw those new voters overwhelmingly vote Democrat.
Now we need to build on our successes while transforming the Democratic Party into a grassroots organization that can win in 50 states.
I have seen all the doomsday predictions that the Democratic Party could shrink to become a regional Party. A Party of the Northeast and the Pacific Northwest.
We cannot be a Party that seeks the presidency by running an 18-state campaign. We cannot be a party that cedes a single state, a single District, a single precinct, nor should we cede a single voter.
As many of the candidates supported by my organization Democracy for America showed -- people in places that we've too long ignored are hungry for an alternative; they're hungry for new ideas and new candidates, and they're willing to elect Democrats.
Since we started Dean for America last March, we raised over $5 million, mostly from small donors. That money was given to 748 candidates in 46 states and at every level of government.
We helped a Democratic governor get elected in Montana and a Democratic mayor get elected in Salt Lake County, Utah.
We helped Lori Saldana in San Diego. Lori, a Latina grassroots environmental organizer was outspent in both the primary and the general, won a seat on the state assembly.
We also helped Anita Kelly become the first African-American woman elected to her circuit court in Montgomery Alabama.
Fifteen of the candidates who we helped win last month never ran for elective office before.
And in Texas, a little known candidate who had been written off completely ran the first competitive race against Tom Delay in over a decade.
There are no red states or blue states, just American states. And if we can compete at all levels and in the most conservative parts of the country, we can win ... at any level and anywhere.
People will vote for Democratic candidates in Texas, and Alabama, and Utah if we knock on their door, introduce ourselves, and tell them what we believe.
There is another destination beyond strong finances, outreach, and campaigns.
That destination is a better, stronger, smarter, safer, healthier America.
An America where we don't turn our back on our own people.
That's the America we can only build with conviction.
When some people say we should change direction, in essence they are arguing that our basic or guiding principles can be altered or modified.
They can't.
On issue after issue, we are where the majority of the American people are.
What I want to know is at what point did it become a radical notion to stand up for what we believe?
Over fifty years ago, Harry Truman said, "We are not going to get anywhere by trimming or appeasing. And we don't need to try it."
Yet here we are still making the same mistakes.
Let me tell you something: there's only one thing Republican power brokers want more than for us to lurch to the left -- and that's for us to lurch to the right.
What they fear most is that we may really begin fighting for what we believe -- the fiscally responsible, socially progressive values for which Democrats have always stood and fought.
I'll give this to Republicans. They know the America they want. They want a government so small that, in the words of one prominent Republican, it can be drowned in a bathtub.
They want a government that runs big deficits, but is small enough to fit into your bedroom.
They want a government that is of, by, and for their special interest friends.
They want a government that preaches compassion but practices division.
They want wealth rewarded over work.
And they are willing to use any means to get there.
In going from record surpluses to record deficits, the Republican Party has relinquished the mantle of fiscal responsibility.
And now they're talking about borrowing another $2 trillion to take benefits away from our Senior Citizens.
In going from record job creation to record job loss, they have abandoned the mantle of economic responsibility.
In cutting health care, education, and community policing programs... and in failing to invest in America's inner cities, or distressed rural communities... they certainly have no desire to even claim the mantle of social responsibility.
In their refusal to embrace real electoral reform or conduct the business in government in the light of day, they are hardly the model of civic responsibility.
In their willingness to change the rules so that their indicted leaders can stay in power, they have even given up any claim on personal responsibility.
And in starting an international conflict based on misleading information, I believe they have abdicated America's moral responsibility, as well.
There is a Party of fiscal responsibility... economic responsibility.... social responsibility... civic responsibility... personal responsibility... and moral responsibility.
It's the Democratic Party.
We need to be able to say strongly, firmly, and proudly what we believe.
Because we are what we believe.
And we believe every person in America should have access to affordable health care. It is wrong that we remain the only industrialized nation in the world that does not assure health care for all of its citizens.
We believe the path to a better future goes directly through our public schools. I have nothing against private schools, parochial schools and home schooling. Parents with the means and inclination should choose whatever they believe is best for their children. But those choices must never come at the expense of what has been -- and must always be -- the great equalizer in our society -- public education.
We believe that if you put in a lifetime of work, you have earned a retirement of dignity -- not one that is put at risk by your government or unethical business practices.
The first time our nation balanced its budget, it was Andrew Jackson, father of the Democratic Party, who did it. The last time our nation balanced its budget, it was Bill Clinton who did it. I did it every year as Governor. Democrats believe in fiscal responsibility and we're the only ones who have delivered it.
We believe that every single American has a voice and that it should be heard in the halls of power everyday. And it most certainly must be heard on Election Day. Democracies around the world look to us as a model. How can we be worthy of their aspirations when we have done enough to guarantee accurate elections for our own citizens.
We believe in a strong and secure America... And we believe we will be stronger by having a moral foreign policy.
We need to embrace real political reform -- because only real reform will pry government from the grasp of the special interests who have made a mockery of reform and progress for far too long.
The pundits have said that this election was decided on the issue of moral values. I don't believe that. It is a moral value to provide health care. It is a moral value to educate our young people. The sense of community that comes from full participation in our Democracy is a moral value. Honesty is a moral value.
If this election had been decided on moral values, Democrats would have won.
It is time for the Democratic Party to start framing the debate.
We have to learn to punch our way off the ropes.
We have to set the agenda.
We should not hesitate to call for reform -- reform in elections, reform in health care and education, reforms that promote ethical business practices. And, yes, we need to talk about some internal reform in the Democratic Party as well, and I'll be discussing that more specifically in the days ahead.
Reform is the hallmark of a strong Democratic Party.
Those who stand in the way of reform cannot be the focus of our attention for only four months out of every four years.
Reform is a daily battle.
And we must pursue those reforms with conviction -- every day, at all levels, in 50 states.
A little while back, at a fundraiser, a woman came up to me. She identified herself as an evangelical Christian from Texas. I asked her what you are all wondering -- why was she supporting me. She said there were two reasons. The first was that she had a child who had poly-cystic kidney disease, and what that illness made it impossible for their family to get health care.
The second thing she said was, "The other reason we're with you is because evangelical Christians are people of deep conviction, and you're a person of deep conviction. I may not agree with you on everything, but what we want more than anything else from our government is that when something happens to our family or something happens to our country -- it's that the people in office have deep conviction."
We are what we believe. And the American people know it.
And I believe that over the next two... four... ten years...
Election by election...
State by state...
Precinct by precinct...
Door by door...
Vote by vote...
We're going to lift our Party up...
And we're going to take this country back for the people who built it.
JCOOK
12-09-2004, 01:16 AM
Switch i think you'll agree when i say
BUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH A!
"Moral responsibility"...give me a break :rolleyes: Yeah those evangelicals are gonna vote for an abortion-supporting, gay marriage supporting politician. The evangelical he found is about one of every thousand.
Then I love how he talks about special interests. That is EXACTLY what these "gay rights" supporters are and that's EXACTLY what he caters to.
Fuck him, as portraying one party as the enemy. The Democratic tactic of making conservatives the enemy that America should rise up and overthrow is counterproductive, but they're too STUPID to realize that.
Originally posted by Lou
The Democratic tactic of making conservatives the enemy that America should rise up and overthrow is counterproductive, but they're too STUPID to realize that.
Do you know the difference between a conservative and a neocon corporatist fascist? If you don't, you best not being referring to anybody as "stupid".
Howard Dean doesn't have any objection to actual conservatives and neither do I.
Originally posted by FORD
Do you know the difference between a conservative and a neocon corporatist fascist? If you don't, you best not being referring to anybody as "stupid".
Howard Dean doesn't have any objection to actual conservatives and neither do I.
You know what, fine keep espousing the attitude that Republicans (aka fascists in your book) are this select handful of oppressors that are keeping the majority of the country down, and that they need to be overthrown. As if we're just like Colombia or Venezuela or some country like that. It's outrageous and it's not going to get you or fellow Deaniacs anywhere.
BrownSound1
12-09-2004, 02:30 AM
Howard Dean, bless his heart, is smoking crack if he thinks Alabama will go Democrat on a Presidential race. They'll vote for Democrat governors, and yes, I have voted for a Democrat congressman (Bud Cramer, who is a good man) and a Democrat Senator (Howell Heflin, another good man who is now retired.) However, this state hasn't voted for a Democratic Party Presidential candidate since Carter's first term, if I'm not mistaken. I also highly doubt that Mississippi will go Democrat any time in the near future.
I'm not trying to be an asshole by saying this, but the Howard Dean type of Democrats are not viewed well here. The Dems will have to get more "centered" to succeed in the South, and perhaps they will have to nominate another Southerner to even have a chance. Edwards, however, is not the one you need to choose.
Originally posted by Brownsound1
I'm not trying to be an asshole by saying this, but the Howard Dean type of Democrats are not viewed well here. The Dems will have to get more "centered" to succeed in the South, and perhaps they will have to nominate another Southerner to even have a chance. Edwards, however, is not the one you need to choose.
Remember that of all the candidates running earlier this year, it was Dean who made a point of saying he would reach out to southern voters. Remember the "guys with Confederate flags on their pickup trucks" line that was taken ridiculously out of context. Dean took the Southern vote more seriously than any of the other candidates, with the possible exception of Clark. Certainly more so than Edwards or Bob Graham even though they were native southerners.
I still believe a Dean/Clark ticket would have buried Bush to the point where Diebolded precincts couldn't swing the race.
Big Train
12-09-2004, 03:47 AM
Dean needs to get his credibility "back" before he worries about America or anything else for that matter.
This "Taking back" attitude is crazy, as more than half of the country is happy "Not" having the Dems take anything back. The leading figures of the Dem party and outspoken people who lean liberal (Jon Stewart, Mike Moore, I'm looking your way..), need to tone down their elitist attitude bullshit which is keeping the average Dem away and consolidating Republican voting bases. Stewart for example was on Larry King last night and when asked about Iraq said "I can't believe so much of America is so uneducated about Iraq". What the Dems COMPLETELY and ABSOLUTELY miss the fucking bus on is this: Whether or not you agree with that sentiment, telling people who may choose to vote for you or your goals that they are "uneducated" (or in some cases-Teresa Heinz-using the word "stupid), for not agreeing with you on an issue, is NOT the way to make friends and win influence.
If Howard knows this great, once he gets over the "whaooooooaaaaa" scream thing, he may become a contender.
DrMaddVibe
12-09-2004, 07:16 AM
Maybe Dean can find Daschle a job in his new endeavour.
The Dems have been getting their ass handed to them election after election and they STILL can't figure out a formula to win. If they do move to the center now it will be viewed as pandering for votes and not something they really want to do. Clinton's 1st term showed exactly what I'm talking about. He ran as a moderate but when he got in there he pushed socialized medicine, gays in the military, and social agendas that still leave me laughing every time I think of Joclyn Elders and Robert Reich! The result? A sweeping majority of the House and Senate to the Republicans. Governorships state to state have swung to the GOP and they've held control and built upon the trust that the voters endowed them with.
Dean is a bitter idiot with an axe to grind. His followers are so far to the left that it makes Kerry seem moderate! Gen. Clark wouldn't have been able to help Dean one iota. When conftonted with real questions about real issues he gets this Scarecrow from Wizard of Oz look on his face and goes about his script like someone farted in the room.
It would behove the Dems to really rethink who and what they are, and what they stand for. The ever changing platform underneath them is built upon quicksand and they're going down slowly but surely like the dinosaurs death march into extinction. Dean and his ilk are their problem not their cure all be all. I wish it had of been Dean running against GW. There wouldn't have been any blue on the map at all!
diamondD
12-09-2004, 07:56 AM
The hard left is choking the Democratic party to death, and what's so sad is that they are too stupid to realize that their elitest attitude bites them in the ass everytime they open their mouth.
BigBadBrian
12-09-2004, 07:56 AM
Howard Dean is a has-been....or rather...a never-was. :gulp:
ELVIS
12-09-2004, 08:09 AM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Howard Dean is a has-been....or rather...a never-was. :gulp:
He's a never-was...
FORD, promoting Howard Dean is a lost cause...
He's a dud, and the people will NEVER embrace him...
Go back to the drawing board...
aesop
12-09-2004, 08:15 AM
No No let the Leftists think that Dean is a Centrist candidate who, along with maybe Barney Frank as VP would make a great ticket!
We like staying in power.
Bill Clinton must be pissed mumbling to himself every day "Didn't these poor bastards learn ANYTHING from me?".
BigBadBrian
12-09-2004, 08:44 AM
Originally posted by aesop
No No let the Leftists think that Dean is a Centrist candidate who, along with maybe Barney Frank as VP would make a great ticket!
Barney Frank....that cracked me up! Thanks, dude! :gulp:
John Ashcroft
12-09-2004, 08:58 AM
The Dems are taking the country back, one loss at a time...
Originally posted by aesop
Bill Clinton must be pissed mumbling to himself every day "Didn't these poor bastards learn ANYTHING from me?".
Yes we did.... we learned that the DLC is killing our party from the inside by trying to turn it into another branch of the neocon shitbags.
Cathedral
12-09-2004, 10:48 AM
Dean?
My side split open with laughter, I need a Dr.
Sorry Ford, but it was the GOP that took the country back and you have a fight on your hands to get back in power.
If Dean is your Obi-Won Kenobie, '08 is looking really good for the good side.
ELVIS
12-09-2004, 11:34 AM
Hahaha...:D
I have no idea what FORD sees in this guy...
Warham
12-09-2004, 03:30 PM
I don't need a prescription for sleeping pills from Dr. Dean. His speeches put me to sleep.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Nickdfresh
12-09-2004, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by Big Train
...their elitist attitude bullshit which is keeping the average Dem away and consolidating Republican voting bases. (Jon) Stewart for example was on Larry King last night and when asked about Iraq said "I can't believe so much of America is so uneducated about Iraq".
But he's right! The war is going poorly and the majority of the public has no idea why we are there nor do they have an inclination as to the long term implications to this quagmire since the majority of the public is not informed. Those that are informed who consider themselves "conservatives" get their information from talk show "entertainers" that have no journalistic integrity, not have any pretension of such, yet their word is taken as gospel. Fox News is beating CNN in the ratings because Faux pseudo-News discovered long ago that if you tell people what they WANT to hear, then they will watch.
The majority of the American public IS ill informed, and it is hardly elitist to point that out!
Warham
12-09-2004, 03:50 PM
Damn, it almost reads like a FORD post.
Nickdfresh
12-09-2004, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Damn, it almost reads like a FORD post.
I'm his new alter-ego!;)Huzzah Huzzah Huzzah!
Big Train
12-09-2004, 04:12 PM
It is elitist to assume those things to begin with about anyone who identifies themselves as conservative. There are plenty of news outlets which offer the "other side of the story" (Liberal version), as well as conservative. To say that people are to ignorant to check out all available sources is retarded. Although I know your not talking about me (right?), making a blanket statement like that does not win friends. Jon Stewart doesn't know me and I am an average American who voted for Bush, does that mean I'm ill-informed becuase I don't agree with him? How does he know what we did or did not read or listen to? It's presumptious at best and elitest at worst to make that statement and it does nothing but make liberals look like pompous asses.
ELVIS
12-09-2004, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Those that are informed who consider themselves "conservatives" get their information from talk show "entertainers" that have no journalistic integrity, not have any pretension of such, yet their word is taken as gospel.
Where do get that idea from ???
I know where. You make it up!
You're so full of shit, it's rediculous...
Post some credible facts...
:elvis:
Nickdfresh
12-09-2004, 04:27 PM
I thought it was an excellent speech for one. I only hope he can live up to it over the next four years.
Vivian Campbell
12-09-2004, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Do you know the difference between a conservative and a neocon corporatist fascist? If you don't, you best not being referring to anybody as "stupid".
Howard Dean doesn't have any objection to actual conservatives and neither do I.
Ford, what, in your opinion, is an "actual conservative"?
ELVIS
12-09-2004, 05:32 PM
FORD has no answer for that, and in four years Howard Dean will be Howard who ??
BigBadBrian
12-09-2004, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
The war is going poorly and the majority of the public has no idea why we are there nor do they have an inclination as to the long term implications to this quagmire
Is that according to the NYT or the Washington Post? :confused:
BITEYOASS
12-09-2004, 05:33 PM
Someone like Dean who is that motivated to yell during a speech is definetely a someone you want running a party. Sorry but Kerry is the one who put me to sleep FORD. Why were all the neocons stating that Howard Dean has a severe anger problem when he was making that speech, when in actuality the dude was just having fun?
Nickdfresh
12-09-2004, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Is that according to the NYT or the Washington Post? :confused:
No. I mean the survey that indicated that the majority of Americans believe that Iraq was behind 9/11.
But shit, I will admit that "Vanity Fair (Aryan)" had me goin' for a while with their fraudulent post-9/11 article on the subject. Maybe the CIA gave them a file too.
BigBadBrian
12-09-2004, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Yes we did.... we learned that the DLC is killing our party from the inside by trying to turn it into another branch of the neocon shitbags.
What is killing the Democrats is a violent shift away from the center of AMERICA. The party the appeals to the center of the electorate WILL WIN. The Republicans did that better in '04 better than the Democrats. It is really quite that simple. Take faith. Democrats "better find religion" real quick. I'm not talking radical steps here, folks. I'm just stating the obvious. :gulp:
Nickdfresh
12-09-2004, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by BITEYOASS
Someone like Dean who is that motivated to yell during a speech is definetely a someone you want running a party. Sorry but Kerry is the one who put me to sleep FORD. Why were all the neocons stating that Howard Dean has a severe anger problem when he was making that speech, when in actuality the dude was just having fun?
Did you notice Bush's facial expressions during the first debate in which he vaguely resembled the face of a man having an aneurism and trying to pinch his ass cheeks to hold in his severe diarrhea at the same time? Didn't stop the neocons from voting for him, did it?
LoungeMachine
12-09-2004, 05:48 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Is that according to the NYT or the Washington Post? :confused:
Hey, B3
Serious Q time.
I respect both your intelligence and MOST of your opinions.
That being said.... In ALL Honesty
Do you actually feel things are going well there?
Do you actually think it was planned well?
Do you actually believe we are fighting "the war on terror" there?
Do you actually believe SH was a threat to us?
Do you actually believe this Administration has been honest?
Seriously. I'm curious.
LoungeMachine
12-09-2004, 05:54 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
What is killing the Democrats is a violent shift away from the center of AMERICA. The party the appeals to the center of the electorate WILL WIN. The Republicans did that better in '04 better than the Democrats. It is really quite that simple. Take faith. Democrats "better find religion" real quick. I'm not talking radical steps here, folks. I'm just stating the obvious. :gulp:
It's all a pendulum shift.
2-5% to the left every 4-12 years, and then back to the right.
Those in power, eventually abuse said power, and the electorate tells them to stand in the corner for a term or 2.
It's not much different than the shift in division leaders in sports.
The next 4 years will be fun to watch from a pol perspective.
Beware the second term.
There is no "mandate". More people voted for Kerry than Reagan.
This is how it's supposed to work, the theft of 2000 not withstanding.
The "center" will tire quickly of the NeoCon / Evangelical dorks, and history will kick them in the ass.
Then it will be OUR turn to fuck things up for a while.
DLR'sCock
12-09-2004, 06:30 PM
Originally posted by Lou
"Moral responsibility"...give me a break :rolleyes: Yeah those evangelicals are gonna vote for an abortion-supporting, gay marriage supporting politician. The evangelical he found is about one of every thousand.
Then I love how he talks about special interests. That is EXACTLY what these "gay rights" supporters are and that's EXACTLY what he caters to.
Fuck him, as portraying one party as the enemy. The Democratic tactic of making conservatives the enemy that America should rise up and overthrow is counterproductive, but they're too STUPID to realize that.
It's moral for people to lose their healthcare
It's moral for people to lose their jobs
It's moral for people to not be able to take care of their kids
It's moral for people to destroy another country illegally without cause or true reason
It's moral for people to murder more than 100,000 humans for selfish needs and gains
It's moral for people to lie to your country and your world
It's moral for people to support the unending murder of thousands of upon thousands men, women, and children
It's moral for people to take advantage of a tragedy for self gain
It's moral for people to steal
It's moral for people to kill
It's moral for people to steal
It's moral for people to kill
It's moral for people to steal
It's moral for people to kill
It's moral for people to steal
It's moral for people to warp the teachings of christianity for their own unjustifed selfish gains
It's moral for people to steal
It's moral for people to kill
It's moral for people to steal
It's moral for people to take advantage of people who don't know any better
DaveIsKing
12-09-2004, 08:34 PM
Originally posted by DLR'sCock
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
It's immoral for Government to stick their noses in our business
And it's REALLY immoral for the NANNY STATE to exist!!!!!!!!!
Damn, I agree! :D
Originally posted by BITEYOASS
Someone like Dean who is that motivated to yell during a speech is definetely a someone you want running a party. Sorry but Kerry is the one who put me to sleep FORD. Why were all the neocons stating that Howard Dean has a severe anger problem when he was making that speech, when in actuality the dude was just having fun?
Apparently you have me confused with a Kerry supporter, which I never was, and definitely never will be after the way he conceded the election in the face of obvious fraud - especially after promising he would NOT cave like Gore did in 2000. Realistically, Gore had argued all his options. The 2000 election was still stolen, but it's not easy to appeal a Supreme Court decision, no matter how corrupt it may be. Kerry had plenty of room to fight, and he pussied out. Standard operating practice for the DLC types, unfortunately.
And you're absolutely right that the Dean scream in Iowa was way overblown. Basically the mediawhores took the feed directly from Dean's clip on mic, isolated it from the roar of the crowd, and then acted as though that YEEEEEAAAAARRRRRGH heard 688 times per hour across the world for the next 2 weeks was some form of mental meltdown.
Nobody in that venue in Iowa heard that scream. The crowd was too fucking loud, and you're right - Dean was merely giving a pep speech to his campaign. "Yeah, OK, so third place in Iowa ain't the best, but about half the time the winner doesn't take Iowa, so who cares" - I'm paraphrasing, of course, but that was the general idea. Governor Dean was committed then - as he is now - to a vision for this party that includes all 50 states, and not this divisive red-blue mediawhore created bullshit.
DrMaddVibe
12-09-2004, 08:46 PM
Tick tock, tick tock...
Nickdfresh
12-09-2004, 08:52 PM
If Dean is the Chair of the DNC, can he still run as a candidate?
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
What is killing the Democrats is a violent shift away from the center of AMERICA.
And that "violent shift" has come from the neocon shitbags who have controlled the GOP for the last 2 decades, and who - through the DLC - are taking over the Democratic party as well.
Do you realize that Richard Nixon would be considered a "liberal" today compared to Junior? Or that even Reagan, the false Messiah of so called conservatism, is a moderate, by BCE standards?
Do you realize that Dennis Kucinich, probably the most liberal "big name" politician on the national scene would be considered a conservative in most other countries?
Do you see how silly it is to label Howard Dean as "extreme left" when his views - and practices as Governor of Vermont - probably resemble Barry Goldwater far more than they do his neighbor Bernie Sanders?
We ARE the center. Maybe because the BCE "front end alignment job" was so terrible and the country's been driving on the edge of the right shoulder for so long, that it's now hard to even see the center line. It also means that Junior is close to driving the entire country into the ditch.
The party the appeals to the center of the electorate WILL WIN. The Republicans did that better in '04 better than the Democrats. It is really quite that simple. Take faith. Democrats "better find religion" real quick. I'm not talking radical steps here, folks. I'm just stating the obvious. :gulp:
The two biggest obstacles currently in this country are fraudulent election systems and a lying corporate media. As long as those 2 factors are allowed to remain, a message is irrelevant because few will hear it, and those who do will not have their votes counted :(
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
If Dean is the Chair of the DNC, can he still run as a candidate?
Unfortunately no :(
And that is my only reservation about him being the chair.
Problem is, we need a DNC chair like Howard Dean to ensure a 2008 candidate like Howard Dean.
Of course he could always accept the chairmanship, with the full understanding that he will step down in January 2007, in order to begin his own campaign. :)
DrMaddVibe
12-09-2004, 09:03 PM
If you don't want Dean to be head of the DNC then why do you have it in your sig?
ELVIS
12-09-2004, 09:41 PM
This is insane...
Howard Dean is the best you can come up with ??
If the democrats don't win in 2008 the party may cease to exist...
Hillary has a much better chance than Howard...
"It's moral for people to lose their jobs."
Well I hate to break the news to you, but that's what a capitalistic society has. There's going be a job flux. As compared to communism, which ensures that everyone has a job. And we've seen how well that works.
"It's moral for people to kill."
Well this is right in line with the Democratic party agenda of being pro-choice, pro-euthanasia and pro-embryonic stem cell research. Yup, that's Dem morals for you.
JCOOK
12-10-2004, 12:29 AM
In the words of Howard Dean..." AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
DEMON CUNT
12-10-2004, 01:52 AM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
The "center" will tire quickly of the NeoCon / Evangelical dorks, and history will kick them in the ass.
Then it will be OUR turn to fuck things up for a while.
Nice! You are one of the great thinkers here on the board.
Thank God (tee hee) the pendulum's natural Balance*!
*Warham and JKOOK's favorite Van Hagar album! :D
DEMON CUNT
12-10-2004, 02:00 AM
Originally posted by Lou
"It's moral for people to lose their jobs."
Well I hate to break the news to you, but that's what a capitalistic society has. There's going be a job flux.
This is on page one of the NeoCon Mantra Songbook!
The people who are losing thier jobs are also the customers of the capitalistic corporations. People without jobs cannot buy much. Our system, like communism, could just devour itself.
Don't take our way of life for granted. It could end someday if we are not careful.
If things continue as they are, the Chinese (who now own almost 20% of IBM) will be outsourcing back to us! That will be worse than working for WalMart!
The Chinese economy is set to skyrocket!
Big Train
12-10-2004, 03:30 AM
Cunt,
It is a great fucking songbook, you should learn a tune or two.
The great thing about capitalism is that it is adaptive by nature, whereas communism is bound to it's general precepts which most of the time causing the industries to fail.
China is doing well for a variety of reasons, mostly long standing demand which is finally starting to be sated. Russia is in a similar position and both of their countries citizens carry very little debt.
America needs to tighten it's belt and get it's head back in the game for sure, I agree.
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 06:26 AM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
This is on page one of the NeoCon Mantra Songbook!
The people who are losing thier jobs are also the customers of the capitalistic corporations. People without jobs cannot buy much. Our system, like communism, could just devour itself.
Don't take our way of life for granted. It could end someday if we are not careful.
If things continue as they are, the Chinese (who now own almost 20% of IBM) will be outsourcing back to us! That will be worse than working for WalMart!
The Chinese economy is set to skyrocket!
This is true, from The Onion:
"Walmart Announces Rollback of Wages"
BENTONVILLE, AR—Wal-Mart, the world's largest discount retailer, announced its biggest-ever rollback Monday, with employee pay cuts of up to 35 percent.
Above: A sign announces a Louisville, KY Wal-Mart's low, low wage for cashiers.
"Just in time for the holiday shopping season, we're rolling back the hourly wages of workers in every department—housewares, automotive, health and beauty, and so many more!" Wal-Mart president and CEO H. Lee Scott Jr. announced at a press conference. "From Baton Rouge to Boise, we're continuing our tradition of low, low prices and using our muscle to create unbelievable savings!"
"For us!" Scott added.
Scott then turned to a large projection screen on which the company's trademark yellow happy face whizzed through the aisles of a Wal-Mart, enthusiastically "slashing" the hourly wages of employees all over the store.
"Paying $7.75 an hour for a Class-2 cashier with fewer than two years' experience?" a cheery narrator asked in amused disbelief. "How about $6.50? And $8.45 an hour for a dockworker to unload boxes of bath towels all day? We think $6.75 sounds more like it!"
In addition to wage rollbacks, Scott said Wal-Mart will discontinue a number of shelf-stocking, warehousing, and sales-floor jobs that have been occupying valuable space on the payroll.
"Why, some of those old stockers have been collecting dust in our aisles and ledgers for five years," the narrator said as the smiley-face ushered reluctant ex-employees and their bloated wages to the parking lot. "It's time for a store-wide clearance! Out with the old and in with the new!"
The beaming smiley-face then placed a sign reading "Help Wanted—$5.15/Hour" in a window and welcomed in a long line of smiling job applicants bearing brand-new high-school diplomas, military discharge papers, and green cards.
"Wal-Mart is the place to find the latest of everything!" the narrator said. "The benefits of having long-time employees around don't add up to the benefits we have to pay them. It's time for newer, fresher, cheaper faces!"
As a result of the announcement, Wal-Mart's stock rose 20 points Monday.
"We're very excited," Wal-Mart stockholder James Seaton said. "After all, everyone loves a good value. And you can't beat the combination of low cost and high quality you find in good old-fashioned American labor."
According to Scott, employees at all 1,362 Wal-Marts, 1,671 Supercenters, and 550 Sam's Clubs will be notified of the rollbacks this week by greeters stationed at the employee entrance of each store. Greeters will address employees by their first names, shake their hands, and inform them of the store's special new wage plan. Those who remain on staff will find red "Wage Rollback!" stickers on their time cards in celebration of the occasion and in compliance with the scant federal regulations protecting minimum-wage earners.
"Wow! A 24 percent reduction!" said Harold Reis, who works in the garden department in a Marshfield, WI Wal-Mart. "I can't believe it! Why, I never saw cuts like this when I used to work at the family-owned Seubert Greenhouse!"
"But that was a few years ago," Reis added. "Nowadays, you can drive all over town looking for someplace to pay you more, but good luck. Wal-Mart is the single biggest employer in 21 states!"
In spite of the savings on labor, Wal-Mart director of human resources Lawrence Jackson said he isn't worried about incurring losses.
"What we might lose in terms of shrinkage of our work force, we'll make back almost immediately," Jackson said. "That's what's so great about being a part of so many small communities across the country—once we get a location up and running, people find out they can't afford not to work for us!"
In a related plan, Jackson said Wal-Mart plans to slash the prices it pays for manufactured goods in various Pacific Rim and South American countries by 20, 30, and even 40 percent.
diamondD
12-10-2004, 07:34 AM
Originally posted by FORD
And you're absolutely right that the Dean scream in Iowa was way overblown. Basically the mediawhores took the feed directly from Dean's clip on mic, isolated it from the roar of the crowd, and then acted as though that YEEEEEAAAAARRRRRGH heard 688 times per hour across the world for the next 2 weeks was some form of mental meltdown.
Nobody in that venue in Iowa heard that scream. The crowd was too fucking loud, and you're right - Dean was merely giving a pep speech to his campaign. "Yeah, OK, so third place in Iowa ain't the best, but about half the time the winner doesn't take Iowa, so who cares" - I'm paraphrasing, of course, but that was the general idea. Governor Dean was committed then - as he is now - to a vision for this party that includes all 50 states, and not this divisive red-blue mediawhore created bullshit.
This is why people think you're insane. He screamed it into the same microphone that was SUPPOSED to capture his voice and isolate it from the crowd. What were they supposed to do, use a feed from the back of the crowd?
And who is the authority that says no one in the crowd heard it? You? :rolleyes:
And where's Guitar Shark? Did you destroy him for using the Osama Bin FORD picture as his avatar? :p
DEMON CUNT
12-10-2004, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by diamondD
This is why people think you're insane. He screamed it into the same microphone that was SUPPOSED to capture his voice and isolate it from the crowd. What were they supposed to do, use a feed from the back of the crowd?
So you have never cheered at a ball game or concert? Since when does cheering make you crazy?
Dean's character was assasinated by the so called liberal media.
The republican/democrat political machine FEARED Dean beacuse he was on fire and set to kick Bush's ass.
Unfortunately Kerry, King of the Boring, got the nom.
BigBadBrian
12-10-2004, 11:38 AM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Hey, B3
Serious Q time.
I respect both your intelligence and MOST of your opinions.
That being said.... In ALL Honesty
Do you actually feel things are going well there?
Hard to tell. I don't think we can get a true view from anyone. Not the Administration. Not any media outlet. All biased one way or the other. That includes the foreign ones as well. I think the picture will be more clear after the elections over there.
Do you actually think it was planned well?
The initial phase, yes. Now, things are definitely a little bit off schedule, but we'll see how this works out. American presence definitely needs to "fade to black" after the elections over there. The Iraqis need to feel that they are running the show and that we are eventually leaving. If they feel that the elections were fair and that we didn't try to influence them, things will work out in the long haul.
Do you actually believe we are fighting "the war on terror" there?
Yeah, I do. Sometimes I had my doubts, but I've read quite alot about al-Qaeda and Middle Eastern terror networks in general in the last year or so and there is an entire industry built around it and Wahbbism that fuels it. These guys that stoke it are veterans of many different conflicts from the Soviet era in Afghanistan clear through to the present day. They come from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Chechnya, Jordan, Egypt, and everywhere else in the ME you can think of. Some of the cells were present in Iraq during the Saddam era. Saddam didn't mess with those guys. He knew better than to mess with them, especially since they weren't bothering him and only wanted to hide out there. No, before you ask, there is nothing to prove of any al-Qaeda activity connected to Saddam and 9/11. Yet. In writing. Yet. We'll see.
Do you actually believe SH was a threat to us?
People like to ask that question. It must first be asked in which context: was he a direct threat or an indirect threat? He was an indirect threat to the United States and a direct threat to just about every other country in proximity to Iraq. The UN was simply a joke. It was playing those cat and mouse inspection games with Iraq for over 12 years concerning inspections of his weapons programs. The US was criticized for "rushing to war." Give me a fucking break! TWELVE YEARS! Saddam was making fools out of everyone. Does anyone honestly believe he wouldn't have started up Chem and Bio weapon programs again. How about the Nuke program he once had? Ask the Kurds or the Iranians. They were GASSED already with an Iraqi army that possessed chemical weapons.
Do you actually believe this Administration has been honest?
Did they lie to get us into war? No. I'm going to use a few quotes:
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We
want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass
destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing
weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27,2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority
to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because believe
that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a
real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
The above Democrats relied on the same source of information for their statements as did President Bush when he made his decision to go into Iraq. That source of information was the CIA, British MI5, Russian intelligence, and so forth. Even the French said Saddam still said Saddam still likely had WMD. Saddam couldn't prove he had disposed of tons of chem weapons material, that's why the UN was still checking.
BigBadBrian
12-10-2004, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
So you have never cheered at a ball game or concert? Since when does cheering make you crazy?
Dean's character was assasinated by the so called liberal media.
The republican/democrat political machine FEARED Dean beacuse he was on fire and set to kick Bush's ass.
Unfortunately Kerry, King of the Boring, got the nom.
FORD, you are DEMON CUNT. :gulp:
DEMON CUNT
12-10-2004, 11:58 AM
BBB,
Saddam said that the weapons were destroyed. The UN weapon inspectors found no weapons. Two years later no weapons have been located by the troops.
All your bullshit asside, the main reason we went to war (Sadddam has "massive" amounts of WMD) appears to be incorrect.
Was it a lie or a mistake? Either way someone fucked up hard!
Since when do you care about what France has to say?
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-02/12/xinsrc_94c07ef7ba9b43b1b9ac601a888bd4bf_powell2.jp g
DEMON CUNT
12-10-2004, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
FORD, you are DEMON CUNT.
No bitch.
BigBadBrian
12-10-2004, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
BBB,
Saddam said that the weapons were destroyed. The UN weapon inspectors found no weapons. Two years later no weapons have been located by the troops.
All your bullshit asside, the main reason we went to war (Sadddam has "massive" amounts of WMD) appears to be incorrect.
Was it a lie or a mistake? Either way someone fucked up hard!
Possibly. Probably. The dealin' ain't done yet though. Chemical and biological weapons are small. It'll take years to find out what happened to what is missing. That's what frightens me. Why did Saddam have twice as many pesticide plants as what he needed? Just how many damned scorpions and spiders does Iraq have? Dual use plants...plants that could be used to make pesticides or chemical weapons. That's a fact.
Since when do you care about what France has to say?
I don't, that's a bone for you Libs to chew on. :p
Warham
12-10-2004, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
So you have never cheered at a ball game or concert? Since when does cheering make you crazy?
Dean's character was assasinated by the so called liberal media.
The republican/democrat political machine FEARED Dean beacuse he was on fire and set to kick Bush's ass.
Unfortunately Kerry, King of the Boring, got the nom.
Yeah, we feared Dean.
::YAWN!::
Warham
12-10-2004, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
BBB,
Saddam said that the weapons were destroyed. The UN weapon inspectors found no weapons. Two years later no weapons have been located by the troops.
All your bullshit asside, the main reason we went to war (Sadddam has "massive" amounts of WMD) appears to be incorrect.
Was it a lie or a mistake? Either way someone fucked up hard!
Since when do you care about what France has to say?
That wasn't the main reason we went to war, cunt.
The main reason we went to war was because Hussein was or had violated every fucking resolution the UN passed since 1991 and Bush, after Slick Willy did little about it, finally got tired of his shit and we went after his ass. This after going to the Saddam-bribed UN twice for help, to which the French, Germans and Russians kindly upturned their noses, refusing to help us while getting their fat pockets stuffed with cash from Iraq.
DLR'sCock
12-10-2004, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by Lou
"It's moral for people to lose their jobs."
Well I hate to break the news to you, but that's what a capitalistic society has. There's going be a job flux. As compared to communism, which ensures that everyone has a job. And we've seen how well that works.
"It's moral for people to kill."
Well this is right in line with the Democratic party agenda of being pro-choice, pro-euthanasia and pro-embryonic stem cell research. Yup, that's Dem morals for you.
I'll never understand the mentality of people who have no problem with unending bloodshed and ceaseless murder against innocent LIVING HUMAN BEINGS, and are more concerned about embryos in the wombs of FEMALE(you cannot have that baby lou, or any guy, only women can, and during that time, the embryo is one with the mother) human beings.....btw, Science does not consider the embryo a living human being until it is born...oh and I am not particularly Pro-abortion at all and I have never had to go through with it thankfully, but ultimately it is the womans' choice.....and to a degree the father's as well......but these fucking nnut bag whacko rigth wing christians who have no clue wah tthe teachings of Jesus are really about need to wake the fukc up...., but I am pro-choice, especially when the life of the mother is can be harmed, rape, and fucking hick fucking incest....
I do not think it should be used as birth control necessarily....at all...
OK, well how "moral" or "ethical" or even of "good conscience" is it for people to fire their employees who have dedicated theirs lives to a company and leaving them high and dry without warning, and without those employees the company would not flourish....for the sake of greed and for the owners to put more money in their own pockets????
But killing people and destroying their lives is not helping them, especially when it was never requested....
"please wipe out my whole famaily and permanently would hundredds of thousands of us, please!!!!!"
I'll take the side of science...oh and I don't think
Warham
12-10-2004, 04:10 PM
Another idiot posting.
Oh, a baby isn't a viable human until it's 9 months old and out of the womb, Cock? I guess my wife isn't human since she was born after being inside my mother-in-law for only seven months!
A baby is at least viable after five months, and perhaps even before that.
Damn, the idiot juice is being passed around in here between Cunt, Phil and now Cock today.
DLR'sCock
12-10-2004, 04:20 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Another idiot posting.
Oh, a baby isn't a viable human until it's 9 months old and out of the womb, Cock? I guess my wife isn't human since she was born after being inside my mother-in-law for only seven months!
A baby is at least viable after five months, and perhaps even before that.
Damn, the idiot juice is being passed around in here between Cunt, Phil and now Cock today.
an idiot response...you are so blind it is ridiculous, and don't .....when you learn to think.....then we'll speak....
btw....the only reason anyone should have a late term abortion, is if it would KILL the mother(would you rather your wife die???? or her live and have a chance to have another????)......there is no other reason.....I don't understand anyone who waits to decide to have an abortion....unless they find out about the rape, incest, or threat to their own life at that late term....
adn when it comes to biology and life, I'll always stay on the side of science.....
If I was ever in a situation of choce with abortion when I was younger, I wouls have most likely told her to keep it....it would have been discussed in with deep thought as to all of the options....but if she was to make that final decision, it is her's to make....
you need to think....
you can try...
Warham
12-10-2004, 04:36 PM
You're an idiot because you don't know when a human life is viable.
By your thinking a woman can have an abortion at 8 1/2 months.
For a woman, you sure do a dis-service to your sex.
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 05:40 PM
Well Warham, let's turn the tables on you for a bit.
What do you think of the "Morning After Pill?" A pill that is designed to flush an egg after two or three days?
What about the abortion pill--RU486?
Warham
12-10-2004, 05:54 PM
I'm for using pre-conception contraception, not post-conception.
I like the other pill better, RU469.
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by Warham
I'm for using pre-conception contraception, not post-conception.
I like the other pill better, RU469. :D
No more "eating beaver" jokes in the Canadian threads!
Originally posted by DLR'sCock
OK, well how "moral" or "ethical" or even of "good conscience" is it for people to fire their employees who have dedicated theirs lives to a company and leaving them high and dry without warning, and without those employees the company would not flourish....for the sake of greed and for the owners to put more money in their own pockets????
Well first Jesus didn't teach pro-choice and I challenge any one of you to find that in the Bible or find that anywhere.
But now onto this about jobs. Yes, you're right. But I know where you're headed with this--it's somehow the government's responsibility to take over and intervene and meddle with what businesses do. And that I just don't believe. Of COURSE it's wrong for businesses to do that. But that's not the government's problem.
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by Lou
Well first Jesus didn't teach pro-choice and I challenge any one of you to find that in the Bible or find that anywhere.
Jesus also never said he was anti-abortion.
But now onto this about jobs. Yes, you're right. But I know where you're headed with this--it's somehow the government's responsibility to take over and intervene and meddle with what businesses do. And that I just don't believe. Of COURSE it's wrong for businesses to do that. But that's not the government's problem.
No, it's businesses' prerogative to do what it pleases, like dumping chemical waste into your backyard for instance! Fuck the government and their regulations!
How quickly people forget that there was a day that in America a meat company would knowingly sell a vat of lard in which a man had fallen into and died, and was dissolved into the substance someone then presumably spread onto bread to make a lard sandwich.
Let me trust companies to look out for my best interests!
BigBadBrian
12-10-2004, 07:11 PM
Originally posted by Warham
I like the other pill better, RU469.
Now that's a pill I can swallow. :gulp:
BigBadBrian
12-10-2004, 07:14 PM
Originally posted by DLR'sCock
an idiot response...you are so blind it is ridiculous, and don't .....when you learn to think.....then we'll speak....
btw....the only reason anyone should have a late term abortion, is if it would KILL the mother(would you rather your wife die???? or her live and have a chance to have another????)......there is no other reason.....I don't understand anyone who waits to decide to have an abortion....unless they find out about the rape, incest, or threat to their own life at that late term....
adn when it comes to biology and life, I'll always stay on the side of science.....
If I was ever in a situation of choce with abortion when I was younger, I wouls have most likely told her to keep it....it would have been discussed in with deep thought as to all of the options....but if she was to make that final decision, it is her's to make....
you need to think....
you can try...
Cock, were you drunk when you composed the above post? If not, all your grammar teachers should be shot. :gulp:
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
"Jesus also never said he was anti-abortion."
Oh COME ON! That is the stupidest thing you've posted yet.
BigBadBrian
12-10-2004, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by DLR'sCock
Science does not consider the embryo a living human being until it is born...
Cock, you're an "Idiot without a Cause." What in the sam hell do you mean by "Science." Do you mean Mr. Stalwitz, my 7th grade science teacher? Just who do you mean. That's a shotgun blast of a statement if there ever was one. "Science" holds absolutely no sway over myself and most people unless you back it up with a specific organization. :gulp:
BigBadBrian
12-10-2004, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by Lou
Oh COME ON! That is the stupidest thing you've posted yet.
Yup. We have a winner for MORONIC STATEMENT OF THE DAY! :bananna:
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by Lou
Oh COME ON! That is the stupidest thing you've posted yet.
How is it stupid? REFUTE IT! I DARE YOU!
What would JESUS SAY about the Iraq War Mr. Christ Spokesman? I'M the dum one? Everyone's cornering the market on the Christ judgement thing. Criticizing everything they don't like about society and twisting it into Christ's perspective. Of course they conveniently ignore their own little double-standards and hypocrisies. I think it's really funny.
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Yup. We have a winner for MORONIC STATEMENT OF THE DAY! :bananna:
No, your statement about Thomas Jefferson takes that one!
ELVIS
12-10-2004, 08:58 PM
http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosassorted/images/abortedbaby05.jpg
Aborted baby (22 weeks)...
:elvis:
BigBadBrian
12-10-2004, 09:00 PM
Damn ELVIS. Next time just a link please. :(
ELVIS
12-10-2004, 09:01 PM
Shocking isn't it...
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 09:01 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Damn ELVIS. Next time just a link please. :(
These shock value photos need to stay in a link with a parental advisory. Don't you work in the rectory Elvis? Shame on you.
DaveIsKing
12-10-2004, 09:03 PM
Ugly.
ELVIS
12-10-2004, 09:11 PM
Parental advisory link (http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosassorted/)
:elvis:
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 09:21 PM
I know there are no bloody pictures here of Iraqi dead children or of aborted fetus', but does anyone find these facts disturbing?
Seeing as we are the richest nation in the history of the planet.
2002 Facts on Child Poverty in America
November 2003
The U.S. Census Bureau considered a three-person family poor in the year 2002 if its annual income was less than $14,348. For a family of four, the poverty threshold was $18,392.
12.1 million American children younger than 18 live below the poverty line.
More children live in poverty today than 25 or 30 years ago. The number of poor children reached a recent peak of 15.7 million in 1993, fell for eight years, but has risen in the last two years.
One out of every six American children (16.7 percent) was poor in 2002.
By race and ethnicity, 31.5 percent of Black children, 28.6 percent of Hispanic children, 11.0 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander children, and 9.4 percent of Non-Hispanic White children were poor.
The U.S. has the highest child poverty rate of any wealthy nation.
An American child is more likely to live in poverty than a child in 17 other wealthy industrialized nations for which data exist, according to data from the cross-national Luxembourg Income Study.
Poor children’s families have trouble putting food on the table.
One out of every six households with children in America were “food insecure” in 2002 (meaning there was not always enough food for all household members to have active healthy lives because the household lacked money or other resources for food), according the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The majority of food insecure households have incomes that are near or below the poverty line.
Three out of four poor children live in a working family.
Despite the weak economy and rising joblessness among parents, 73 percent of children in poverty in 2002 lived in a family where someone worked full- or part-time for at least part of the year. One in three poor children (35 percent) lives with a full-time year-round worker.
Poor children defy the stereotypes.
There are more poor White Non-Hispanic children (4.1 million) than poor Black children (3.8 million) or poor Hispanic children (3.8 million), even though the proportion of Black and Hispanic children who are poor is far higher. More poor children live in suburban and rural areas than in central cities. Poor families have only 2.2 children on average.
Poverty matters.
Poor children are at least twice as likely as nonpoor children to suffer stunted growth or lead poisoning, or to be kept back in school. Poor children score significantly lower on reading, math, and vocabulary tests when compared with otherwise-similar nonpoor children. More than half of poor Americans (55 percent) experience serious deprivations during the year (defined as lack of food, utility shutoffs, crowded or substandard housing, or lack of a stove or refrigerator). Poor households are more than 15 times as likely to experience hunger.
America can lift more children out of poverty.
America cut its child poverty rate in half in the 1960s. Since then, child poverty has grown while national efforts to improve economic security have focused on the elderly. If America lifted low-income children out of poverty in the same proportion as we currently lift low-income seniors, three out of four poor children would no longer be poor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have questions, comments, or information to share, please e-mail us at familyincome@childrensdefense.org, call us at 202-662-3542, or write to us at Children's Defense Fund, Attn: Family Income Division, 25 E Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001.
And all while living in the greatest nation on earth. "I am proud to be an American...."
DEMON CUNT
12-10-2004, 09:40 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I know there are no bloody pictures here of Iraqi dead children or of aborted fetus', but does anyone find these facts disturbing?
Seeing as we are the richest nation in the history of the planet.
2002 Facts on Child Poverty in America
November 2003
The U.S. Census Bureau considered a three-person family poor in the year 2002 if its annual income was less than $14,348. For a family of four, the poverty threshold was $18,392.
12.1 million American children younger than 18 live below the poverty line.
More children live in poverty today than 25 or 30 years ago. The number of poor children reached a recent peak of 15.7 million in 1993, fell for eight years, but has risen in the last two years.
...
C'mon Nick, don't you know that the only life that matters is that of a white fetus!?!
Get with it you liberal! :D
These people want to make it illegal, which doesn't really work. Everything that's illegal still happens. Making surgical procedures illegal is dangerous.
What they need to concetrate on is reducing the demad through realistic education and support. But that's not very dramtic. They'd rather humiliate women at the clinics. What would Jesus do?
I'm pretty sure fat ass Warham doesn't do anything for his community. He just regurgitates what ever pastor friendly tells him to. Look at him trying to be all scientific. What a dick.
Jesus Christ
12-10-2004, 09:56 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
What would JESUS SAY about the Iraq War ?
What profit hath a man if he gain the whole world (and all the oil in it) and loseth his soul?
ELVIS
12-10-2004, 10:03 PM
Good point...
DLR'sCock
12-10-2004, 10:06 PM
Originally posted by Warham
You're an idiot because you don't know when a human life is viable.
By your thinking a woman can have an abortion at 8 1/2 months.
For a woman, you sure do a dis-service to your sex.
Of course, you are still so fuckng retarded that you didn't read what I wrote...you only want to see what you wish to see...Iam sure that will nto change.....believe what you wish.....it is unimportant to me....
DLR'sCock
12-10-2004, 10:20 PM
Originally posted by Lou
Well first Jesus didn't teach pro-choice and I challenge any one of you to find that in the Bible or find that anywhere.
But now onto this about jobs. Yes, you're right. But I know where you're headed with this--it's somehow the government's responsibility to take over and intervene and meddle with what businesses do. And that I just don't believe. Of COURSE it's wrong for businesses to do that. But that's not the government's problem.
well the difference is I believe in checks and balances.....some here don't, they only want what they want and that's it......I have no problem with capitalsim, capitalsim is a good thing, but hardly perfect. In fact I think people should feel that because they are lucky enough to live here, becuase this country gives peple the oppurtunity to flourish, and if they have all of the cards on their side, AND THINGS WORK OUT.....then taxes are a civic duty(you make more, well then you should pay more(I am in a postition where I could be making alot more money, when I jump up the tax brackets, I won't bitch and moan like some spoiled baby)...........to keep the society going. But some want it all, and don't appreciate wherethey are at to get what they wanted.....they only think,"me, me, me, me"...
I am a believer of stick it out and keep on trying to do what you need to do, but with no gov't to interceed, or any entitty to intereceed, then what do you have when and entity has all of the unchecked power to do as it please no matter what the cost....there must be checks and balances in life.....all areas of life......for man is so weak, and proven over and over and over again that man is willing to do as one wishes to get what one want's.....not all see the truth...
DLR'sCock
12-10-2004, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by Jesus Christ
What profit hath a man if he gain the whole world (and all the oil in it) and loseth his soul?
So may have lost their souls, their humanity, yet they still do not see what it is they have done.....
Warham
12-10-2004, 10:23 PM
Originally posted by DLR'sCock
btw, Science does not consider the embryo a living human being until it is born...
I'll take the side of science...oh and I don't think
That's what you posted, and yes I did read it.
You're still as dumb as a box of rox.
DLR'sCock
12-10-2004, 10:25 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
C'mon Nick, don't you know that the only life that matters is that of a white fetus!?!
Get with it you liberal! :D
These people want to make it illegal, which doesn't really work. Everything that's illegal still happens. Making surgical procedures illegal is dangerous.
What they need to concetrate on is reducing the demad through realistic education and support. But that's not very dramtic. They'd rather humiliate women at the clinics. What would Jesus do?
I'm pretty sure fat ass Warham doesn't do anything for his community. He just regurgitates what ever pastor friendly tells him to. Look at him trying to be all scientific. What a dick.
i am completely for using all resouces to reduce abortions.....btw I think the rate of abortions increased under Bush's watch.....educate the masses, and teach responsibility, and I will say to all again, if you are PRO-LIFE, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND ADOPT AS MANY KIDS IN THIS US AS YOU CAN TO HELP OUT....
I really have thought about this, and there will come a time when I might do this....
Warham
12-10-2004, 10:25 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
C'mon Nick, don't you know that the only life that matters is that of a white fetus!?!
Get with it you liberal! :D
These people want to make it illegal, which doesn't really work. Everything that's illegal still happens. Making surgical procedures illegal is dangerous.
What they need to concetrate on is reducing the demad through realistic education and support. But that's not very dramtic. They'd rather humiliate women at the clinics. What would Jesus do?
I'm pretty sure fat ass Warham doesn't do anything for his community. He just regurgitates what ever pastor friendly tells him to. Look at him trying to be all scientific. What a dick.
Yeah, let's just have more abortions because there might be a few more kids in poverty if we let them live.
Since we'll go that way, let's just shoot any homeless person we see on the street. It'll spare them the misery of living in poverty as well.
I guess liberals know what's best for people.
DLR'sCock
12-10-2004, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by Warham
That's what you posted, and yes I did read it.
You're still as dumb as a box of rox.
you are right and I will rephase that(I was rushing at work), science does not consider the embryo a human being until it is capable of living outside of the womb.....
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 10:28 PM
Hey Warham. How about thinking about the kids that are out of the vagina once in a while.
And just remember this, a responsible liberal pro-choice man that uses birth control, is just as effective at preventing abortions as you are!
DLR'sCock
12-10-2004, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Hey Warham. How about thinking about the kids that are out of the vagina once in a while.
And just remember this, a responsible liberal pro-choice man that uses birth control, is just as effective at preventing abortions as you are!
Nck, sometimes thinking is quite difficult for people, but in time they can get it....maybe...
Warham
12-10-2004, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Hey Warham. How about thinking about the kids that are out of the vagina once in a while.
And just remember this, a responsible liberal pro-choice man that uses birth control, is just as effective at preventing abortions as you are!
I am Nick. I just proposed we kill all homeless people. It'll spare them the misery of living in poverty any longer. I mean if liberals are concerned about fetuses being born into poverty and have no problems snuffing out their lives to avoid that tragedy, let's not just stop there! After we take care of the homeless, we should work on HIV positive people, kids with downs syndrome, etc. Their lives will be alot easier if we just snuff them out now, instead of letting them suffer through life.
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 10:45 PM
No you didn't! You completely skirted the issue of child poverty because you refuse to do anything about!
I never said abortion was a answer to child poverty. I posted that in the richest (& Christian) nation that ever existed, we are 17th, behind all of the European nations that we so love to hate in child poverty! Abortions a problem, bombing Iraqi children into a morgue is a problem, and so are the kids that are starving in this nation! Stop the fucking moral vanity already!
Warham
12-10-2004, 10:56 PM
So what's your solution to the poverty, Nick?
There will always be poverty in a capitalistic society, period.
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 11:02 PM
A "War on It!"
Just as there will always be abortions whether it's legal or illegal. You can always do more to minimize the problem and reduce the number to the lowest common denominator.
Warham
12-10-2004, 11:04 PM
Good let's have a war on poverty.
I'm all for it.
I have donated to charities. Hopefully everybody else will as well.
Nickdfresh
12-10-2004, 11:11 PM
Charities are great. But it's not enough. Social programs need to be expanded to insure that the neediest get what they need to have a shot at survival. That does not mean giving out more welfare necessarily, but it means that if we really believe in a egalitarian society in which all kids have a equal shot in life, these kids need a chance at something. How specifically I do not know.
Warham
12-10-2004, 11:28 PM
I'm not in favor of expanding any programs to increase government size, even though I feel very bad for children in poverty as you do.
I was in favor of welfare reform; Clinton basically signed it at gunpoint. People need to get off welfare, not get on it. I believe that many children are victims of their own parents, and handing out more cash to their parents isn't the best idea. I favor alternative methods.
How about a war on Wal Mart?
And other such pig corporations who entire "business strategy" is to kill the business core of a small town, forcing everyone in the area to buy from them, and most to work for them as well.
DLR'sCock
12-11-2004, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by FORD
How about a war on Wal Mart?
And other such pig corporations who entire "business strategy" is to kill the business core of a small town, forcing everyone in the area to buy from them, and most to work for them as well.
I hear that, I am a huge spporter of mom and pop businesses, but with companies like Starbucks and Wal-Mart(and many others) who use unethical aggressive strategies to force the local business out of business so they can become larger andwealthier bloated entities....ethics ethics ethics, sp many people do not have them...
Yeah, I can't stand Starfucks either. I consider them the Wal Mart of the coffee business for the reasons you just mentioned. Hell, I even got a gift card from somebody and I think I used it once. Even for free, I don't go there very often. Besides, the coffee AND business practices are much better at Batdorf & Bronson (http://www.batdorf.com) anyway.
Nickdfresh
12-11-2004, 01:26 PM
Starbucks coffee tastes like they douse the beans with lighter fluid and burn them before they are ground. Their coffee sucks anyways.
BigBadBrian
12-11-2004, 02:55 PM
Originally posted by FORD
How about a war on Wal Mart?
And other such pig corporations who entire "business strategy" is to kill the business core of a small town, forcing everyone in the area to buy from them, and most to work for them as well.
You're a Socialist. I'm not big on Walmart either. :gulp:
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
You're a Socialist. I'm not big on Walmart either. :gulp:
So anyone who opposes huge corporations controlling everything, which is corporatism, or fascism according to Mussolini, is a "socialist"?
There are some corporations which are simply too large, and Wal Mart is one of them. Republicans claim to be the party of small business, yet they continue to encourage corporate mega mergers which have put several industries - among them the oil industry, the broadcast media, and the music industry - in the hands of 4 or 5 huge companies.
and as I said, in some small towns, there is no pretense of competition at all.
If opposing that bullshit makes me a "socialist" than pass the fucking vodka, comrade :rolleyes:
Guitar Shark
12-11-2004, 05:19 PM
I actually think Dean could do a pretty good job as DNC chairman. But he'll fail every time as a presidential candidate.
Nickdfresh
12-11-2004, 05:23 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
I actually think Dean could do a pretty good job as DNC chairman. But he'll fail every time as a presidential candidate.
I fear that may be correct since he has been so slandered by the media.
Guitar Shark
12-11-2004, 05:30 PM
Slander isn't the right word. He made a mistake and they (mainly the late-night talk shows) played it up for ratings. He has no one to blame but himself, for not understanding the role of the media in today's political landscape.
BigBadBrian
12-11-2004, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Slander isn't the right word. He made a mistake and they (mainly the late-night talk shows) played it up for ratings. He has no one to blame but himself, for not understanding the role of the media in today's political landscape.
True enough, but it IS disgusting how large of a role the media plays in politics. I don't want Rather, Jennings, Hume, or Rooney picking the candidates. In a way, they now do. :gulp:
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Slander isn't the right word. He made a mistake and they (mainly the late-night talk shows) played it up for ratings. He has no one to blame but himself, for not understanding the role of the media in today's political landscape.
Yes, Dean made a mistake, but it's not the one you're thinking. His mistake was saying in a primary debate on live TV that media consolidation was out of control and that he would put a stop to it as President. After that, he became the media's #1 target. He was already the #1 target of the Republicans and the DLC.
The scream, in it's natural form was nothing. Even in it's electronically enhanced form, it would have been a 30 second bit on Jon Stewart's show at most, but ignored by an actual news media. The fact that we have corporate propagandists instead of proper journalism in this country is what led it to being blown out of proportion.
Remember, it was Hitler and Goebbels who believed that a lie, repeated often enough, will become "the truth" to those who are taught not to question. And the scream was always accompanied by the suggestion that Dean was having some sort of mental meltdown, which anyone who watched the entire post caucus speech would know was entirely false.
So, counselor, isn't it slander to imply that someone is "insane", in order to destroy their candidacy?
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
True enough, but it IS disgusting how large of a role the media plays in politics. I don't want Rather, Jennings, Hume, or Rooney picking the candidates. In a way, they now do. :gulp:
Funny how you left out Hannity, O'Reilly, and Limbaugh.
Guitar Shark
12-11-2004, 06:54 PM
Originally posted by FORD
So, counselor, isn't it slander to imply that someone is "insane", in order to destroy their candidacy?
That all depends, Dave. Are you running for office? I wouldn't want to commit slander or anything. ;)
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
That all depends, Dave. Are you running for office? I wouldn't want to commit slander or anything. ;)
Then drop the goddamned avatar already :mad:
BigBadBrian
12-11-2004, 07:17 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Then drop the goddamned avatar already :mad:
Can I use it? ;) :D
ELVIS
12-11-2004, 10:42 PM
Originally posted by Warham
So what's your solution to the poverty...
Edcuation...
ELVIS
12-11-2004, 10:53 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Yes, Dean made a mistake, but it's not the one you're thinking. His mistake was saying in a primary debate on live TV that media consolidation was out of control and that he would put a stop to it as President. After that, he became the media's #1 target.
And rightly so...
Suggesting that you will control the media as president is rediculous, and proof of Dean's radical nature...
The scream, in it's natural form was nothing. Even in it's electronically enhanced form, it would have been a 30 second bit on Jon Stewart's show at most, but ignored by an actual news media.
Oh bullshit!
I heard the scream broadcast live, and you suggesting that it was "enhanced" is a total LIE!
The scream was stupid, but I agree that it was basically nothing...
My impression of Howard Dean has nothing to do with his retarted scream...
It's his retarted radical message...
The people will never warm up to this guy...
:elvis:
DEMON CUNT
12-12-2004, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by Warham
I just proposed we kill all homeless people. It'll spare them the misery of living in poverty any longer.
Warning! Canned Christian Answer Alert!
This is how they are instructed to repond to the poverty/abotion argument. Non-answers like these force conversations into a circle and nothing gets accomplished.
There's no sense in arguing with these people. They have been programed.
It's all good vs. evil, black and white, right or wrong. That is why the Bible and Disney movies appeal to these people.
Making abortion illegal will solve NONE of our problems.
DEMON CUNT
12-12-2004, 04:48 AM
Originally posted by ELVIS
Edcuation...
How do purchase an education if you live in poverty? Basketball scholarship? No child left behind?
BigBadBrian
12-12-2004, 08:07 AM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
How do purchase an education if you live in poverty? Basketball scholarship? No child left behind?
School.
Nickdfresh
12-12-2004, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
School.
Ha ha ha...Very funny retort BigBad. Read this book by Jonathan Kozol and tell me all about some of our wonderful American schools.
http://www.gothamgazette.com/books/images/savageInequalities.jpg
diamondD
12-13-2004, 10:04 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
So you have never cheered at a ball game or concert? Since when does cheering make you crazy?
Dean's character was assasinated by the so called liberal media.
The republican/democrat political machine FEARED Dean beacuse he was on fire and set to kick Bush's ass.
Unfortunately Kerry, King of the Boring, got the nom.
What the fuck are you talking about? I never said anything about cheering making you crazy. I was talking about FORD being crazy for suggesting the yell was enhanced.
Dean was never on fire, he was just yelling like he was.
DEMON CUNT
12-14-2004, 02:00 AM
Don't you remember? Dean was the talk of the town.
Then the Dems allowed the media to eat Dean alive because he was too left for the pussy Dem elite. So the cowardly right wing media took him apart.
http://i.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/2003/1101030811_400.jpg
DrMaddVibe
12-14-2004, 06:49 AM
Oh yeah...I remember him.
Are there ANY sane people from Vermont?
BigBadBrian
12-14-2004, 07:14 AM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
[B] So the cowardly right wing media took him apart.
RIGHT wing media? You, wench, are out of your damned mind.
DEMON CUNT
12-14-2004, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
RIGHT wing media? You, wench, are out of your damned mind.
Am I?
The same news media that did it's best to destroy Clinton for getting a blowjob has given Bush Inc. a free pass on Osama, Enron, Abu Gharib, DUI, 911 failures, Iraq quagmire, Halliburton's no bid contracts, Royal Saudi connections funeralgate, going AWOL, etc.
If you realy believe that the media is liberal, or even "fair and balanced" you are not paying attention. Good citizen- You believe what you are told to.
SUCKERS!
http://images.radcity.net/5155/484207.jpg
Warham
12-14-2004, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
Am I?
The same news media that did it's best to destroy Clinton for getting a blowjob has given Bush Inc. a free pass on Osama, Enron, Abu Gharib, DUI, 911 failures, Iraq quagmire, Halliburton's no bid contracts, Royal Saudi connections funeralgate, going AWOL, etc.
If you realy believe that the media is liberal, or even "fair and balanced" you are not paying attention. Good citizen- You believe what you are told to.
SUCKERS!
http://images.radcity.net/5155/484207.jpg
I don't know about you, but I watch FOX and that's all they talk about. The shit you listed is on there 24/7, and that network is the most right-leaning network there is.
I'd hate to see what's on the Clinton News Network every day?
Clinton deserved to be destroyed for lieing under oath. Let's not forget the guy was impeached. :D
Warham
12-14-2004, 03:30 PM
I 'stole' this article from a site for you to read Cunt. You'd be best to steal a brain from somebody.
The real story on Halliburton www.gasandoil.com
12-11-03 Over the past few months, the Democratic presidential candidates have been peddling a story. The story is that the Bush administration is circumventing the competitive bidding process to funnel sweetheart Iraq reconstruction contracts to major campaign contributors, especially Vice President Dick Cheney's old firm, Halliburton.
The riff was laid down by Dennis Kucinich, but now all the candidates are playing along. Howard Dean says the Halliburton contracts show that the Bush administration "has sold this country down the river." John Kerry says the administration has broken faith with the American people with its no-bid contracts with Halliburton. In the parade of Democratic bogeymen, the word "Halliburton" elicits almost as many hisses as the chart-topping "Ashcroft."
The problem with the story is that it's almost entirely untrue. As Daniel Drezner recently established, there is no statistically significant correlation between the companies that made big campaign contributions and the companies that have won reconstruction contracts.
The most persuasive rebuttals have come from people who actually know something about the government procurement process. For example, Steven Kelman was an administrator in the Office of Federal Procurement Policy under President Bill Clinton and now is a professor of public management at Harvard. Earlier, Kelman wrote an op-ed article on the alleged links between contributions and reconstruction contracts.
"One would be hard-pressed to discover anyone with a working knowledge of how federal contracts are awarded -- whether a career civil servant working on procurement or an independent academic expert -- who doesn't regard these allegations as being somewhere between highly improbable and utterly absurd," he observed.
The fact is that unlike the congressional pork barrel machine, the federal procurement system is a highly structured and largely insulated from crass political pressures. The idea that a Bush political appointee can persuade a large group of civil servants to risk their careers by steering business to a big donor is the stuff of fantasy novels, not reality.
The real story is that the Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR), won an open competition in 2001 to provide the service support for overseas troops. This contract is called the Logcap, and is awarded every few years.
Under the deal, KBR builds bases, supplies water, operates laundries and performs thousands of other tasks. Though the General Accounting Office has found that KBR sometimes overcharges, in general the company has an outstanding reputation among the panoply of auditing agencies that monitor these contracts.
But some circumstances are not covered under Logcap. During the Clinton administration, the Pentagon issued a temporary no-bid contract to KBR to continue its work in the Balkans. In the months leading up to the Iraq war, Defence officials realized they needed plans in case Saddam Hussein once again set his oil wells ablaze. KBR did the study under Logcap.
Then in February, with the war looming, Pentagon planners issued an additional bridge contract to KBR to put out any fires that were set. KBR had the experience. Its personnel were in place. It would have been crazy to open up a three-to-five-month bidding process at that time.
There are a number of legitimate questions Democratic candidates could be asking about the US procurement system.
Is the United States so overreliant on private contractors that the line between combat personnel and support personnel is getting blurred?
Should Washington beef up the Pentagon procurement staff, to give it the ability to manage contracts from a wider cast of companies?
What does America do if the private contractors decide to pack up and leave Iraq?
But answering these questions would mean coming up with a positive vision of how to better proceed with America's reconstruction efforts in Iraq. Instead the Democratic presidential candidates are content simply to repeat demagogic and misleading applause lines.
The lesson of this Halliburton business is that some parts of the US government really do make their decisions on the merits. And just because a story makes you popular doesn't make it true.
Nickdfresh
12-14-2004, 03:44 PM
Originally posted by Warham
I don't know about you, but I watch FOX and that's all they talk about. The shit you listed is on there 24/7, and that network is the most right-leaning network there is.
I'd hate to see what's on the Clinton News Network every day?
Clinton deserved to be destroyed for lieing under oath. Let's not forget the guy was impeached. :D
About a blowjob.
DEMON CUNT
12-14-2004, 04:01 PM
Wow, Warham-sandwich, that just clears it all up!
The administration just loves good citizens like you. You defend their greed with your silly little articles. You got a tiny tax cut and they get millions, sucker!
Sure, Fox News does talk about that stuff, that doesn't mean that they are being fair and balanced.
Like I said, your opinions are spoonfed to you.
Warham
12-14-2004, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
About a blowjob.
No, about lieing about that blowjob.
Nickdfresh
12-14-2004, 04:19 PM
Can we have an independent counsel devote millions to investigate Bush about his erroneous claims on WMD's, the felonious "outing" of a CIA Agent that has been ignored, and the failure to protect the homeland while pumping billions into a failed Iraq policy? Gee, I bet we could find some lies too.
DEMON CUNT
12-14-2004, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by Warham
No, about lieing about that blowjob.
Holy Shit! That bastard!
Now if only we could find those WMD. Because that lie has killed almost 1300 Americans.
Warham
12-14-2004, 04:21 PM
I thought that's what the 9/11 commision was for.
Warham
12-14-2004, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
Holy Shit! That bastard!
Now if only we could find those WMD. Because that lie has killed almost 1300 Americans.
What about those UN resolutions that Saddam didn't seem to abide by? Think that those had something to do with going into Iraq? Hmmm, I wonder, cunt. Oh yeah, that's right. Bush went into Iraq for his money-grubbing oil buddy Dick Cheney!!! How convenient.
Vanstonica
12-14-2004, 04:28 PM
Is it true that FORD is just Howard Dean's screenname?
Nickdfresh
12-14-2004, 04:32 PM
Originally posted by Warham
I thought that's what the 9/11 commision was for.
http://www.allhatnocattle.net/KenStarr3.jpg
Very far from the Ken Starrian Independent Counsel my friend.
Warham
12-14-2004, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
http://www.allhatnocattle.net/KenStarr3.jpg
Very far from the Ken Starrian Independent Counsel my friend.
I dunno. Did you check out who's on the commission?
DEMON CUNT
12-14-2004, 05:29 PM
Originally posted by Warham
What about those UN resolutions that Saddam didn't seem to abide by? Think that those had something to do with going into Iraq? Hmmm, I wonder, cunt. Oh yeah, that's right. Bush went into Iraq for his money-grubbing oil buddy Dick Cheney!!! How convenient.
Bush goes against the UN because Saddam went against the UN?
Since when do you care about the UN?
And since there are no WMD in Iraq, it looks like the sanctions worked.
Nickdfresh
12-14-2004, 05:29 PM
I just bought it. Yes, they were appointed by Bush, and unlike Starr, only investigated what they were chartered to investigate, and it was neither Bush's nor Clinton's personal life.
Warham
12-14-2004, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
Bush goes against the UN because Saddam went against the UN?
Since when do you care about the UN?
And since there are no WMD in Iraq, it looks like the sanctions worked.
I don't care about the UN, but liberals sure do.
Liberals cite the UN constantly...'Bush should have went back for the twentieth time to beg for help from the French, Germans and Russians.'
Bullshit, fuck the UN. It should be dismantled immediately.
The sanctions didn't work. The only thing the sanctions did was make Hussein and some French people's pockets deeper.
DEMON CUNT
12-14-2004, 05:38 PM
Don't forget Bush's first choice of commissioner! I almost fell out of my seat laughing- I couldn't fucking believe it.
http://www.citypages.com/getreal/2002/kissinger.jpg
"Sure Mr. President, I can cover up a few thousand more murders!"
DEMON CUNT
12-14-2004, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by Warham
I don't care about the UN, but liberals sure do.
Liberals cite the UN constantly...'Bush should have went back for the twentieth time to beg for help from the French, Germans and Russians.'
Bullshit, fuck the UN. It should be dismantled immediately.
The sanctions didn't work. The only thing the sanctions did was make Hussein and some French people's pockets deeper.
Then why bring that up as the reason for the invasion?
There are no WMD in Iraq. The sactions worked.
BigBadBrian
12-14-2004, 06:18 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Funny how you left out Hannity, O'Reilly, and Limbaugh.
Or Begala, or Carville, or Buchanan? I left all of those people out because they are not news anchors...they are commentators. People listen to them for infotainment....not actual news. Maybe you do, however. :gulp:
Warham
12-14-2004, 06:34 PM
Originally posted by DEMON CUNT
Then why bring that up as the reason for the invasion?
There are no WMD in Iraq. The sactions worked.
Trade Sanctions Don't Work
Daily Policy Digest
Energy Issues / International
Wednesday, March 19, 2003
Trade sanctions won't work against a determined dictator like Saddam Hussein. Additionally, many feel that the human cost of sanctions may be too great. Consequently, there needs to be a serious rethinking of sanctions policy, says Bruce Bartlett.
In the case of Iraq, the nation has ample reserves of petroleum and does not lack for methods of selling it on the world market despite United Nations sanctions. Indeed, much of the oil Iraq sells is done so legally under a U.N. program that allows limited amounts of oil to be sold to purchase food and medicine.
Since 1997, when the program began, and 2001, Iraq received $51 billion from legal oil sales, according to a U.S. General Accounting Office report.
The report also notes that Iraq obtained another $6.6 billion during this period through smuggling and illegal surcharges.
Despite increased efforts by the United States and the U.N. to limit illegal oil sales, they appear to be increasing, Bartlett says:
Last month, the Wall Street Journal quoted a senior White House official as saying Iraq is getting $3 billion per year from them.
The process has become well organized via an illicit pipeline to Syria, and trucks and railroad tankers that cross the borders with Jordan and Turkey.
A recent study by the Institute for International Economics found the Iraq sanctions to be pretty much a failure across the board. They didn't get Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait back in 1991. They didn't force him from power and haven't brought about compliance with U.N. resolutions requiring disarmament. Indeed, by all accounts, Saddam Hussein has continued to build up his military despite the sanctions, says Bartlett.
Source: Bruce Bartlett, "Trade Sanctions Don't Work," National Center for Policy Analysis, March 19, 2003.
Nickdfresh
12-14-2004, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
...they are commentators. People listen to them for infotainment....not actual news. Maybe you do, however. :gulp:
THIS IS THE SINGLE BIGGEST PROBLEM RIGHT HERE! NEWS AND ENTERTAINMENT SHOULD NEVER BE MELDED TOGETHER!
BigBadBrian
12-14-2004, 07:32 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
THIS IS THE SINGLE BIGGEST PROBLEM RIGHT HERE! NEWS AND ENTERTAINMENT SHOULD NEVER BE MELDED TOGETHER!
Not true. It's up to the person to differentiate. Hey, alot of people get their news from the Jon Stewart Show....that's just life in this modern world. :gulp:
DEMON CUNT
12-14-2004, 08:28 PM
Originally posted by Warham
Trade Sanctions Don't Work
Daily Policy Digest
Energy Issues / International
Wednesday, March 19, 2003
Trade sanctions won't work against a determined dictator like Saddam Hussein.
Nice copy/paste/regurgitation. But do YOU have anything to say?
What was the goal of the sanctions?
ODShowtime
12-14-2004, 08:41 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Or Begala, or Carville, or Buchanan? I left all of those people out because they are not news anchors...they are commentators. People listen to them for infotainment....not actual news. Maybe you do, however.
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
THIS IS THE SINGLE BIGGEST PROBLEM RIGHT HERE! NEWS AND ENTERTAINMENT SHOULD NEVER BE MELDED TOGETHER!
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Not true. It's up to the person to differentiate. Hey, alot of people get their news from the Jon Stewart Show....that's just life in this modern world.
True. It is a HUGE problem, and maybe the one that begat the rest. People like you BBB, who appear able to distinguish flaming propoganda from news, are few and far between. So, so many millions of idiots don't know the difference. When they catch a soundbite from one of these assholes, it can get stuck in their brain, which is hazardous to everyone.
BigBadBrian
12-14-2004, 08:50 PM
Originally posted by ODShowtime
True. It is a HUGE problem, and maybe the one that begat the rest. People like you BBB, who appear able to distinguish flaming propoganda from news, are few and far between. So, so many millions of idiots don't know the difference. When they catch a soundbite from one of these assholes, it can get stuck in their brain, which is hazardous to everyone.
Maybe it'll all come out in the wash. There are armies of pundits on both sides of the ball. ;)
http://www.angelfire.com/ok5/pearly/bill/jc_argue2.jpghttp://www.wsau.com/stationimages/shows/hannity.jpg
ODShowtime
12-14-2004, 09:02 PM
that guy is a fucking moron
Edit: I love when a post like this appears at the top of a page!
BigBadBrian
12-15-2004, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by ODShowtime
that guy is a fucking moron
Edit: I love when a post like this appears at the top of a page!
You mean Carville?
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Not true. It's up to the person to differentiate. Hey, alot of people get their news from the Jon Stewart Show....that's just life in this modern world. :gulp:
Except Jon Stewart openly admits his show is entertainment and not an actual news show. You'll never hear the morons on FAUX admit that.
BigBadBrian
12-15-2004, 09:47 AM
Originally posted by FORD
Except Jon Stewart openly admits his show is entertainment and not an actual news show. You'll never hear the morons on FAUX admit that.
FAUX? What network is that? :confused:
You know, that PNAC staffed hate spewing "news" network that went to court for the "right" to lie to the American people.....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.