Carter: "What has happened to the United States of America?"

You are the one who accused the UN of murdering children because they imposed sanctions against a murderous dictator.

How would you have dealt with Saddam? Would you have had no sanctions and no military action whatsoever?

 

Im tired of the right winged bull**** that I have to deal with in the "The liberals had the same intelligence as Bush". Unless you want to argue that there is NO difference in the Executive and Legislative branches of our Gov't and that the Executive Branch isnt privy to info first (or wasnt) and didnt make **** (or cherry pick the bull**** from a proven liar) up that they gave to congress then you are just a blind political hack.

I dont see Mr Bush holding anyone responsible for the Gitmo **** or the Abu Ghriab atrocities, other then Low level order followers.

IT IS DISCRIMINATION to not allow a homosexual to work. It is DISCRIMINATION to not allow them to live peacefully, function in society, or run for office. But NOT to disallow them to marry?

You act as if when Clinton was in office the neocon nut jobs werent the same about Clinton. At least Clinton was sucessful at his job. Speaking of arguments being so far out of sight. I mean, the dude had a great economy, a plumeting crime rate, jobs out the wazoo, peace, and managed to do what many thought was fooking impossible, a strong market with a non existant deficit. But you right winged Hannity clones had to b**** about a fooking blow job. I mean really, you just needed to say what really pissed you off. That he was getting some and you guys werent. Instead of blow jobs we have.


Halliburton no bid contracts
Plame Leaks
Bull**** wars costing us over 2000 american lives
Cronyism that lead to the Katrina mess and Mike Brown.
Abu Ghriab abuses.


Just to name a few of the monumental abuses of this WH.

 

If you think the point of the story was to compare the Iraq War with the holocaust then you need to take a course in logic.

 

Hmmm...those were UN sanctions, not US sanctions. So who has their 'head up their ass' and ignores facts?

 

Well, he did draw the comparison in his post.

 

It might be discrimination, but it's not illegal discrimination. Key distinction!

 

The point of the story was about denial. How some people refuse to accept the truth even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

 

But what he's saying we're denying is that the US is murderous. I mean if we were denying that the deficit is too big would he even bring that story up?

 

Discrimination is unjust, and as MLK said, any law that is unjust is no law at all.

 

Well, that was two different posters. One brought up the story and the other brought up the statement that US is murderous. We don't even know if they have the same viewpoint.

 

when did i say it was US sanctions? for someone who is so picky about words...you should have better reading comprehension.

 

I agree it's unjust. It's the law though.

Also, considering the demographics of those who voted against gay marriage, I would say that it would be probable that MLK, being a minister, would have voted to ban gay marriage. How's that for irony?

 

I can say this because I voted for him, but it safe to say my cousin Jimmy was one of the worst presidents in american history, and his conduct since leaving office (not the Habitat for Humanity, which is admirable) has been largely disgraceful. the Nobel he was awarded was a joke. Yassir Arafat won a Nobel peace prize too.

 

Hey, I know towing the party line must be hard work, but do you ever get discouraged that you've been tugging on the same boatload of bull**** for years now, and still can't get the damn thing to move an inch?

 

Lol, ok I'll spell it out for you.

Glynch's post. you'll notice 'its' connects 'United States' and 'two wars and sanctions.'

Now my response. Notice I point out the fact that the first Gulf War and the sanctions were UN based, not US based.

Now your response to MY post where you back up glynch and assert someone who ignores the 'facts' has their head up their ass.

One can reasonably infer that since you quoted my response - you were joining in the same discussion with glynch and I. Further, you declare his representation was factual. Since his representation is that they were US sanctions - again refer to the 'its' and 'United States' connection above if you are still confused - you did what you now claim you didn't.

So we'll add 'who's having reading comprehension problems' to 'who has their head up their ass' onto your list.

 

but given that you said it that post which i was replying to that it was UN action (which included the sanctions according to your own post) i fail to see why i'd have to repeat that again.

so let me repeat. the sanctions killed hundreds of thousands of people. and hence the term 'murderous' is appropriate and accurate.

 

Carter made homebrewing legal. He's ok in my book. I like him.

 

No , it is not discrimination. If they want to get married, they can find a church to marry them. Why do they need government reconization to get married in the first place? This is all an opinion. Its no more discriminating than placing an age limit on drinking. Why stop there? We could go on forever.

Sucessful? Personally, I blame him for the economy of today. His administration overinflated the enconomy into a big mess. The same people who were poor before the overinflation are the same people who are poor today. The same people who truely benefited from this "spectacular" economy are the same people who benefited at the crash. Clinton was a good president who did good things. Clinton is too soft and Bush is too hard. Sure, Clinton worked hard at making peace, but working peace in the middle east is like children ... when children get quiet in the other room, they are up to something.

 

Sigh. Except that the term murderous was applied to the UNITED STATES. If you meant to make a different point then glynch, say so. That's not what you did functionally. In addition you chose to launch a broadside about the 'facts' backing up a nonfactual assertion.