I heard a story that Steve Nash has been reading The Communist Manifesto and other socialist writings to improve his basketball game. The way he sees it is that power is in the means of production that are in the hands of the workers. In this case the team as a whole rather than just the stars.
Your initial claim which mirrors this one was shown to be factually inaccurate. The only votes that Gore sought to disqualify were those that didn't comply with election law. Should the law be followed or not? You can't respond because facts are against you in that argument. You haven't shown one singel top Democrat failing to support our military at all. Major Malcontent said it very well. You seem to believe attempting to hold our military to high eithical standards is somehow hoping they fail. In my mind that is supporting them, and weeding out those that would damage the reputation of the military. That is a service to the U.S. military, not a lack of support. It is fine if you disagree that is a productive way to help better our nation's military, but you are wrong to claim that you know the motivations of others, especially those that are, themselves, war heroes.
He responded already, by saying that Murtha who has close relations with many of the military's top brass may well be speaking based on his own personal knowledge of what occurred. Murtha claims that casualty rates were actually higher than what Time reported. He didn't pull those numbers out of his ass. He obviously has some knowledge he is getting from a source that believes to be accurate. He is a war hero, who obviously cares about the military he was a part of, and is troubled by what he apparently knows. I will say that if he has no such knowledge then he was premature. I will also say that since you have no idea who Murtha has talked to, and what information he has, you are pre-mature in trying to trash the war veteran's character.
As this is a public forum, I will respond to whatever I feel like. If you can't handle it, then you can go and give non-substantive smarmy, almost witty answers in private e-mail. If batman disagrees with anything I say in the public debate he is more than welcome to post his wishes. While he doesn't need a waterboy, waterboy to batman is a title of honor, especially when the opponent can't seem to handle even the lowly waterboy.
Do a search for "Deckard" and "men and women of our armed forces," or "men and women of our superb military," or "veterans benefits," or some combination of the three. And while you're at it, quit being such a fool. Thanks in advance. Keep D&D Civil.
What's wrong with reading The Communist Manifesto? I've read it, it's very interesting and full of some brilliant ideas. I don't think that reading the Manifesto makes you a Communist, it just makes it so you know what you're talking about when the uninformed masses start calling you a hippie or commie or whatever. Also, since you guys are so bravely protecting our helpless soldiers, you should do something about the UCMJ's investigation. The UCMJ is an inanimate piece of paper and therefore probably won't conduct a proper investigation.
He specifically targeted military ballots. That is a fact that cannot be denied.It was a deliberate strategy. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A4787-2001Jan30?language=printer
I don't understand why all you "weenies" feel the need to shout gwayneco down. You may disagree with him. You may argue with him, but your collaborative self-satisfaction at deriding him is repugnant pack behavior. Without getting specific, none of is is right about everything. Even if you are "wrong" you have a right to your opinion. The kind of civil discourse that even Deckard lapsed from is meant to be an educational journey. Keep it in a better spirit and we all can benefit. With the derision comes heels being dug in and the quality of the discourse goes down. Keep it up gwayneco! As a lifelong Republican I root for minorities!!
Other paragraphs of your story... So, even though there was a memo and it was discussed in the Gore HQ, Gore never challenged Absentee votes without postmarks. In contrast, the Bush camp challenged civilian votes with the same issues.
1. It was discussed and later abandoned because of the political fallout. But it does show original contempt. 2. This thread is about Democrats and the military. What George Bush did in 2000 is irrelevent.
When gweiner decides not to preface his arguments with cheeky monkey, ass-tastic assertions like "democrats hate the military" intended to provoke, or maybe not start threads designed solely to provide the federalist society buddies with spank material, maybe you'd have a case. Until then, we'll continue to focus on the real underlying theme here: Gwayneco hates black people. Honestly, you act like a douche and start a douchey thread intended to piss people off, so you get treated like one. Not hard to figure out. I'm sure he's enjoying every second of this, just like you sometimes enjoy baiting and trolling too - now get in the last word, please.
