raaa
March 24 2009 / 5:43 pm
Reply

Boy gee wiz you Republicans are really grasping for any fear you can tack onto Americans aren’t you?

9/11 = Lies.
WMD fears = Lies.
ACORN fears = Lies.
Obama the Muslim = Lies.
Terrorists at every corner = Lies.
Drill in the arctic to save us = Lies.
Bank deregulation = Lies.

and now… what else? Lies.

Sorry republicans hags, we are NOT AFRAID of you bastards. You screwed up the US. Shut up and go back in your nasty filthy deadly holes.

Please people. Yes, checks and balances. NO MORE REPUBLICAN LIES.

Mat
March 24 2009 / 7:42 pm
Reply

Wow raaa,

It looks like you’re up way past your bedtime. Maybe you need to go take a wee little nap to get rid of that grouchiness.

9/11 was a lie? Wow, that’s news to me. Go check up on the families of those who died and let me know what you come up with, thanks…

WMD fears was a lie? Maybe, maybe not. Hussein certainly had more than enough time to move them before we invaded. If you think moving WMDs to Syria is farfetched, bear in mind that he sent some of his fighter jets to Iran (his arch-enemy) during the first Gulf War.

ACORN is a lie? Are you shitting me? Have you even been paying attention to the news? The guys had the FBI looking into them. But then you don’t sound like you’re particularly well-informed.

Obama the Muslim? Well, at this point, we really don’t know what he is. There’s definitely evidence that we went to an Islamic school at an early age. Perhaps he was? That’s certainly open to debate. However, given the fact that he’s telling our current allies to go fuck themselves while groveling towards the Islamic world (television interview after he was inaugurated, wants to talk to “moderate” Taliban, gives $900 million to the Palestinians and then sent a warm and fuzzy message to Iran) does at least hint at Islamic sympathies.

Terrorists at every corner is a lie? Hmmm…I guess Europe would have to say something about that, since their mosques are prime breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists. We’re actually fighting a war in Afghanistan/Pakistan, we’ve sent support to other countries such as the Philippines, Algeria, Morocco and Egypt, so I’d say they’re out there in the world. Of course, you’re probably too busy reading the New York Times, if you even read at all (which is doubtful).

Drill in the Arctic to “save us?” Well, let me ask you this. Unless you were brought up in a cave, how exactly do you get to work (assuming you have a job) and how do you heat and cool your house? If you picked gas, you’re a winner (even though you’re a loser). You see, oil is necessary for most basic functions in an industrialized world. Would you rather get it from oil deposits here, or from some place that totally hates our guts and can bring us to our knees with high oil prices (such as Russia, most of the Arab world and Venezuela)? Bear in mind that the low oil prices that we’re experiencing right now is a bump and will eventually go back to the levels (or higher) that we saw last year.

Bank deregulation is a lie? Not sure where you’re going with this. I’m assuming you mean the idea that government should take over the banks is a great idea. Ok, let me put it this way. The government started this nonsense by telling banks that they had to lend out to people who had no business getting loans. Look up the Community Investment Act on Google for information (at the very least). Banks are not in the business of charity, but of profit. They were going to find some way to make money because they are a business (try looking up something in economics as well). In fact, read up on Barney Frank and Chris Dodd (these are Congressmen) and see what their role was in all of this.

Naturally, I realize I’m talking to a brick wall. If you had a modicum of intelligence, you wouldn’t have even put the post up. But then, that’s what the Democrats count on; having dumbasses like you not understand what’s going on around you.

david foster
March 25 2009 / 8:29 am
Reply

Historical precedent:

In August 1938, a German aristocrat named Ewald von Kleist landed in London. He was a strong anti-Nazi, and closely associated with other influential Germans holding anti-Nazi views. His mission was to warn the British government of Hitler’s aggressive plans, and to plead for a strong and unambiguous warning, backed up by the credible threat of military force, to be issued by British and French leaders. If the statement was strong enough, von Kleist believed, Hitler would back down from his designs on Czechoslovakia, and would likely be overthrown by his own military.

Baron von Kleist was of course taking a great personal risk–”I have come to you with the halter around my neck,” he said. He met with Lloyd George, Winston Churchill, and Sir Robert Vansittart. Churchill relayed the substance of the conversation to Lord Halifax, the foreign secretary, urging that a serious warning be presented to Hitler in the form of a joint communique signed by the British, the Russians, and the French, with the fullest possible support from the United States.

Neville Chamberlain, though, had other views, telling Halifax that von Kleist was a political enemy of Hitler, blinded by personal hatred. “There are certainly a great many arguments which might be brought to bear against his allegations. We have recently heard other voices from Germany claiming that Hitler’s warlike intentions are to be taken seriously and, consequently, this suggests that we should respond to them with gestures of conciliation.” The British ambassador to Germany, Henderson, urged the government to ignore any warnings issued by von Kleist and his associates. “Their information,” he asserted, “is one-sided, partisan, and intended soley as propaganda against Hitler.”

(more here)

Mat
March 26 2009 / 3:55 pm
Reply

Well gee whiz raa,

“I never said people didn’t die. But, if you believe it happened without US intervention and cooperation on a multitude of levels, then I suspect you believe Sarah Palin would make a good VP.”

Well, you said 9/11 was a lie. Period. You said nothing else about voodoo government or Truther nonsense, which BTW, strains your credibility before you finished that sentence. How Sarah Palin comes into this is beyond me, but you really do need to learn how to focus on the argument at hand. Liberals do have a way of not staying on target with their arguments, so I guess this is another example.

“Yawn. He didn’t have them. It was a lie.”

Well, since you cleared that up, I am much relieved. Thank God that I didn’t need to actually read anything on that or get these odd things called facts. BTW, did you wave your hands next to your ears and stick out your tongue when you wrote that?

“The fact that the FBI looked at them is a wonderful cause of guilt dude. However, according to MIT over 6 million votes were disenfranchised by Karl Rove and his dead (murdered) buddy Michael Connell. Acorn, if YOU bothered to do ANY research other than listen to Rush Limbaugh, was obeying federal reporting laws and turned ballots in obedience to the law. The ACORN story is about as real is Sarah Palin’s desire to save the polar bears.”

Once again, we have an inability to stick to the argument. I talk about ACORN and you whip up Rove, Palin (again) and Limbaugh. I must reiterate, stay focused when you’re making a case. I know it’s difficult, but I have faith in you (well, not really, because you really do sound like one of those Truther idiots).

“I wont’ even quote you. You are an ass.”

Yeah, you can’t quote me because there are facts about Obama’s early life. Bear in mind that I never said that he was Muslim. The evidence does show that he has at least sympathies given the way his diplomacy has worked so far.

“Love the personal attacks based on your ignorance, because they show you believe what you want to based on your intellectual limitations and lack of insight.”

Pray tell where the personal attack was in my statement? I re-read it to make sure I wasn’t hallucinating. Once again, read up on the facts. You really honestly think there are no al qaeda cells in Europe? I’m sure the security services in those countries would say something about that. As for personal attacks, you’re the one who called me an ass, remember? Yeah, that was intellectualism at its finest. Trust me, I’ve been called a lot worse.

“However, if you want a world of fear and boogie men, can you please just rent a movie and watch reality TV and stay away from anything that ACTUALLY is happening — because you are longing for the Bush deathwatch again, aren’t you?”

Wow, you really do have ADD when it comes to staying on an argument, don’t you? Bush deathwatch? Let me ask you this: were you in any way, personally affected by anything that Bush did in eight years? No? Didn’t think so. And don’t give me any emotional trauma nonsense. Save that for the legal system.

“Tell you what. Screw the economy and efforts to save the USA — let’s put all of our money into terrorism. After all, you and Ms. Palin are anxious for “end times” I presume. I only wonder what kind of sick moron likes to be afraid of boogiemen.”

Do I even really need to repeat about the argument-focus thing? As for screwing the economy, your buddy Obama seems to be doing a pretty bang-up job of that already. As for terrorism, when it hits again, I’m sure you’ll be the first one bitching and complaining about it happening. Your kind always does. You have a serious inability to look long term.
All I’ve heard from you so far is either name calling (super mature, by the way) or Truther stuff. But let’s move on, shall we?

“What do I have to do with it? Destroying Alaska will do NOTHING to solve our short and medium term energy needs.”

No, what I asked is whether you drive a car or heat and cool your house. Obviously you couldn’t even answer that question. My guess is that your answer would be in the affirmative, which makes you a phony. ANWR is not all of Alaska (far from it) and the drilling would be on a small portion of even that. Alaska’s a big state. Check a map. Then check ANWR. You need to understand the concept of size scale.

“I’m going with the fact that every legitimate economist has been screaming for years that deregulation would ruin our financial system.”

Yes, that is a fact. Hooray, its your first. Congrads.

“Capital should not be flowing towards banks just to make money on payday loans and 35% credit cards… it should be invested in industry that actually produces things… not industry that steals from our citizens and keeps them in debt.”

Who ever put a gun to the heads of people who max out on credit cards? I have a couple and I use only as much as I can pay back. I know its a radical concept for you, but it’s called financial discipline. It’s not my fault or the bankers fault that people are colossally stupid with credit cards. The problem isn’t the banks but with people who have no conception of how to budget their money. BTW, where do you think most starting businesses (you know the ones who “produce things?”) get their money? Through loans. You know, credit?…
Congrads on your economics 101.

“And, hey genius, you DO know that AIG failed directly because of deregulation, right?”

No, AIG failed because the government stepped in during the 70’s and told them that they needed to lend out to people who clearly should not have been given loans. Obviously you didn’t take my advice and read the Community Reinvestment Act that was in the late 70’s and reinforced in the 90’s. BTW, both parties are at fault because Republicans did have a chance to reform it, but didn’t want to. But the original Act and the revision were backed heavily by Democrats (does Barney Frank and Chris Dodd ring a bell?). As I said before, banks aren’t in the business of charity, but of making a profit. They do that by lending to (supposedly) responsible people who pay them back. That’s where interest comes in. When the government steps in and tells banks that they need to do “charity” work, banks are going to find a way to make a profit off of it. You need to see the difference between charity and capitalism.

“That’s recession 101 and if you don’t know that much, why am I bothering to answer you? (That is a very good question, but I have a few minutes to kill and you are a retard, so this is like killing cockroaches. Fun but disgusting.)”

Um, no, that’s not recession 101. You’ll have to figure that out for yourself. You seem to be able to call me names than intelligently answer any of the ideas I put up. So who’s the “retard,” eh? I don’t spend my time playing with cockroaches, but if that’s your way of having fun, have at it…

“But then, that’s what the Republicans count on; having dumbasses like you support them fleecing America and giving you nothing in return but a ruined nation.”

As far as fleecing and a ruined nation is concerned, we’ll see what life is like in about 10 or 20 years or so when we’re indebted to China (which by the way holds a shitload of our personal debt). Have fun paying off all of the money the Democrats spend now, because there will be a reckoning. Capitalism isn’t perfect, but it’s far better than the alternative. If the country is in ruins, then it’s because of the government and peoples’ inability to live according to their means (i.e. such as spending like there’s no tomorrow).

“Listen, I assume your motivation is pretend to be “one of them,” but these rich republicans wouldn’t even let you park their Rolls as a valet, hire you as a gardener, and certainly wouldn’t help you if you needed a hand. They would have nothing to do with you. They don’t even need your vote — they’ll steal it if they want it anyways. : )”

Why would I need help? That’s precisely what the conservative message is about. It’s called self-reliance. That’s the fundamental difference between me and you. I believe in working on my own merit. If someone makes more than me, then they’ve earned it. They have paid their dues in to get that far. You see the end result of the wealthy, but you never see the road they had to travel to get to that point.

What you want is someone holding your hand all the way (your idea of helping people). Well, you certainly don’t learn anything in life that way, and you certainly don’t deserve what is given to you. You also appreciate something more when you’ve earned it rather than when you’re simply handed it. In fact, it makes you childish in the extreme, which I can already gather in your posts so far.

As far as the super wealthy, why would I want to be like them? I have my own lifestyle and it works for me. In your quest to annhilate the upper class, you’re forgetting one thing. They’re the ones who provide the jobs. Ever heard of a poor person providing one? Didn’t think so. Well, go on with your socialist ranting.

Just bear in mind that while we seem to be hell bent on moving towards socialism, the rest of the world is moving towards capitalism. They won’t wait for us to come to our senses.

Mat
April 5 2009 / 2:29 pm
Reply

raaa,

Once again, you will not and more truthfully, cannot answer any of my responses because they are far too complex for the small amount of grey-matter that composes an even tinier part of you molecular brain. Since your reply finds you wanting, I take it that I won. Period. End of story. Fini. Another twit bites the dust…