Rant: Anti-War Protestors are idiots

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-03-26 02:36am

Isil`Zha wrote:
Stuwart: I can't believe you still have that quote in your sig. lol

Damnit! its Stuart!

as to the sig, well I am too lazy to find another.

Kelly Antilles · Post by **Kelly Antilles** » 2003-03-26 08:34am

EmperorMing wrote:
theski wrote:Without trying to hijack the thread.. I guess for Prez in 2008 is
1. Dem Hillary Clinton
2. Rep Colin Powel
No. Not Hillary.

Agreed. She's already had 8 years in office. AS PRESIDENT.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-03-26 08:57am

Kelly Antilles wrote:
Agreed. She's already had 8 years in office. AS PRESIDENT.

Utsanomiko · Post by **Utsanomiko** » 2003-03-26 10:08am

If Hillary "Black Panther Murder Cohort" Clinton became president, I'd start making down payments on a bunker in Wyoming.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-03-26 10:10am

Darth Utsanomiko wrote:If Hillary "Black Panther Murder Cohort" Clinton became president, I'd start making down payments on a bunker in Wyoming.

Mind if join you in the bunker?

Utsanomiko · Post by **Utsanomiko** » 2003-03-26 11:43am

Stormbringer wrote:
Darth Utsanomiko wrote:If Hillary "Black Panther Murder Cohort" Clinton became president, I'd start making down payments on a bunker in Wyoming.
Mind if join you in the bunker?

The only way I'd spend enough for a two-person bunker is if I was sharing it with a woman, so I'm afraid not.

Kelly Antilles · Post by **Kelly Antilles** » 2003-03-26 11:51am

Darth Utsanomiko wrote:
Stormbringer wrote:
Darth Utsanomiko wrote:If Hillary "Black Panther Murder Cohort" Clinton became president, I'd start making down payments on a bunker in Wyoming.
Mind if join you in the bunker?
The only way I'd spend enough for a two-person bunker is if I was sharing it with a woman, so I'm afraid not.

Then can *I* join you?

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2003-03-26 11:53am

Kelly Antilles wrote:
Darth Utsanomiko wrote:
Stormbringer wrote: Mind if join you in the bunker?
The only way I'd spend enough for a two-person bunker is if I was sharing it with a woman, so I'm afraid not.
Then can *I* join you?

Sounds like the start of a new porn fanfic....YES!!!

Utsanomiko · Post by **Utsanomiko** » 2003-03-26 12:06pm

Kelly Antilles wrote:
Darth Utsanomiko wrote:
Stormbringer wrote: Mind if join you in the bunker?
The only way I'd spend enough for a two-person bunker is if I was sharing it with a woman, so I'm afraid not.
Then can *I* join you?

Heh, sure! It'll be a quaint little place; running water, electric windmill, and all that. And if the USA goes totally under, it'll be a good staging point to start my plan for a Tank Militia(Untill then, the sex will be fantastic)

Kelly Antilles · Post by **Kelly Antilles** » 2003-03-26 12:09pm

Darth Utsanomiko wrote: Heh, sure! It'll be a quaint little place; running water, electric windmill, and all that. And if the USA goes totally under, it'll be a good staging point to start my plan for a Tank Militia(Untill then, the sex will be fantastic)

Oooh, sounds like the perfect bunker.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-03-26 12:26pm

I guess I'll just never understand where this seething, unbridled hatred for Hillary Clinton comes from. She seems okay enough to me.

Raoul Duke, Jr. · Post by **Raoul Duke, Jr.** » 2003-03-26 12:39pm

I think Powell is definitely the better choice.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-03-26 12:43pm

my favorite hillaryism

"I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president." -- Hillary Clinton commenting on the release of subpoenaed documents

[/list]

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-03-26 12:52pm

Durandal, here is link to show you why I hate her so>>> http://brainstrain.users3.50megs.com/hillary.html

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-03-26 02:27pm

If the UN do not want this war why did`nt they protest louder when this so called election was done,even other arab countries should have said something,having an election with only one candidate is nothing more than a joke.

Isil`Zha · Post by **Isil`Zha** » 2003-03-26 04:55pm

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Isil`Zha wrote:
Stuwart: I can't believe you still have that quote in your sig. lol
Damnit! its Stuart! as to the sig, well I am too lazy to find another.

Sure thing Stuwart

lol, it didn't bother me at all - I said that a long time ago though. lol

Raoul Duke, Jr. · Post by **Raoul Duke, Jr.** » 2003-03-26 05:45pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:my favorite hillaryism

"I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers. We are the president." -- Hillary Clinton commenting on the release of subpoenaed documents

[/list]

Which is, in a nutshell, why people disliked Hillary and still do -- her idea was that they were the President, and she damn well gave every impression of acting on that idea. From what I understand, she exercised a broad array of powers she simply had no legitimate authority to.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-03-26 06:10pm

Raoul Duke, Jr. wrote:Which is, in a nutshell, why people disliked Hillary and still do -- her idea was that they were the President, and she damn well gave every impression of acting on that idea. From what I understand, she exercised a broad array of powers she simply had no legitimate authority to.

Which presidential powers did she exercise?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-03-26 06:14pm

Durandal wrote:
Raoul Duke, Jr. wrote:Which is, in a nutshell, why people disliked Hillary and still do -- her idea was that they were the President, and she damn well gave every impression of acting on that idea. From what I understand, she exercised a broad array of powers she simply had no legitimate authority to.
Which presidential powers did she exercise?

She had WAY too much of a hand in the Clinton national health care plan for an unelected official.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-03-26 06:18pm

Durran Korr wrote:
Durandal wrote:
Raoul Duke, Jr. wrote:Which is, in a nutshell, why people disliked Hillary and still do -- her idea was that they were the President, and she damn well gave every impression of acting on that idea. From what I understand, she exercised a broad array of powers she simply had no legitimate authority to.
Which presidential powers did she exercise?
She had WAY too much of a hand in the Clinton national health care plan for an unelected official.

Meaning what? That she had input on it? I don't see the president exercising his power to ask whomever he wishes for advice and input as advisers exercising presidential power.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-03-26 06:30pm

Durandal wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:
Durandal wrote: Which presidential powers did she exercise?
She had WAY too much of a hand in the Clinton national health care plan for an unelected official.
Meaning what? That she had input on it? I don't see the president exercising his power to ask whomever he wishes for advice and input as advisers exercising presidential power.

She headed up the task force dedicated to making the bill. She didn't make the bill very public, she appointed a stunningly partisan slate of members of the task force, and she didn't work nearly as closely with congressmen and senators as she should have (which REALLY pissed some of them off, especially Pat Moynihan). She was an unelected official, she wasn't even a government employee, and she was exercising a great deal of control over what would have been the biggest piece of legislation in American history had it passed, moreso than most Congressmen had.

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-03-26 06:33pm

Darth Wong wrote:...when you look at the way Bush treats people, it becomes more understandable. He makes people FEAR America. They certainly fear him.

What we've learned from this is that even ...Saddam Hussein is more adept at international diplomacy than George Bush. And that's just fucking sad.

Even though I support the war and given reasons for my support, I don't think anyone really, truly spelled out the problems with the Bush administration quite like you have here. The entire post was full of good insight but these two quotations stuck with me.

America is supposed to be a place people like to be involved with and a people whose troops are welcomed-- seen as liberators; fighting for good causes. While no one can deny the massive shithead factor of Saddam, Bush's way of handling it ruins what should be a good reputation.

But-- love the US as I do-- I realize our good reputation has been piddled away by decades of off-and-on support for a lot of tyrants and mad dictators. And, the bad habit of encouraging various rebellions and then leaving people hung out to dry. I don't blame people for their fear in the face of this war-- it does set a bad precedent that we'll have to live with.

We never should have supported the craphounds of the world (Mobuto Sese Seko, Ferdinand Marcos, Jean-Claude Duvalier, Augusto Pinochet to name a few). While I said before and stick to my statement that we have an obligation to clean up our mess, I realize that we could doom ourselves in the long run if we set up a never ending string of housecleaning and regime changing services.

I still say we have good and justifiable reasons for the Iraq war, but in truth some MUCH better diplomacy and a better adherence to principles would have prevented this in the first place.

Post by **Coyote** » 2003-03-26 06:43pm

Tsyroc wrote:[
The "extreme" right didn't like him because he was too middle of the road. ... If they were smart they would have backed the more centrist choice from their own party, hoping to garuntee Gore's defeat...I don't know why the Republican party listen's so much to the extreme right. Why not make them vote for the "lesser of two evils"? It's not like they would have voted for Gore or Nader.

Let's face it; the Repub party wanted "revenge" after eight years of Clinton, and only a proper far-rightist could deliver that properly. John McCain, by being more of a centrist, would be a tacit admission that some of the liberal ideals were worthwhile-- like saying "we'll become more like Clinton". The idealogical mess that would have created might well have destroyed the Repub party.

I really disliked Clinton and still do, but I accepted him as the liberals' "revenge" for eight years of Reagan, whom they loathed. I was willing to call the books even but now G.W.B. has tilted things back to where people are going to look fondly at the Democrats. There'll be backlash. A centrist like McCain was virtually unassailable by the Dems; they'd have no one to put up against him and the Repubs could have locked up the White House for another eight years.... but no, gotta make a "point"...

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-03-26 06:46pm

The former first bitch has a minimal chance at being president, all sides openly admit that 30% of the American population absolute despises and hates her. That's not a good voter base to start off of.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-03-26 06:49pm

The biggest spender since FDR is hardly much of an "extreme rightist," I can assure you.