Dont Tread on Me, I apologize if I offended you. You said that folks in Tennessee shouldn't care as much or know as much about terrorism because they live in an area of lesser risk. I simply make the point that it shouldn't matter where we live; we should all care and be aware of the risks, and I think we are, contrary to what I took your statement to mean.
I admit I think the movie industry sort of lives in the make believe and the imaginary world. Thats what movies are, somebody's imagination of the real or imaginary. Most people would agree that Hollywood has made a name for itself in regard to furthering sort of a utopian view of the world that war is unnecessary, and just perhaps we could all live in perfect harmony if we only would, so lets just quit making weapons, and make love instead of war. I happen to think that is tremendously naive, and if tried, we would be subject to the worst kind of tyranny. History has proven this over and over again. I thus conclude that some people do not face reality and live in a state of denial.
So it seems to me the "Hollywood Leftists" have earned their reputation fair and square. It does not mean other people hate or dislike them, we simply disagree very strongly with what you apparently believe. I think you are wrong on some of these issues and am expressing my opinion. You can call me a hayseed if you want, I'll call you a Hollywood leftist, is that fair. You can continue as you've done already, insinuate that alot of us out here are ignorant, stupid, and whatever else.
okie wrote: I thus conclude that some people do not face reality and live in a state of denial.
And that ,of course, would be everyone who disagrees with your Bush Cultist distorted views.
Like the trailer park mentality that people who create art are living in an imaginary world.
such happy people the liberals are. I think I am going to start culling posts from here and there as demonstrations of how happy and loving our A2K liberals are. This one caught my eye and I thought it quite defining of the poster.
Anon-Voter wrote:We should take the people like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and the whole bloody bunch of them and start peeling the skin off these f*ckers. I mean it, there isn't anything evil enough that can be done to them for doing this to the American people ...the bastards!!
Anon
Please feel free to share your quotes from liberals around the board demonstrating what happy people they are...
I am sure the happy left will cry foul and plaster this thread with quotes from various conservatives demonstrating whatever it is they wish, but in doing so, they will only be proving Will's hypothesis correct.
Of course, you prove nothing, anger over perceived wrongdoings of the Bush Crime Family does not equate to happiness or unhappiness.
I shed a tear every week when the number of dead soldiers is announced on This Week. That doesn't make me an unhappy person. It makes me a human being with NORMAL human compassion, something that the narcissistic Bush Cultists lack.
You guys know that you suffer from a deep emotional void that does not permit you to be a complete human being. You constantly and feebly attempt to project your deep dissatisfaction with the way you are to us.
Roxxxanne, what is this quote about:
"Well I hate America Louis. I hate this country. It's just big ideas and stories and people dying, and people like you. The white cracker who wrote the national anthem knew what he was doing. He set the word free to a note so high nobody can reach it."
Why do you show it? Is it a statement of your philosophy or what?
okie wrote:
Why do you show it? Is it a statement of your philosophy or what?
I suppose, some have interests in others than conservatism, others don't:
Quote:Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes is a play in two parts by American playwright Tony Kushner. It has been made into a television miniseries and an opera. The play is written for eight actors to perform, with all of them playing two or more roles.
source:
Wikipedia
And since it got the Pulitzer Prize for Drama, it's even part of 'culture' - a common foreign word for some.
Fairy tales from the right. Go read the 9/11 report. No such thing occurred. Newsmax is riddled with lies like that, left there for poor hapless fools to accept as fact.
McGentrix wrote:such happy people the liberals are. I think I am going to start culling posts from here and there as demonstrations of how happy and loving our A2K liberals are. This one caught my eye and I thought it quite defining of the poster.
Anon-Voter wrote:We should take the people like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and the whole bloody bunch of them and start peeling the skin off these f*ckers. I mean it, there isn't anything evil enough that can be done to them for doing this to the American people ...the bastards!!
Anon
Please feel free to share your quotes from liberals around the board demonstrating what happy people they are...
I am sure the happy left will cry foul and plaster this thread with quotes from various conservatives demonstrating whatever it is they wish, but in doing so, they will only be proving Will's hypothesis correct.
yes... the unhappy liberals make hateful statements about pulling the skin off scoundrels... the conservatives on the other hand by deed and by support of deeds, drop bombs on civilians, children in hospitals, schoolyards, any old place really, pass laws to take away benefits from those who desperately need them, place profit and profiteering above the people they were elected to serve and manage to keep their sunny dispositions . You guys really are an admirable bunch.
okie wrote:From what some of you have said, apparently some of you only are concerned whether you personally are in danger, but some of us care when we watch New Yorkers die needlessly or Californians, or wherever it might be next. You are correct, many of us do not live in what we would consider high risk areas, but is it every man for himself now according to some of you?
It's every man for himself according to the GOP congressional delegations that have packed tons of pork into Homeland Security for items that will never be required in Montana, Wyoming and other places that are at low risks of terrorism..
McGentrix wrote:parados wrote:
Fairy tales from the right. Go read the 9/11 report. No such thing occurred. Newsmax is riddled with lies like that, left there for poor hapless fools to accept as fact.
Denial doesn't make the truth go away.
Reposting old lies don't make them true, McG.
Date of your editorial that never investigated but only used published sources.. 17 April, 2002
Date of 9/11 report that investigated, actually questioned the people involved and found no offer to Clinton by Sudan.. July 22, 2004.
parados wrote:McGentrix wrote:parados wrote:
Fairy tales from the right. Go read the 9/11 report. No such thing occurred. Newsmax is riddled with lies like that, left there for poor hapless fools to accept as fact.
Denial doesn't make the truth go away.
Reposting old lies don't make them true, McG.
Date of your editorial that never investigated but only used published sources.. 17 April, 2002
Date of 9/11 report that investigated, actually questioned the people involved and found no offer to Clinton by Sudan.. July 22, 2004.
My source is better than yours. Show me where the 9/11 report stated your assertion.
Quote:Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expel Bin Ladin to the United States. Clinton administration officials deny ever receiving such an offer. We have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.4
Sudan did offer to expel Bin Ladin to Saudi Arabia and asked the Saudis to pardon him. U.S. officials became aware of these secret discussions, certainly by March 1996. The evidence suggests that the Saudi government wanted Bin Ladin expelled from Sudan, but would not agree to pardon him. The Saudis did not want Bin Ladin back in their country at all.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/staff_statement_5.pdf
A little sunlight for the murky beliefs of the conservatives...
I recall Clinton himself said OBL was offered, or some such words. He claimed the U.S. had no grounds to hold him or something so he called the Saudis in an effort to convince them to take him. Can you believe Clinton? You tell us. Maybe its another "Clinton fairytale?" Listen to Hannity and he will play the Clinton tape for you.
okie wrote:I recall Clinton himself said OBL was offered, or some such words. He claimed the U.S. had no grounds to hold him or something so he called the Saudis in an effort to convince them to take him. Can you believe Clinton? You tell us. Maybe its another "Clinton fairytale?" Listen to Hannity and he will play the Clinton tape for you.
Hannity repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie and repeats the lie................................
There are many places on the web that point to the error in Hannity's claim. Hannity claims something that when you actually listen to the tape is never said. Here's one
http://mediamatters.org/items/200406220008
Clinton says almost exactly what the 9/11 commission says.
Quote:CLINTON: So we tried to be quite aggressive with them [Al Qaeda]. We got -- well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan.
See the 9/11 staff report excerpt above to compare.
Sudan offered to send Bin Laden to Saudi Arabia. The Saudis refused to take him. Clinton claims to have pleaded with them to take him.
parados wrote:Sudan offered to send Bin Laden to Saudi Arabia. The Saudis refused to take him. Clinton claims to have pleaded with them to take him.
and tom keon, the REPUBLICAN chairman of the 9/11 commission reconfirmed all of this a few days ago on hannity & colmes. much to the visable irritation of ol' honest sean.
It's remarkable what administrations can't remember isn't it?
But, if you are willing to allow the 9/11 commission report to be the final word, then so am I.
McGentrix wrote:It's remarkable what administrations can't remember isn't it?
But, if you are willing to allow the 9/11 commission report to be the final word, then so am I.
i certainly take the commission more seriously than the murderous thugs in the sudan government. you should too.
and btw, wasn't it reagan who used to keep saying "i don't recall" during the iran-contra hearings ?
Frankly, I think the title is wrong. It should read Debating politics is not conducive to happiness, because I don't see either side being very happy right about now.
