Newsflash - Saddam captured!
Sunday, December 14, 2003 by Fuzzy Logic | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
News just out that Saddam Hussein has been captured in Iraq. Tune in to your local news station for live reports.
[Message Edited]
[Message Edited]
 |
|
Page 9 of 12 | |
|
|---|
kona0197
Reply #162 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:52 PM
Reply #162 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:52 PM
Jesse: the joke comment was not directed to you. It was for Jafo.
I really do think what I said previously.
But we should not fight over trival BS.
No worries.
I really do think what I said previously.
But we should not fight over trival BS.
No worries.
Jafo
Reply #163 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:55 PM
Reply #163 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:55 PM
Orion...my father [now 85] once said to me...
If you're not a socialist when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a capitalist by the time you're 40 you have no brain.
Wasn't no joke, neevah...he was dead serious...
Tech-Cat
Reply #164 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:56 PM
Reply #164 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:56 PM
I just can't help myself when I see black helicopter theories from liberals. I feel like I must fight them as if there are plenty of people out there that would be easily influenced by these ridiculous theories.
kona0197
Reply #165 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:57 PM
Reply #165 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:57 PM
I know that was not a joke Paul.
kona0197 is so confused.
Suffice it to say my foot is in my mouth.
kona0197 is so confused.
Suffice it to say my foot is in my mouth.
Tech-Cat
Reply #166 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:58 PM
I have been a capitalist for most of my life. There was a time I may have leaned a bit towards socialism (just a small bit towards), but that was a period in my life I was still trying to figure out who I am and what I believe.
Reply #166 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:58 PM
| If you're not a socialist when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a capitalist by the time you're 40 you have no brain. |
I have been a capitalist for most of my life. There was a time I may have leaned a bit towards socialism (just a small bit towards), but that was a period in my life I was still trying to figure out who I am and what I believe.
Peff
Reply #167 Monday, December 15, 2003 12:01 AM
Reply #167 Monday, December 15, 2003 12:01 AM
I think this says it best...
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and was for distribution of all wealth. She felt deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican which she expressed openly.
One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to higher taxes on the rich &more welfare programs. In the middle of her heart felt diatribe based upon the lectures she had from her far left professors at her school, he stopped her and asked her point blank, how she was doing in school.
She answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain. That she had to study all the time, never had time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying. That she was taking a more difficult curriculum.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Mary." She replied, "Mary is barely getting by", she continued, "all she has is barely a 2.0 GPA" adding, "and all she takes are easy classes and she never studies." But to explain further she continued emotionally, "But Mary is so very popular on campus, college for her is a blast, she goes to all the parties all the time and very often doesn't even show up for classes because she is too hung over."
Her father then asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to her friend who only had a 2.0." He continued, That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair equal distribution of GPA."
The daughter visibly shocked by the fathers suggestion angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I worked really hard for mine, I did without and Mary has done little or nothing, she played while I worked real hard!"
The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party."
Joke
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and was for distribution of all wealth. She felt deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican which she expressed openly.
One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to higher taxes on the rich &more welfare programs. In the middle of her heart felt diatribe based upon the lectures she had from her far left professors at her school, he stopped her and asked her point blank, how she was doing in school.
She answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain. That she had to study all the time, never had time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying. That she was taking a more difficult curriculum.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Mary." She replied, "Mary is barely getting by", she continued, "all she has is barely a 2.0 GPA" adding, "and all she takes are easy classes and she never studies." But to explain further she continued emotionally, "But Mary is so very popular on campus, college for her is a blast, she goes to all the parties all the time and very often doesn't even show up for classes because she is too hung over."
Her father then asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to her friend who only had a 2.0." He continued, That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair equal distribution of GPA."
The daughter visibly shocked by the fathers suggestion angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I worked really hard for mine, I did without and Mary has done little or nothing, she played while I worked real hard!"
The father slowly smiled and said, "Welcome to the Republican Party."
Joke
Tech-Cat
Reply #168 Monday, December 15, 2003 12:06 AM
Reply #168 Monday, December 15, 2003 12:06 AM
Actually that story does make a very good point about redistribution of income. Why should a portion of my hard earned money go towards people to lazy to earn their own money?
IPlural
Reply #170 Monday, December 15, 2003 12:55 AM
Reply #170 Monday, December 15, 2003 12:55 AM
if it were only that simple
I guess taxes do not pay for those fighter jets, bombs, medical research and many other things.
[Message Edited]
I guess taxes do not pay for those fighter jets, bombs, medical research and many other things.
[Message Edited]
kongit
Reply #171 Monday, December 15, 2003 12:59 AM
Reply #171 Monday, December 15, 2003 12:59 AM
I agree with the point of the joke. Socialism isn't completely right. What we have is a mix of capitalism and socialism. The government regulates the capitalism to make sure nothing gets out of hand, while it also collects taxes to support the priorities that capitalism cannot ever cover. Mostly those being defense, transportation, medical research, and other things.
The trick is to find the correct balance between the two.
The trick is to find the correct balance between the two.
bakerstreet
Reply #172 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:10 AM
Reply #172 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:10 AM
"every Democratic presidential canidate has spoken of North Korea, and is prepared to deal with that when the time comes *cough* now *cough*, unlike DUBYA"
LMAO. and they would do... what?
* Hey, I know, lets cut off all their oil, provoke a war and then look the other way while they attack Pearl Harbor. No, wait that has been done before.
* Hey, yeah, lets attack them and completely underestimate their power, get bogged down in a 15+ year war and then leave a worse mess. No, again, that's been done.
* Hey, yeah! Let's just pay them off and ignore them!!!
Bah, all those things have been done... by democratic presidents...
"Clinton had no previous knowledge that 9/11 would happen. DUBYA did! It's that simple."
Considering that AFTER 9/11 it is virtually impossible to act pre-emptively because of all the liberal, culturally sensitive, anti-profiling garbage, I doubt very, very seriously that there was much that could have been done pre- 9/11. Then consider that GB had only been in charge for 8 months. Wonder how long Clinton had to ruminate over all those CIA reports?
Sad to say, but people don't tolerate targeted security well *now*. Had you tried the kind of security it would have taken to prevent 9/11 before 9/11, there would have been hell (read ACLU Lawyers) to pay, and it still would have happened.
[Message Edited]
LMAO. and they would do... what?
* Hey, I know, lets cut off all their oil, provoke a war and then look the other way while they attack Pearl Harbor. No, wait that has been done before.
* Hey, yeah, lets attack them and completely underestimate their power, get bogged down in a 15+ year war and then leave a worse mess. No, again, that's been done.
* Hey, yeah! Let's just pay them off and ignore them!!!
Bah, all those things have been done... by democratic presidents...
"Clinton had no previous knowledge that 9/11 would happen. DUBYA did! It's that simple."
Considering that AFTER 9/11 it is virtually impossible to act pre-emptively because of all the liberal, culturally sensitive, anti-profiling garbage, I doubt very, very seriously that there was much that could have been done pre- 9/11. Then consider that GB had only been in charge for 8 months. Wonder how long Clinton had to ruminate over all those CIA reports?
Sad to say, but people don't tolerate targeted security well *now*. Had you tried the kind of security it would have taken to prevent 9/11 before 9/11, there would have been hell (read ACLU Lawyers) to pay, and it still would have happened.
[Message Edited]
bakerstreet
Reply #173 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:26 AM
Reply #173 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:26 AM
I am just awed at that people can conceive a tough, 'put North Korea in their place' Democratic president. Who are these hard-hittin Democrats that somehow provoke this idea? Johnson? *gag* Heck, even Kennedy *bargained* all those missles out of Cuba, and that was pretty much the ballsiest Democratic act I can account for in the last 50 years.
Maybe I have tunnel vision. In my lifetime, Democratic military prowess has amounted to Carter's wonderful raid in Iran and Clinton lobbing a missle or two when he feared a scandalous news release. Made for good relations with China, though, huh? I have yet to see any of the current, limp-wristed caucus fodder offer any suggestion on how to 'handle North Korea'.
Maybe I have tunnel vision. In my lifetime, Democratic military prowess has amounted to Carter's wonderful raid in Iran and Clinton lobbing a missle or two when he feared a scandalous news release. Made for good relations with China, though, huh? I have yet to see any of the current, limp-wristed caucus fodder offer any suggestion on how to 'handle North Korea'.
Tech-Cat
Reply #174 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:26 AM
Clinton had eight years and he did nothing.
Reply #174 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:26 AM
| Wonder how long Clinton had to ruminate over all those CIA reports? |
Clinton had eight years and he did nothing.
Tech-Cat
Reply #175 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:29 AM
I feel that there was some motivation to divert attention away from his sex scandel when Clinton made the decision to launch missles into Iraq. That mission was a waste of tax money and did nothing to reduce the threat Iraq posed on the world.
Reply #175 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:29 AM
| Clinton lobbing a missle or two when he feared a scandalous news release. |
I feel that there was some motivation to divert attention away from his sex scandel when Clinton made the decision to launch missles into Iraq. That mission was a waste of tax money and did nothing to reduce the threat Iraq posed on the world.
bakerstreet
Reply #176 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:33 AM
Reply #176 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:33 AM
Tech: Clinton couldn't act, no matter how much warning he had. It goes against the liberal prime directive. 'Acting' is wrong, and 'Reacting' is only right if you can preserve more moral purity that those you act against.
Getting Clinton to impose the kind of insane security or strict anti-wasp immigration crackdowns it would have taken to prevent 9/11 would have been completely against Democratic thinking. They would rather suffer than regret.
I can see their perspective, but I have read Hamlet way too many times to believe that eternal indecision is somehow morally superior. They don't act out of pacifism, rather they freeze up because they can't stomach the responsibility of being wrong. Not the kind of people I want for military, or even civil leaders.
[Message Edited]
Getting Clinton to impose the kind of insane security or strict anti-wasp immigration crackdowns it would have taken to prevent 9/11 would have been completely against Democratic thinking. They would rather suffer than regret.
I can see their perspective, but I have read Hamlet way too many times to believe that eternal indecision is somehow morally superior. They don't act out of pacifism, rather they freeze up because they can't stomach the responsibility of being wrong. Not the kind of people I want for military, or even civil leaders.
[Message Edited]
kongit
Reply #177 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:34 AM
Reply #177 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:34 AM
I don't blame Clinton nor Bush. The fact is that nothing on that scale happened before. I also presume that there were and still are many cia reports of probable terrorist attacks. Look how many times the white house has warned (using that stupid yellow orange red thing) of immenent attacks. And how many came true. The cia reports might have existed but to guess to make such extreme measures before to prevent the attack would have been unthinkable.
Tech-Cat
Reply #178 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:40 AM
If they are wrong, they suffer in the approval polls. I remember Clinton was always obsessed about where his approval rating was and made decision based on what might bring his approval up. I prefer leaders that do what they feel is right.
Reply #178 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:40 AM
| They don't act out of pacifism, they don't act because they can't stomach the responsibility of being wrong. Not the kind of people I want for leaders. |
If they are wrong, they suffer in the approval polls. I remember Clinton was always obsessed about where his approval rating was and made decision based on what might bring his approval up. I prefer leaders that do what they feel is right.
bakerstreet
Reply #179 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:44 AM
Reply #179 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:44 AM
"I prefer leaders that do what they feel is right."
Or at the very least what is necessary, even if it is unpalatable. I don't have any confidence that any of the Democratic hopefuls have the guts to make a lose-lose decision.
Or at the very least what is necessary, even if it is unpalatable. I don't have any confidence that any of the Democratic hopefuls have the guts to make a lose-lose decision.
Tech-Cat
Reply #180 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:52 AM
To win the Democratic Party nomination, the hopefuls have to appeal to the left. Supporting any kind of military action especially the military action in Iraq is seen as not leftist enough. The hopeful that wins the nomination then must appeal to the center to win votes from those in the middle and maybe some that lean towards the right. Ever seen the SNL sketch where George Bush Senior is teaching George W how to "dance to the right" for the primaries then "dance toward the center" for the national election?
[Message Edited]
Reply #180 Monday, December 15, 2003 1:52 AM
| I don't have any confidence that any of the Democratic hopefuls have the guts to make a lose-lose decision. |
To win the Democratic Party nomination, the hopefuls have to appeal to the left. Supporting any kind of military action especially the military action in Iraq is seen as not leftist enough. The hopeful that wins the nomination then must appeal to the center to win votes from those in the middle and maybe some that lean towards the right. Ever seen the SNL sketch where George Bush Senior is teaching George W how to "dance to the right" for the primaries then "dance toward the center" for the national election?
[Message Edited]
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 9 of 12 | |
|
|---|
Reply #161 Sunday, December 14, 2003 11:47 PM
As the saying goes: If you're not a liberal (Democrat) when you're 20, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative (Republican) by the time you're 40 you have no brain.