Politics: J'accuse!

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Not Me
This is EXACTLY what I mean about Dems being hypocrites. You talk a feminist talk, but think nothing of spewing misogynistic slurs if the woman disagrees with you. Sorry I wasn't deferential enough to the men on this board.

Try not comparing yourself to Pam Anderson.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Not Me
Great, when you can't beat me on substance, you choose to attack a woman for how she looks. This is what I mean about you Dems. You discard your principles as it suits your self-interest.

Scroll then post. While this wouldn't have been very funny in any event, Bilmore already stole your thunder on this.


As for discarding principles, ever since Repubs began advocating nation-building and the benefit of deficit spending, your ground became kinda weak, don't you think? (assuming you do think, which is probably wrong.)

[SlaveNoMore]

Sidd Finch
[[never mind]]

Posts like this would make the FB a much, much better place.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Tip O'Neill? Carter?

You know, if you look hard enough, I'm sure you can find a few negative quotes from Huey Long about FDR and from WJ Bryan about Grover Cleveland.

I thought it was baseball season.


Or are you still incapable of admitting that one of your own -- Not Me -- is wrong?

Shoulda figured. Repubs are great at saying that Repubs are not sufficiently Republican. But incapable of admitting that they are just plain wrong, and that Dems are right.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Posts like this would make the FB a much, much better place.

Give me the power to edit yours, and we can take care of that.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by bilmore
Huh?

Those polls show that the main reason for what disaffection Reps feel for Bush seems to be his massive spending programs, which don't comport with the reasons why they might have voted for him.

Your earlier post found a way to lay blame for the recent spending spree at the feet of the Dem minority in the senate. I thought that was a stretch. I was not clever enough to make that interesting, or even evident.

All this is a long way of saying that I shouldn't post while I rush out the door in a futile attempt to get my shirts from the cleaners by 7.

[SlaveNoMore]

Sidd Finch
Give me the power to edit yours, and we can take care of that.

I now only post photos of hot scholarship winners over there. Otherwise, I'm avoiding the white noise.

[SlaveNoMore]

Sidd Finch
Or are you still incapable of admitting that one of your own -- Not Me -- is wrong?

It depends on what your definition of is, is.

Besides, rather than admit (s)he is wrong, I would rather avoid the issue and stand aside SEF in the Rose Garden and proclaim what a great poster he is.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
Your earlier post found a way to lay blame for the recent spending spree at the feet of the Dem minority in the senate. I thought that was a stretch. I was not clever enough to make that interesting, or even evident.

It was evident. Bilmore is just so used to blaming the Dems for everything that he didn't notice. It's like breathing to him.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
It depends on what your definition of is, is.

Besides, rather than admit (s)he is wrong, I would rather avoid the issue and stand aside SEF in the Rose Garden and proclaim what a great poster he is.

Ya' just can't do it, can you? She is clearly, blatantly wrong in her oft-repeated assertion that Dems never criticize other Dems. And not one of the reasonable Repubs on this board is willing to acknowledge that. Not one.

Not Me, I thank you for proving the precise opposite of your assertion. Repubs are utterly incapable of admitting that another Repub is wrong and Dems are right.

They can accuse Repubs of being not Repub enough -- kinda like Bilmore's effort to blame Bush's spending on the (minority) Senate Dems -- but they simply cannot say "the Dem in this discussion is right, the Repub is wrong."

Contrast that to my agreeing with Bilmore, and against Ty, yesterday re: Clinton's use of military force.

Again, thank you Not Me. And thank you to your cohorts as well.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by bilmore
Those polls show that the main reason for what disaffection Reps feel for Bush seems to be his massive spending programs, which don't comport with the reasons why they might have voted for him.

Well, as I've noted before, Novak tells us that military is so pissed at Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld that they might just stay home in November. Bilmore's mentioned the disaffection of fiscal conservatives. As the next significant voting bloc that'll stay home, let's add gun owners.

You know they're pissed when they actually contemplate voting for a gun-control candidate.

Four years later, some gun owners have grown so disenchanted with President Bush that they may cast a protest vote for a third-party candidate, stay away from the polls, or even back the likely Democratic nominee, gun-control advocate John F. Kerry.

...

Surprisingly, the issues that have most alienated many gun groups from the Bush administration have little to do with firearms, but rather with the Patriot Act and other homeland security measures instituted after Sept. 11. Opposition to such laws has aligned gun-rights activists with unlikely partners, such as liberal Democrats and the ACLU.

"It's not just gun rights for us, it's the Bill of Rights," said Angel Shamaya, executive director of KeepAndBearArms.com, which claims tens of thousands of supporters. "A lot of gun-rights advocates are from mildly upset to livid over President Bush and his administration."

Hmm. I guess this leaves in Bush's corner Rush's dittoheads, avid viewers of Hannity and Colmes, and Halliburton employees.*

Gattigap


* Admittedly, a significant voting block, but many of them are in places like Basra right now. Better tell Rove to get those absentee ballots out soon!

[sgtclub]

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...reaking_3.html

[I told you they read this board]

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by sgtclub
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...reaking_3.html

[I told you they read this board]

Next stop for those troops will be -- Fallujah.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...reaking_3.html

[I told you they read this board]

The article says they're pulling off the DMZ, not out of South Korea.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
The article says they're pulling off the DMZ, not out of South Korea.

True, but it implies that they are pulling out of South Korea too (with the statement that SK's army will face NK). It's unclear, but I'd like to know.


Personally, when the South Koreans were protesting US military presence with particular vigor awhile back, I thought the US should have told the SK gov't to hold a referendum on US troop presence, and that the US would comply with the results of a "stay or go" vote. That would have crystallized the issue quite nicely, and shown the US respecting the wishes of its ally's populace. A good "put your money where your mouth is" moment.