Waiting for Fitzgerald

[Spanky]

Just as a reminder, I am the epicenter of the Universe, not Penske. You two are only to respond to Penske's posts after you have responded to mine. My posts get dealt with first. I realize that my posts are not as caustic, and I don't include pictures, but I am working on my delivery, and regardless of content, my posts should be given first consideration.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
For once, cut the crap.

All the more reason to ketchup now -- I can't wait to see if this gambit of SAM's worked!

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Wow, that's not an offensive cheap PoPD shot at all. Spanky is not only the most coherent poster on this board, but he is also the most politically accomplished. This is the saddest personal attack yet that I have seen on these boards.

It isn't the politics of personal destruction. I think he's a simpleton and I said so. That's an insult, pure and simple. It was personal and not political.

If you can't communicate through any means other than your rather tiresome bag of cliches and stolen photoshops, just scroll on past my posts.

I'll talk to you again when you start showing signs of human intelligence. And by the way, that, too is a personal, not a political insult.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by bilmore
Where do you GET this shit? Against the will of the Baathist thugs? Sure. Against the will of the people? Hardly, as any pre and post-invasion poll will show you. If I preface every argument I make with "the liberal viewpoint, which is proven to cause massive death to all", yeah, I suppose my arguments will take on greater weight. too.

I haven't seen any polls indicating they (a) invited us in or (b) want us to stay. And then there's that whole shooting us and blowing us up shit. But maybe I'm reading the message wrong.

And again, Bilmore, I am not one of thoise people who think that we had no reason to be in Iraq. I think the reasons for us to go in were trumped up, I think that the Bush Administration failed to properly prepare the way for the invasion, and I think that it is foolhardy and irresponsible to act as though the war can be prosecuted and taxes can be cut at the same time.

But Saddam was a genocidal thug who needed to be taken out and I'm glad we did it. I hope we can stick around long enough to rebuild in a way that will have a lasting impact, and I hope we don't bankrupt ourselves and our children to do it.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Spanky
Are you talking about me?

Yes, I was. I think you have an incredibly simplistic view of the world, ethics, politics, and polite discourse. You appear to see the world in completely didactic terms, and you regularly argue either side of the coin if it suits your purpose without the slightest evidence that you are even aware you were asserting the polar opposite the day before.

You may be a very nice guy. You are certainly a very committed guy. I applaud your dedication to the application of your beliefs, and you seem in general, to be a pretty easygoing person as long as you are not challenged. But I also believe you are a maroon.

Sorry.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
Just as a reminder, I am the epicenter of the Universe, not Penske. You two are only to respond to Penske's posts after you have responded to mine. My posts get dealt with first. I realize that my posts are not as caustic, and I don't include pictures, but I am working on my delivery, and regardless of content, my posts should be given first consideration.

I am fine with this. They have exposed themselves as being without the ability to converse without falling back on personal insult and invective. A sad commentary but not really that different from what their leaders exhibit for the, eg. Dean, the Clintons, Kerry, Biden, Harry Ried.

I suppose once the Senate Minority publicly calls the President a "loser" as a summary comment on the President's being, the rank and file lemmings of the leftwing feel emboldened to adopt such empty rhetoric as the substance of their discourse. A sad commentary on the state of political relations in our country. but no less sad than a minority political group that fails to grasp the core mission of the War on Terror and the resultant freedom that we have spread to millions of people and distinuguish that from the costs of several thousand dead.

If nothing else I am thankful that I am in the majority and am safe and secure in the knowledge that the adults in charge will keep our nation safe while continuing to do what is necessary and right around the world to further that safety and the ideals of freedom. And being tolerant, unbiased and not a hater I will refrain from attacking those too stupid or too ignorant to appareciate the ideals of freedom and human rights here and abroad.

God Bless America and W!

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Spanky
You call me a simpleton when you claim to be a moral relativist and yet think certain civil liberties are universal and are endowed to us by our our creator?

Do you really not see that there is a big difference between a government killing its own people and people get killed in a war? You need to use force to get justice. But you should only use the necessary force. But when fighting for justice people can get hurt and even killed. You can't see the difference between that and killing people for unjust end.

You can't see the difference between collateral damage in a war fought for a just cause and intentionally killing people for an unjust cause?

Answer me this. Was it OK to kill millions of Germans to stop Hitler? And if it was does that justifcy Hitler killing millions of people to serve his purposes.

Our all intentions the same?

There isn't a lot of difference a government killing its own people and people getting killed in a war.You can call it collateral damage if you want, but it still boils down to killing innocents.

Sometimes that killing is acceptable. It was acceptable in WWII because of the fact that Hitler was practicing genocide. Of course, we didn't get into WWII because Hitler was practicing genocide. We, meaning the upper levels of military and civilian government knew it was going on, but they didn't think it was worth getting involved in. We got into WWII because of Pearl Harbor, and the fact that Germany declared war on us after we declared war on Japan.

I also don't think it was a bad thing that Saddam was deposed. Had Bush I done it in 92 when we were driving him out of Kuwait, I would have wholeheartedly supported that. But he didn't.

Bush II also didn't depose Saddam because he was killing off thousands of his own citizens and trying to exterminate the Kurds. In fact, we've stood by for decades as Iran, Iraq, and Turkey have all tried to eradicate the Kurds.

W went into Iraq because he was getting his ass kicked by the press for failing to get Bin Laden. He needed a diversion. That's why we went into Iraq. And killing people because you need to boost your poll ratings isn't true or just or right. It's cynical, dishonest, and borders on the criminal. I say borders because I'm not aware of an existing statute that would expressly fit this situation.

As I said yesterday, right war, wrong time, wrong reasons, too great a cost.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Spanky
Can you not see the difference that in one instance a government is killing millions of its own citizens intentionally for social engineering purposes. In another instance we are trying to remove a government in a war and in order to do it many innocent people die?

In one instance we don't want to kill the innocent people, but if we don't take action were they become collateral damage, millions more may die and millions will be enslaved for years.

In the other instance, the government not only does it not care that innocent people are being killed, but is intentionally killing innocent people, not to save more lives, but to reach some sort of "social good".

Intentions and results are everthing.

What you don't seem to grasp is that IT ISN'T OUR RIGHT. We don't get to say who is and who isn't being sufficiently democratic. Just as we don't get to play God.

Given that we don't have the right to enforce our ideals on anyone else any time we want to, acting as if we do makes us just a group of murderous thugs. Vigilantism is illegal and immoral. Why do you have the audacity to suggest that it's okay, BUT JUST FOR US, to do it on a global scale?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Spanky
Just as a reminder, I am the epicenter of the Universe, not Penske. You two are only to respond to Penske's posts after you have responded to mine. My posts get dealt with first. I realize that my posts are not as caustic, and I don't include pictures, but I am working on my delivery, and regardless of content, my posts should be given first consideration.

Your posts get attention first, and largely, alone. I am ignoring any of Penske's posts that don't actually lend themselves to actual discussion and the sharing of ideas. While I find that I seldom agree with you, I will give you credit for at least engaging in dialogue, instead of the equivalent of a moneky throwing feces at the zoo.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
It isn't the politics of personal destruction. I think he's a simpleton and I said so. That's an insult, pure and simple. It was personal and not political.

If you can't communicate through any means other than your rather tiresome bag of cliches and stolen photoshops, just scroll on past my posts.

I'll talk to you again when you start showing signs of human intelligence. And by the way, that, too is a personal, not a political insult.

You obviously don't understand the phrase Politics of Personal Destruction. It's sad that you and others have resorted to a scorched earth campaign of either invective and/or profanity in a vain attempt to discredit those who have exposed the vacuity of the moral relativists of the left and who would tolerate the murder and oppression of millions in the name of that relativism. No matter how much you want to wish right and wrong away into the grey zone, they do exist and the UMC inside you tells you so. Give in to the light Wonk. For the future of America and freedom.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Your posts get attention first, and largely, alone. I am ignoring any of Penske's posts that don't actually lend themselves to actual discussion and the sharing of ideas. While I find that I seldom agree with you, I will give you credit for at least engaging in dialogue, instead of the equivalent of a moneky throwing feces at the zoo.

Nice. No matter what you post, there has to be a profane personally directed invective. Talk about a puerile approach. Not to mention that I think that is a stolen Howard Dean line. You should at least give him credit for such high wit.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I imagine FDR is spinning in his grave.

With crutches, or without?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
With crutches, or without?

Depends on whether he ascended from purgatory yet.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
What liberals fail to realize is that the greatest evil occurs when the individual can be sacrificed for the good of society.

Which is why the liberals march in lockstep when this administration wants to sacrifice civil liberties in the war on terror. You really nailed that one. Liberals are all about subordinating individual rights to the common good.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

D'oh!