All Hank, all the time.

[SlaveNoMore]

Adder
Yes. I pay far more in taxes now than I did when Clinton was in office.

You were in High School.

I assume you make more now than when you did on your paper route.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You were in High School.

I assume you make more now than when you did on your paper route.

STP. One wonk is enough.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
in 2004, pollster Scott Rasmussen asked likely voters if they believed America was generally a fair and decent country and whether they believed the world would be a better place if more countries were like America.

Republicans agreed that America is generally fair and decent, 83 percent to 7 percent. Eighty-one percent agreed that the world would be a better place if more countries were like the United States.

By contrast, Democrats were nearly split, with only 46 percent agreeing that America is generally a fair and decent country, and with 37 percent saying America is not a generally fair and decent country. Only 48 percent of Democrats said they thought that the world would be a better place if more countries were like the United States.

I wonder what a similar poll taken in 1998 would have found.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I wonder what a similar poll taken in 1998 would have found.

Since y'all on the left think I am monkey feces flinging clinton hating rightwing nut, I will say, honestly, if you asked those questions at any time since about 1977 (I am using this date as a relative starting point for some minimal degree of political cognizance), I would have answered yes and yes, notwithstanding any political differences with the people in office.

Clinton's presidency didn't make me hate America, it gave me more respect for and insight into the positive aspects of the system annd insitutions that we have, notwithstanding that he obviously had no respect for that system or its institutions.

eta: What would your answers have been in each of 1998 and 2004?

[Diane_Keaton]

Originally posted by Spanky
It seems weird because Israel, I believe, was just the northern part of present day Palestine and Judah was the South (including where Jerusalemm and Tel Aviv sit now).

Why are you calling it "Palestine". Did not the Palis reject UN Resolution 181 (II) ("Future Government of Palestine"), adopted on Nov. 29, 1947? (which offered Jews living in the Palestine Mandate a certain amount of territory to be the "Jewish State" and territory to Arabs living in the Mandate referred to as the "Arab State", but which was expected to be called "Palestine" by the Arabs, except that they rejected the Resolution.) I thought that even after the war, the Arabs refused to name their offered territory "Palestine" (claiming the whole lot of it their's). This doesn't take into account rejections of Camp David, Taba proposals, etc.

ETA "Jewish State" versus "Arab State" stuff.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You were in High School.

I assume you make more now than when you did on your paper route.

I frankly can't believe he tried that argument. Thank god you and Penske have brains... I actually started looking up historical rates to figure out how in the hell he could possibly say that.

Then I decided to read a few responses to him. I owe you a drink for the time you just saved me.

The world's most gullible litigator,
SD

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
Why are you calling it "Palestine". Did not the Palis reject UN Resolution 181 (II) ("Future Government of Palestine"), adopted on Nov. 29, 1947? (which offered Jews living in the Palestine Mandate a certain amount of territory to be the "Jewish State" and territory to Arabs living in the Mandate referred to as the "Arab State", but which was expected to be called "Palestine" by the Arabs, except that they rejected the Resolution.) I thought that even after the war, the Arabs refused to name their offered territory "Palestine" (claiming the whole lot of it their's). This doesn't take into account rejections of Camp David, Taba proposals, etc.

ETA "Jewish State" versus "Arab State" stuff.

The thrust of my question was why is Israel named Israel and not Judah?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I wonder why..........didn't the Pali leader win a Nobel Peace Prize? You'd have thunk he would have had the cred and principled beliefs to have pulled it off. Must have been those wicked duplicitious land-hungry Jews that thwarted the effourt.

Giving Yassir Arafat the Nobel Peace Prize permanently discredited that award (it was on shakey ground anyway after they gave it to the foreign secretary of North Vietnam).

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Giving Yassir Arafat the Nobel Peace Prize permanently discredited that award (it was on shakey ground anyway after they gave it to the foreign secretary of North Vietnam).

You'd think that giving Pearl Buck the Nobel Prize for Literature would have discredited that award, but it's still a big thing. Go figure.

[ltl/fb]

inquiries into the impossibility of justice and the terminal intellectual fatigue caused by disillusionment

something some poet said about some sicilian author.

penske may interpret my liking for the quote as hating America.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You were in High School.

I assume you make more now than when you did on your paper route.

This may explain why his next line started "But seriously,"

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You'd think that giving Pearl Buck the Nobel Prize for Literature would have discredited that award, but it's still a big thing. Go figure.

The difference Ty is what the symbolism is. The super duper majority of people in the world not only do not give a flying fuck who Pearl Buck or who gets the Nobel Prise for Lit or what books she wrote but all of those things will have absofuckinglutely no affect of any kind ever on their lives. 0. beyond nothing.

The nobel peace prise, while at the end of the day while conveying no tangible power, is symbolic. Giving it to Arafat is symbolic of the fact that the liberals in the West, the US and Europe and the UN have legitimised this guy as a respected world leader to the point where an international organisation will give him its preeminent declaration of being a person who strives for peace. We both know I could go and google and find websites that detail the thousands of innocent civilians who died at Arafat's orders, including instances where he was on site for terrorist killings of civilians. But the liberals in the media, in the US and Europe were willing not only to overlook this, but to give a mass murdering terrorist who espouses a doctrine of hate and race extermination the legitimacy to have an international platform, again, with the Peace Prise being a symbol of that legitimisation.

It's as if GErmany had fought WWII to a stalemate and then HItler got the nobel peace prise. Would you have supported that?

The result of this symbolic legitimisation is that terrorist organisations are now the most powerful entities in the region at issue and are legitimised from being terrorist organisations to being political parties. The result is War.

Perhaps, if the liberals in the West had been willing to differentiate between a terrorist and a statesmen and could call out the former as being persona non grata in the peace process, there would have been an impetus on the Arab populace of the region to find, develop and support responsible statesmen. Instead the West said, we leigitimise terrorists who espouse hate. And those terrorists exploited the hate, tjhe dark side of the force, iyw, and we end up with a region that has no mechanism for a peaceful solution.

Congratulations!

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
inquiries into the impossibility of justice and the terminal intellectual fatigue caused by disillusionment

something some poet said about some sicilian author.

penske may interpret my liking for the quote as hating America.

I can't interpret this as saying anything. Maybe I am intellectually fatigued......was it directed at me, the sicilian thing?

Have you eaten?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
This may explain why his next line started "But seriously,"

Adder is not really known for his subtle wit, I still discern an intent to deceive and frankly, I am offended. No offence.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Spanky
The thrust of my question was why is Israel named Israel and not Judah?

Because Judah sounds lousy. Say it a few times. Its clumsy, awkward sounding and has no kick. Flat... too many vowels. "Israel" has a nice run to it. Rolls off the lips crisply.