You don't know crap about Reagan. He would be doing the same thing. You think he would be sitting back waiting for Saddam to give a nuke to a terrorist? Baghdad would be called Reagandad by now. Hey Reagan said the same thing about the media and liberals........that they were rewriting history. That's what Bush said today. These homos are rewriting history about how the war started.
Hateful? I have the speech and thought it was epic and truthful. Tell me what's hateful. People marching at a soldiers funeral is hateful. Saying Bush is Hitler is hateful. Saying Bush knew about 9/11 and him and Israel planned it is hateful. And that is stuff is from Howard Dean. Where were you when Dean said that crap? You're no Reagan guy or you wouldn't be blowing the enemy a-hole.
Where did you get the word quagmire anyway? From Ted Kennedy and Howard Dean and Chris Matthews? A quagmire is watching terrorists try and blow up the WTC in 1993 and doing nothing about it. A quagmire is when they blew up the Khobar Towers and US Cole while we did nothing. A quagmire is not when 50 million who never knew an election are voting for a Congress and President. A quagmire is not when 50 million can live without fear from an oppessive leader who would gas them for speaking out. Look up quagmire. Did you think this would be over in 2 weeks? Go listen to Peace Train and smoke your pot and go study photography while the rest of the country does what's necessary for you to be able to smoke your doobie.
How tactful of you to completely duck away from your pathetic, unsubstantiated, and completely false claim. Pretty typical, though. People who argue on sheer emotion and no objectivity often have trouble backing up their claims. They usually resort to misguided labelling. I have no trouble admitting what I am. If I was a liberal, a socialist, a communist, a fascist, a nazi, etc., why on earth would I not admit it to you? What would that (hypothetically, mind you) have to do with anything? You can sit there and call me all the names you want, but it does nothing in the way of strengthening your case. Even if this were true, it would be a hell of a lot better than just criticizing everyone (that disagrees with you, anyway). But I digress. Have it your way, Craig. Continue making a complete ass out of yourself. I find it somewhat amusing. Sad, but amusing. You're like a screaming little brat who goes bananas when mommy tells him 'no.'
You do nothing but call Bush a liar but take no evidence otherwise into account. There was a Senate invesitgation that showed no one was misled. You say he lied ignoring everything that was done or said. I have to then lump you in with the Sheen's, the Streisand's, the Moore's who ignore all the evidence to the contrary. I'm the one who is showing you that people are voting in Iraq and are freer now than they were before 2003. The truth to you is a rant because when it comes to the facts, you can't handle it.
Remind me again who controls the Senate? Yeah, I trust the same bastards that got us into this quagmire. They've proven to be so competent. You ain't showin' me crap, son. Seriously, what do you think you've been telling me that I didn't already know? I had a very long talk with my cousin 3 nights ago about this. He served over there for about a year, and is an ardent supporter of Bush. Yet he is not so foolish as to admit that this war is worth it. We used to disagree about it before he left, and I could tell that it killed him to admit it the other night. He told me that things were getting better when he left, but also concedes that the only way that we can succeed in the long run is to occupy Iraq permanently. The truth is, when it comes to someone disagreeing with you, you can't handle it. I'll ask you one more time. Maybe you won't dodge it again. Why bother?
I can handle it but I know I'm right. That's all. I need to be more respectful though. That I will admit. In person, I'm much more agreeable to people.
Of course you do. Just like I know I'm right. And just like SabanFan, martin, red55, etc. all know they're right. When you're dealing with politics and religion, there simply is no absolute truth. We all have our opinions that we have no doubt spent years developing, and thus, are somewhat passionate about. More than likely, we have also taken into consideration many of the arguments that are presented to us here. On this, we agree. I'm no Ghandi, myself. Most of us tend to be somewhat defensive when others disagree with us. Although, there are a few cool heads in here that I never see get worked up. Kudos to them, I wish I could be more like that. But I've been through enough of these things to know that no one is ever going to take seriously the thoughts of an individual who can't make a post without lashing out at his opposition. I've been on both sides.
I was not even going to respond to your original post because I've learned you don't know how to conduct a political discussion without getting personal. But you have to call me out anyway on a thread I haven't even posted on. This is a forum for political discussion, not for you to post your angry views about other members. Nobody wants to hear it. I think you are describing yourself. It is you that is always calling somebody else communists, liberals or other silly labels (bandwagoneers?) instead of just making your point. All of us have taken stands here, you just can't comprehend any viewpoint but your own. You are easily the most narrow-minded poster on FSA. All you do is rail at people who disagree with you. You can't conduct a debate and you lose your temper quickly when someone dares to disagree and you start calling people names. This behavior is unimpressive. Don't invoke my name on your rants, so I can just ignore your posts. You don't really want to hear anybody but yourself, anyway. Right?
You assume I'm losing my temper. You couldn't get me mad by posting through this stupid board......you assume too much. It's fun to see you guys be shot down time and time again but still think you are right.
