The Worst President in History?

[ieffinhatecardio]

Wow.. and even a THIRD TIME!!!  HOLY SHIT!!!! We've got a real winner here don't we?!?!

Refer to my last post.  If you need to, have that crack addict of a mother read it to you out loud for emphasis since you didn't get it the first time.  Also, ask her if she drank and smoked heavily during your pregnancy.

And for the record, the only thing I did to hurt my case was to speak to you thinking a simpleton like yourself could comprehend what I was saying and be able to defend your opinion without running out of shit to say and resorting to furiously repeating yourself, "rain man."  HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... good lord.

So you're not going to prove the claim you made?

Fact, you said "The US would be in worse off now and for the next 20 years if anyone other than Bush was President".

Fact, when asked to prove it you said "Yeah, I can PROVE something that's 20 yrs in the future".

Here's another fact, if you're going to make outlandish statements it's better for your cause if you're prepared to prove them when you're called out.

Of course this simple fact is above your comprehension because you're not bright enough to understand simple logic.

Nice job.

I look forward to your next post, it's always fun watching a neotaint squirm his way out of proving what he claims.

[Brixtonbulldog]

So you're not going to prove the claim you made?

Fact, you said "The US would be in worse off now and for the next 20 years if anyone other than Bush was President".

Fact, when asked to prove it you said "Yeah, I can PROVE something that's 20 yrs in the future".

Here's another fact, if you're going to make outlandish statements it's better for your cause if you're prepared to prove them when you're called out.

Of course this simple fact is above your comprehension because you're not bright enough to understand simple logic.

Nice job.

I look forward to your next post, it's always fun watching a neotaint squirm his way out of proving what he claims.

MELTDOWN


You had to call your mom, didn't you?  Well whatever works as long as you finally got it.

I also posted, "HAHA... Hey retard, even liberals have admitted that a John Kerry or Al Gore would've been disasterous for 9/11, Afghanistan, and even Iraq." Now obviously it cannot be PROVEN because no one has built a time machine yet but it's pretty clear the direction this county would be headed down if another was president by looking at the history of the opposing party.  Saddam would again wreak havoc in the region, buffer his arsenal.  He would be years closer to a nuclear arsenal.  His intentions for the west were also very clear and the only thing stopping him was the US/UN efforts to keep him in the stone age.  Terrorism the world over would be thriving because Gore nor Kerry would have gone to Afghanistan and Iraq.  Even if they did they would've pulled a Clinton and lobbed a few T-hawks and been done with it.  Only a president like Bush would be this persistent.  This should be obvious considering how much flak he's received for doing it and STILL he maintains the position. 

I love how intellectual lightweights like yourself and many on the left seem to think it would've been better to turn a blind eye until an imminent threat is looming off the coast of New York/LA/Miami etc. 

If you actually doubt that would've been the case I now challenge you to defend that position, "Einstein." lol

[gtbro1]

don't be so negative about bush.

listen to rush and get a realistic view on the bush presidency.

   Hello Mr. Intenseone

 

[ieffinhatecardio]

MELTDOWN


You had to call your mom, didn't you?  Well whatever works as long as you finally got it.

I also posted, "HAHA... Hey retard, even liberals have admitted that a John Kerry or Al Gore would've been disasterous for 9/11, Afghanistan, and even Iraq." Now obviously it cannot be PROVEN because no one has built a time machine yet but it's pretty clear the direction this county would be headed down if another was president by looking at the history of the opposing party.  Saddam would again wreak havoc in the region, buffer his arsenal.  He would be years closer to a nuclear arsenal.  His intentions for the west were also very clear and the only thing stopping him was the US/UN efforts to keep him in the stone age.  Terrorism the world over would be thriving because Gore nor Kerry would have gone to Afghanistan and Iraq.  Even if they did they would've pulled a Clinton and lobbed a few T-hawks and been done with it.  Only a president like Bush would be this persistent.  This should be obvious considering how much flak he's received for doing it and STILL he maintains the position. 

I love how intellectual lightweights like yourself and many on the left seem to think it would've been better to turn a blind eye until an imminent threat is looming off the coast of New York/LA/Miami etc. 

If you actually doubt that would've been the case I now challenge you to defend that position, "Einstein." lol

Again you haven't proven your original assertion. You blatantly said if "anyone" else was President. That means any human being, in other words Republican, Democrat and Independent.

It's curious that all you've mentioned in way of proving your insane assumption is "Hey retard, even liberals have admitted that a John Kerry or Al Gore would've been disasterous for 9/11, Afghanistan, and even Iraq."

Is that your proof? Is that all you've got? I just read it again to see if I missed anything and I still can't find anything in the way of proof. In fact you're backpedalling now by saying "no one has built a time machine".

You're mind is so clouded by neotaint rhetoric that you clearly don't think straight. You spew unprovable nonsense and get defensive when asked to prove your assertions. You're the worst kind of neotaint.

Open your mind Prof. Hawking, it will only make you a better person.

Here's a tip, next time you feel like posting something outrageous, stop, do some research to see if you can back it up. If you can back it up then post away, if not then don't be surprised when someone rational calls you out.

[OzmO]

Oh, ok.

Sure, name it.  But there's a difference between mistakes and incompetence.  Keep in mind it was a military operation.  You can put a lot of responsibility on the Generals shoulders as well.   

-  Invading a country with out a good post invasion plan that covers potential problems IS incompetence.

-  Not consulting Colin Powell, the only person with real combat experience on your staff IS incompetence.

-  Assuming the Iraqis would just embrace democracy and act right as a result after the invasion IS incompetence.

-  Not securing the government buildings after the invasion of a repressed impoverished country IS incompetence.

-  Setting up ROE's that don;t allow your troops to protect said infrastructure IS incompetence.

-  Invading with too few men to secure a stable environment after the invasion IS incompetence.

None of the above had anything to do with the Generals.  These are strategic decisions.  Decisions that were made by men who were out of touch with reality while intoxicated with war fever.

BUSH and company who have the blood of 3500+ dead sons, brothers, and fathers on their hands from their irresponsible incompetence and people still make excuses for them.  Pathetic.

None of the above things were mistakes.  The problem was the ASSHAT (bush) was too busy believing he was on a holy mission from God to listen to anyone but Rummy the desk jockey.

As far as a fighting war is concerned we've done better than the media would lead you to believe.

Are we start talking about ice cream cones now? 

It's 4 years later and no end in sight.

Are the 3500 DEAD AMERICANS A LIE?  Is the media lying?

Is the violence everyday a lie from the media?

i can't believe people still try and pass me that media is making out to be worse than it is crap.  Save that for the neo-con rally.  They should go tell the mothers of the 3500+ dead soldiers that BULL SHIT.

And a few million Iraqis turning out for a democratic election is testament to who wants a new country and what we can offer through Saddams demise.

What we can offer?   Can we offer safe local markets from suicide bombers?

Those people can't handle democracy yet.  But some people still hold to that fantasy as the reason we are there after being buffalo-ed by BUSH.

[headhuntersix]

The media does not cover good news..its counter productive...a boring day where nobody dies in Iraq..gimme a break. If it bleeds it leads. Orzmo..u blame Bush..i blame the neo's who swayed Bush. I'm not sure what happened to Powell..but basically I agree with u.

[trab]

I'd go further than incompetence, Negligence if he was warned by intell, which he surely was.

[OzmO]

don't blame bush for iraq, w/o the dems vote there wouldn't be a war.

your gimmick is getting old.

[OzmO]

sorry, just the truth.

lol  you didn't get either of the posts   

[Brixtonbulldog]

Again you haven't proven your original assertion. You blatantly said if "anyone" else was President. That means any human being, in other words Republican, Democrat and Independent.

It's curious that all you've mentioned in way of proving your insane assumption is "Hey retard, even liberals have admitted that a John Kerry or Al Gore would've been disasterous for 9/11, Afghanistan, and even Iraq."

Is that your proof? Is that all you've got? I just read it again to see if I missed anything and I still can't find anything in the way of proof. In fact you're backpedalling now by saying "no one has built a time machine".

You're mind is so clouded by neotaint rhetoric that you clearly don't think straight. You spew unprovable nonsense and get defensive when asked to prove your assertions. You're the worst kind of neotaint.

Open your mind Prof. Hawking, it will only make you a better person.

Here's a tip, next time you feel like posting something outrageous, stop, do some research to see if you can back it up. If you can back it up then post away, if not then don't be surprised when someone rational calls you out.

I didn't prove it.. I supported it.  Which is what you would be doing if you had a point to support.  Naturally, you're IQ is sub par so you expect me to prove something that didn't happen yet.  It was a prediction.  PRE-DIC-TION... sound it out.  It means to make an educated guess based on the information available. 

Oh yeah.. I loved the line your giving about being a better person.. this twat thinks he's giving me life advice, hahahahaha... wow.  A liberal dirt spec giving ME advice.  Jeez.  I really have seen everything now!

And I know that you love saying "neotaint rhetoric"... we've established that.  Unfortunately you have shown your ignorance by spouting it since it's babble with no foundation... I'm not a neocon and I'm not trying to convince you of anything.  I believe anything I say to you goes right over your head anyway.

In summation... it is obvious by your posts that have never tried harder in your life to convince yourself of being right..

.. and fail so terribly.  Meanwhile I'll get to work on "researching" the future, hahahahahaahahhahhahahah ah!!!!!!

[Brixtonbulldog]

-  Invading a country with out a good post invasion plan that covers potential problems IS incompetence.

 

I'm sure YOU could have done better.    But I think pres has enough tools at his disposal to come up with a good plan.  And considering the nature of this war I think he's in a far better position to decide that than the media (who hate him) and people (like yourself) who believe anything they say.

[/quote]

-  Not consulting Colin Powell, the only person with real combat experience on your staff IS incompetence.


[/quote]

His staff?  His "staff" is every member of the armed forces.  Some of them are rumored to have combat experience from time to time.[/b]

[/quote]

-  Assuming the Iraqis would just embrace democracy and act right as a result after the invasion IS incompetence.

[/quote]

Historically.. that's a fairly reasonable expectation.  And a lot of them did.. a lot of Iraqis ARENT terrorists!!! (blows your mind, doesn't it).

[/quote]

-  Not securing the government buildings after the invasion of a repressed impoverished country IS incompetence.


[/quote]

Hey... it's war.  You do what you can with the soldiers you have.  I'd also like to point out that this was another decision GENERALS on the ground would be making.
[/quote]

-  Setting up ROE's that don;t allow your troops to protect said infrastructure IS incompetence.

[/quote]

New enemy.. new tactics.  Our ROE's have to change with the conflict and 4 or 5 years really isn't enough time to have perfected fighting the most difficult kind of war.
[/quote]

-  Invading with too few men to secure a stable environment after the invasion IS incompetence.


[/quote]
Let's thank the dems for that one shall we? 
[/quote]

BUSH and company who have the blood of 3500+ dead sons, brothers, and fathers on their hands from their irresponsible incompetence and people still make excuses for them.  Pathetic.

It's 4 years later and no end in sight.

Are the 3500 DEAD AMERICANS A LIE?  Is the media lying?

[/quote]


3500?  You wanna compare that to ANY other major conflict?  I didn't think so.  And It's obvious by your statement that you're nothing more than someone who personally hates Bush and wants to blame him for the death of SOLDIERS who VOLUNTEERED to fight a war with TERRORISTS and anyone else who threatened this country. 

Funny.. I thought radical islamic terrorists had that blood on thier hands... hmm.

If you hate bush and just want to blame him and no one else for something he didn't start but WILL finish just say so.  It's already pretty obvious.

[trab]

If you hate bush and just want to blame him and no one else for something he didn't start but WILL finish just say so.  It's already pretty obvious.
 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bush WILL Finish? Oh Boy. Bush (and any of us) wont live long enough to see the "Finish" of this.

This is a century long disaster. 
 

[OzmO]

 
I'm sure YOU could have done better.    But I think pres has enough tools at his disposal to come up with a good plan.  And considering the nature of this war I think he's in a far better position to decide that than the media (who hate him) and people (like yourself) who believe anything they say.

Actually i could have based on a principle from Colin Powell's book.   Never invade with too few troops.   

But that's besides the point isn't BB?

Was it a good plan?  NO.

His staff?Huh  His "staff" is every member of the armed forces.  Some of them are rumored to have combat experience from time to time.[/b]

The one person he should have consulted he didn't.

The fact is, it was a major failure to "assume" the iraqis would embrace democracy and the violence would stop and they would respect law and order.

"assumption  is the mother of all fuck ups"

BUSH, CHENEY, and RUmmy assumed

Historically.. that's a fairly reasonable expectation.  And a lot of them did.. a lot of Iraqis ARENT terrorists!!! (blows your mind, doesn't it).

NOT securing the borders from outside influence in weapons and foreign fighters because they had too few troops to invade with  is another act of Incompetence.

Hey... it's war.  You do what you can with the soldiers you have.  I'd also like to point out that this was another decision GENERALS on the ground would be making.

ROE's are political.  I'm surprised you think otherwise.


What's the point of going further with you?  You obviously think things are just great as you don't have any direct involvement.  Based on your ":excuses for BUSH" you are not going to see any reasoning in face of facts.  Just remember, BUSH will go down as making the worse foreign policy decision in our history.

BUSH is ultimately responsible for what has happened.   he is the commander and chief. whether he entrusted others for decision making or not, it falls on his shoulders in the end.  As he likes to say:  he is the decider.

BUSH is to blame.  he spear headed the push to invade and authorized the plan. 

I don't know how more plain that can be.  He irresponsibly and recklessly put our soldiers in harms way.  He has an obligation to do the right thing and make the right decisions.  Personally he should be impeached for that IMO. 

People's hatred towards BUSH is more than justified. 

He is the worse president we've had. 

[Brixtonbulldog]

What's the point of going further with you?  You obviously think things are just great as you don't have any direct involvement.  Based on your ":excuses for BUSH" you are not going to see any reasoning in face of facts.  Just remember, BUSH will go down as making the worse foreign policy decision in our history.

BUSH is ultimately responsible for what has happened.   he is the commander and chief. whether he entrusted others for decision making or not, it falls on his shoulders in the end.  As he likes to say:  he is the decider.

BUSH is to blame.  he spear headed the push to invade and authorized the plan. 

I don't know how more plain that can be.  He irresponsibly and recklessly put our soldiers in harms way.  He has an obligation to do the right thing and make the right decisions.  Personally he should be impeached for that IMO. 

People's hatred towards BUSH is more than justified. 

He is the worse president we've had. 

People's hatred for Bush is a combination of not understanding politics, war, and international affairs and a media that has gone so far out of the realm of objective reporting while maintaining the attention of a fat, lazy, ignorant and otherwise dim witted populace. 

At least we finally got to the bottom of this.. YOU, like most of the other ass-to-mouths on this board and elsewhere, have completely ignored the fact that you, yourselves have hated him for what he is for quite sometime.  Any failure, any where since 2000, has been placed upon his shoulders when a great deal of failures made by past presidents have not been held to such a standard (or no standards, in some cases).  This was not an "easy" time to be president and although none of todays headlines result from Bush being close to perfect I can only remember who the alternatives would have been.  And because of this I have yet to see ANY objectivity from most of the mental "powerhouses" on getbig.  But I do see a lot of pretenders (which you are one) who try so hard to seem unbiased and objective. 

But as long as we're showing our colors let me say that I am ecstatic we invaded Iraq and are slaughtering insurgents at a rediculus rate.  On a personal level, as long as the loathsome liberals and democrats are angry at Bush/conservatives/GOP then I'm certain we're doing something right.  I don't think Bush was even close to the greatest president ever but he's certainly not anywhere near the worst.

[trab]

Hey Im a conservative and voted for him, and HATE him. He should be impeached but time is too short.
I have so many uptight  Repub Biz owner associates  that feel the same, it aint funny!

[ieffinhatecardio]

I didn't prove it.. I supported it.  Which is what you would be doing if you had a point to support.  Naturally, you're IQ is sub par so you expect me to prove something that didn't happen yet.  It was a prediction.  PRE-DIC-TION... sound it out.  It means to make an educated guess based on the information available. 

Oh yeah.. I loved the line your giving about being a better person.. this twat thinks he's giving me life advice, hahahahaha... wow.  A liberal dirt spec giving ME advice.  Jeez.  I really have seen everything now!

And I know that you love saying "neotaint rhetoric"... we've established that.  Unfortunately you have shown your ignorance by spouting it since it's babble with no foundation... I'm not a neocon and I'm not trying to convince you of anything.  I believe anything I say to you goes right over your head anyway.

In summation... it is obvious by your posts that have never tried harder in your life to convince yourself of being right..

.. and fail so terribly.  Meanwhile I'll get to work on "researching" the future, hahahahahaahahhahhahahah ah!!!!!!

More bullschit from our resident neotaint moron.

Do you know what a prediction is? I think not because stating that we're better off with Bush than with anyone else isn't predicting anything, it's a statement of fact. You comprehend the difference right? You're intelligent enough to know there's a difference between a prediction and a statement right?

Bwaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

As I said earlier, it's like debating with an infant, there's nothing to win. Keep digging genius, hopefully for your sake one of these times you'll get something right.

P.S. How's that "The US is better off now and for the next 10-20 years with Bush instead of anyone else" prediction statement of fact working out for you?

You delusional neotaints are always good for a pity laugh.

People's hatred for Bush is a combination of not understanding politics, war, and international affairs and a media that has gone so far out of the realm of objective reporting while maintaining the attention of a fat, lazy, ignorant and otherwise dim witted populace. 

At least we finally got to the bottom of this.. YOU, like most of the other ass-to-mouths on this board and elsewhere, have completely ignored the fact that you, yourselves have hated him for what he is for quite sometime.  Any failure, any where since 2000, has been placed upon his shoulders when a great deal of failures made by past presidents have not been held to such a standard (or no standards, in some cases).  This was not an "easy" time to be president and although none of todays headlines result from Bush being close to perfect I can only remember who the alternatives would have been.  And because of this I have yet to see ANY objectivity from most of the mental "powerhouses" on getbig.  But I do see a lot of pretenders (which you are one) who try so hard to seem unbiased and objective. 

But as long as we're showing our colors let me say that I am ecstatic we invaded Iraq and are slaughtering insurgents at a rediculus rate.  On a personal level, as long as the loathsome liberals and democrats are angry at Bush/conservatives/GOP then I'm certain we're doing something right.  I don't think Bush was even close to the greatest president ever but he's certainly not anywhere near the worst.

Bwaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa

More incredible humor from our resident genius neotaint. He's calling other people dim witted and yet he doesn't even know how to spell "ridiculous".


Newsflash Mr. Hawking, when you're trying to appear superior don't misspell simple words. See what I mean about hurting your own cause?


Concerning the "fat" comment, aren't you that blubbery clown with the fat rolls on your neck and the idiotic tattoo?

LOL, this tool is the funniest dude that posts on this board. He makes Mr. Hate seem rational.

[OzmO]

People's hatred for Bush is a combination of not understanding politics, war, and international affairs and a media that has gone so far out of the realm of objective reporting while maintaining the attention of a fat, lazy, ignorant and otherwise dim witted populace. 

At least we finally got to the bottom of this.. YOU, like most of the other ass-to-mouths on this board and elsewhere, have completely ignored the fact that you, yourselves have hated him for what he is for quite sometime.  Any failure, any where since 2000, has been placed upon his shoulders when a great deal of failures made by past presidents have not been held to such a standard (or no standards, in some cases).  This was not an "easy" time to be president and although none of todays headlines result from Bush being close to perfect I can only remember who the alternatives would have been.  And because of this I have yet to see ANY objectivity from most of the mental "powerhouses" on getbig.  But I do see a lot of pretenders (which you are one) who try so hard to seem unbiased and objective. 

But as long as we're showing our colors let me say that I am ecstatic we invaded Iraq and are slaughtering insurgents at a rediculus rate.  On a personal level, as long as the loathsome liberals and democrats are angry at Bush/conservatives/GOP then I'm certain we're doing something right.  I don't think Bush was even close to the greatest president ever but he's certainly not anywhere near the worst.

man you are one twisted wack job.    sorry.

Just to set the record straight.  Had BUSH not invaded Iraq i'd have little to say on the matter. 

I believe he did the right thing in Afghanistan and applaud the way he did it.  He lost me and most of the 70% of the US population at Iraq. 

The only ones left are the hopelessly brainwashed, chest thumpers who use the principles to solving problems they discovered from WWF.  Your indifference and hatred have separated you from your humanity. 

You are no better then a nazi.  A self-righteous hate-filled fearful blunt instrument. 

I'd have some respect for you if you were saying the things you say and were in Iraq.  but you are not.  You're safe behind you computer casting down judgments on people who see the madness of our involvement in Iraq.



You can claim I'm not objective as much as you want.  perhaps I'm not, and probably becuase i am against Bush as his reckless policies makes me that in your eyes.  Thing is, this isn't politics as far as BUSH is concerned.  For those who still hold on to supporting him it is. 

Had BUSH stayed out of Iraq chances are he'd have been held as one of our greatest presidents.  But rest assured; shortly the democrats will be screwing up the country mainly becuase BUSH screwed it up now. 

[Brixtonbulldog]

Bwaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

More incredible humor from our resident genius neotaint. He's calling other people dim witted and yet he doesn't even know how to spell "ridiculous".


Bwaaaahhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa

Newsflash Mr. Hawking, when you're trying to appear superior don't misspell simple words. See what I mean about hurting your own cause?

Well normally I'm typing too fast that it doesn't really matter... but seeing how hard it was for you to understand 99% of anything else I've written I can see why you're so upset.

[ieffinhatecardio]

Well normally I'm typing too fast that it doesn't really matter... but seeing how hard it was for you to understand 99% of anything else I've written I can see why you're so upset.

That's it? That's all you've got?

I'm laughing my ass off at you and this is all you can manage?

I'll reiterate again, it's like debating an infant. 

[Brixtonbulldog]

man you are one twisted wack job.    sorry.

Just to set the record straight.  Had BUSH not invaded Iraq i'd have little to say on the matter. 

I believe he did the right thing in Afghanistan and applaud the way he did it.  He lost me and most of the 70% of the US population at Iraq. 

The only ones left are the hopelessly brainwashed, chest thumpers who use the principles to solving problems they discovered from WWF.  Your indifference and hatred have separated you from your humanity. 

You are no better then a nazi.  A self-righteous hate-filled fearful blunt instrument. 

I'd have some respect for you if you were saying the things you say and were in Iraq.  but you are not.  You're safe behind you computer casting down judgments on people who see the madness of our involvement in Iraq.



You can claim I'm not objective as much as you want.  perhaps I'm not, and probably becuase i am against Bush as his reckless policies makes me that in your eyes.  Thing is, this isn't politics as far as BUSH is concerned.  For those who still hold on to supporting him it is. 

Had BUSH stayed out of Iraq chances are he'd have been held as one of our greatest presidents.  But rest assured; shortly the democrats will be screwing up the country mainly becuase BUSH screwed it up now. 

Right a nazi... you've lost me.  I'm a nazi because I can see past the media to what has really happened, you can't.  You think I sit here and have nothing to lose yet this was the same guy who signed up for the service DURING WARTIME, genius.

The fact is that everyone today that throws people on my side down by saying we're "brainwashed", "hateful" are themselves showing every trait attributed to being brainwashed by the media and hateful of what you obviously can't grasp.  Name it, war, Bush's motives, intelligence, foreign policy, terrorism... your side has almost no comprehension of what these things mean, and now you're the poster boy for that.  Spouting insults towards my side instead of offering better alternatives for the choices someone in his office had to face AND showing how misled you have been by an underhanded and ultra-biased media with a death grip on the American mind.

[Brixtonbulldog]

That's it? That's all you've got?

I'm laughing my ass off at you and this is all you can manage?

I'll reiterate again, it's like debating an infant. 

Too busy typing to someone with a point.  I see you've already forgotten how stupid you looked trying to debate me through the rest of this thread.  Unlike the broke ass record you have been so far, I can't stand repeating myself to people who can't read.

T- To- To- TODAY JUNIOR!

And skimming back through your posts it seems like I can sum up everything you've said today with one word "bullshit."  How does it feel to have some "neotaint" put you in your place! ah HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHH!!!!! loser
 

[ieffinhatecardio]

Too busy typing to someone with a point.  I see you've already forgotten how stupid you looked trying to debate me through the rest of this thread.  Unlike the broke ass record you have been so far, I can't stand repeating myself to people who can't read.

T- To- To- TODAY JUNIOR!

And skimming back through your posts it seems like I can sum up everything you've said today with one word "bullshit."  How does it feel to have some "neotaint" put you in your place! ah HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHH!!!!! loser
 

Another disappointing post.

Come on Prof. Hawking, make another genius level prediction statement of fact that I can laugh at, you know something reduculus ridiculous.

I've only got about 15 minutes before I'm out and I would love to laugh at your deluded intellect one more time.

How about something like, "Without Vice President Chaney the Earth would no longer spin on it's axis or revolve around the Sun", that sounds like a statement of fact you would make.

[OzmO]

Right a nazi... you've lost me. 

It's not hard to lose someone who is brainwashed.  Just start talking facts.

I'm a nazi because I can see past the media to what has really happened, you can't.

 

no, you are nazi and you are brainwashed becuase you refuse to acknowledge teh debacle in Iraq even in the face of overwhelming facts.  You simply in one swoop blame it on the media.  you are a nazi becuase of comments like this:

But as long as we're showing our colors let me say that I am ecstatic we invaded Iraq and are slaughtering insurgents at a rediculus rate.  On a personal level, as long as the loathsome liberals and democrats are angry at Bush/conservatives/GOP then I'm certain we're doing something right.

This shows how polarized you've allowed yourself to get forfeiting any intelligence on objectivity you once had that has become easily manipulated hate.

You think I sit here and have nothing to lose yet this was the same guy who signed up for the service DURING WARTIME, genius.

Are you there now fighting for what you believe in?  NO.  like i said.  I'd respect you more, becuase IF you really in your heart believed the BS you spew, you'd be there.  But you figure you did your bit, so now you can dictate........I'm not buying for a second and i don;lt think anyone else does.  Keep telling yourself what you need to make your self feel better.

The fact is that everyone today that throws people on my side down by saying we're "brainwashed", "hateful" are themselves showing every trait attributed to being brainwashed by the media and hateful of what you obviously can't grasp.

This is the biggest classic misconception among the unenlightened:  media = liberal bias.   Who owns the media?   Who owns the half dozen companies that bring your news?   do you think these are liberals?   They are conservative people who cater to the almightly dollar.  they give us what they think we want so they get advertising revenue.....liberal or conservative. 

Name it, war, Bush's motives, intelligence, foreign policy, terrorism... your side has almost no comprehension of what these things mean, and now you're the poster boy for that.

This is from the guy who refuses to acknowledge anything negative from the war on this insurgency?  oh please.   

go get an ice cream cone in Baghdad.

Spouting insults towards my side instead of offering better alternatives for the choices someone in his office had to face AND showing how misled you have been by an underhanded and ultra-biased media with a death grip on the American mind.

tion
I've offered better choices:

1.  we had a choice not to go to war
2.  we had a choice to do it right with a good plan
3.  we had a choice to allow the iraqis to take care of their insurgency with their gloves off
4.  we now have a choice to continue doing the same things and expecting a different result or not.

Misled......400 billion in debt, 20,000 wounded, 3500+ dead and NO END in sight.  yeah right.   

[Brixtonbulldog]

Another disappointing post.

Come on Prof. Hawking, make another genius level prediction statement of fact that I can laugh at, you know something reduculus ridiculous.

I've only got about 15 minutes before I'm out and I would love to laugh at your deluded intellect one more time.

How about something like, "Without Vice President Chaney the Earth would no longer spin on it's axis or revolve around the Sun", that sounds like a statement of fact you would make.

You mean 15 minutes till your bedtime.  You leave me so little to work with since, apparently, you have absolutely zero to contribute to this conversation and have yet to make a point about anything.  You're irrelevant.. figures.

[Brixtonbulldog]

It's not hard to lose someone who is brainwashed.  Just start talking facts. 

Oh really?  And what FACTS might those be?  Just because someone who doesn't know better deems our efforts a failure (out of hatred even) doesn't mean that's the case.

no, you are nazi and you are brainwashed becuase you refuse to acknowledge teh debacle in Iraq even in the face of overwhelming facts.  You simply in one swoop blame it on the media.  you are a nazi becuase of comments like this:

Ok.. I know.  I have the balls to speak my mind.  So kill me.  I'm Jewish so that hardly makes me a nazi for having an opinion.  I'm sure the moment you drop the "I'm objective, really!" facade .. the same could be said about yourself.

This shows how polarized you've allowed yourself to get forfeiting any intelligence on objectivity you once had that has become easily manipulated hate.

I haven't said a single thing to be taken as hatred.  YOU, on the other hand, have said nothing but.

Are you there now fighting for what you believe in?  NO.  like i said.  I'd respect you more, becuase IF you really in your heart believed the BS you spew, you'd be there.  But you figure you did your bit, so now you can dictate........I'm not buying for a second and i don;lt think anyone else does.  Keep telling yourself what you need to make your self feel better.

Yeah, I did my time.  That a privilege you get when you dedicate yourself to the service of this country no matter where it takes you.  (obviously something you do not understand) I believe whole heartedly that what we're doing is just.  The soldiers there today are there by making a choice to stand behind this country and fight (possibly die) because we were asked to.

This is the biggest classic misconception among the unenlightened:  media = liberal bias.   Who owns the media?   Who owns the half dozen companies that bring your news?   do you think these are liberals?   They are conservative people who cater to the almightly dollar.  they give us what they think we want so they get advertising revenue.....liberal or conservative. 

Yeah, and THAT is a proven fact.  The media represents the left and takes advantage of that position.  Both liberal and conservative media in this country are out for money, but that hasn't stopped CNN, the NY Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, USA Today, ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR  (get the point, numnuts?)

This is from the guy who refuses to acknowledge anything negative from the war on this insurgency?  oh please.   

go get an ice cream cone in Baghdad.
tion
I've offered better choices:

1.  we had a choice not to go to war MISTAKE (we should have marched on Baghdad in 91)
2.  we had a choice to do it right with a good plan Plans can only be SO good.. war is war (I doubt you can understand that)
3.  we had a choice to allow the iraqis to take care of their insurgency with their gloves offCan't (incapable and unwilling)
4.  we now have a choice to continue doing the same things and expecting a different result or not. Win the war, period.  Do what it takes.  Another concept your side doesn't understand.  Maybe it's the whole "winning" aspect you're not used to.
Misled......400 billion in debt, 20,000 wounded, 3500+ dead and NO END in sight.  yeah right.   Compared to other wars?? Please.

Face it.  No matter what Bush did, you would hate.  You believe everything you see on TV.  You think that by being critical, you're being objective.  The truth is you have been misled to believe something that isn't true.  You hang on, not because you know better, but because you feel your dissent means you question the man in office and you somehow understand things you have never dealt with.  You're fake.  And I see right through you.