Argue With Everyone Political Forums  

Go Back   Argue With Everyone Political Forums > General Political Debate > General Political Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007, 12:41 PM
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: chapmanville, wv
Posts: 5,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachem View Post
News flash!!!! We are animals!!!!! At least we know the other side is not having sex they are too 'rational' for that.
Yes but we are animals with souls and minds to reason with....just because you do not believe such does not make it a fact....if it is a fact...prove the non-existence of my God.....if you can. BD
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007, 12:44 PM
sachem's Avatar
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Waiting for Santa
Posts: 18,031
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedog View Post
Yes but we are animals with souls and minds to reason with....just because you do not believe such does not make it a fact....if it is a fact...prove the non-existence of my God.....if you can. BD
Where in my post did I say we did not have minds to reason with? Where did I say anything about the exixtence of your God? Which post were you reading?
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007, 12:58 PM
nathanbforrest45's Avatar
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: mountains of East TN
Posts: 10,767
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sachem View Post
Funny indeed! Never said all my thoughts were original. I said I do not need others to tell me what I believe. Try it some time, dearie.

Limbaugh et al do not tell me what to believe, they merely clarify what my thoughts are. The only difference between me and Limbaugh (besides our finances of course) is that he is more articulate than I am. I am more than willing to allow you to put your thoughts in order with some help from your friends, why are you not so willing to reciprocate?
__________________
Its better to have fussed and crabbed then never to have fussed at all - Lucy
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007, 01:50 PM
sachem's Avatar
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Waiting for Santa
Posts: 18,031
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45 View Post
Limbaugh et al do not tell me what to believe, they merely clarify what my thoughts are. The only difference between me and Limbaugh (besides our finances of course) is that he is more articulate than I am. I am more than willing to allow you to put your thoughts in order with some help from your friends, why are you not so willing to reciprocate?
Where did I say you were not allowed to have your 'friends' help you put your thoughts in order? When Limbaugh speaks I take his words as what he believes. Though others may share those beliefs, I do not automatically assume that everyone to the right of center believe exactly the same things. Just as I do not believe that everyone to the right on this forum believe all the same things.It isn't black and white, there are many shades of gray.
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007, 05:02 PM
Scoody Boo's Avatar
Political Mastermind
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by case View Post
You conservatives certainly are delusional, Let's see, he has caused the deaths of over 3600 soldiers, for his own agenda
Silly me, I always thought that it was Islamic Jihadists who were killing our troops.
__________________

Liberal-a person who has his cake, eats his cake, and complains that other people don't have cake, and believes that you should donate your cake to them


Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old 07-10-2007, 08:40 PM
Political Junkie
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 485
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoody Boo View Post
Silly me, I always thought that it was Islamic Jihadists who were killing our troops.







Yes, silly you have failed to comprehend my post. I never said he litterally killed them, I said he caused their deaths. Because of his carelessness.

Last edited by case; 07-10-2007 at 08:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old 07-11-2007, 09:18 AM
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by case View Post
Oil? when have I ever said "The war on terror was a direct result of bush's need for oil.............never, your words not mine, however I do believe he is stupid the dumbest president we ever had, yes I do believe that. I also think he had his own agenda in Iraq, whatever that may be, only he knows, perhaps it was revenge for his father, but who knows only the Bush administration knows, that could explain their secrecy. But tell me NB, why are we distracted from the real war on terror in Afghanistan, where the ppl who orchestrated the 9-11 attacks are in hiding, why? Why is it that we focus on a country we thought produced WMD'S, but didn't........why are still fighting in Iraq for something that is not there........while the real criminals and masterminds of terror are still on the loose planing there next attack............why?
So, if you don't think it's about the oil the what is his agenda? Sure you've thought about it. Obviously, someone as well-read as yourself has some thoughts into this other than "whatever that may be". That is dealing with an assumption rather than a fact. An assumption could be anything.

Bush is a lot of things but stupid is not one of them. I agree with you that I think the 'secrecy' in which he runs things are insulting and damagin to him. The fact that people like Reagan and Clinton would regularly hold pres conferences and such may not have made them popular with everyone but at least they were visable. I too and pretty fed up with Bush and will be happy to see him go. he is a huge disapointment in a lot of areas. However, to call him stupid is more stupidity on your part.
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old 07-11-2007, 09:29 AM
CrankyYankee's Avatar
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,864
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedog View Post
Yes but we are animals with souls and minds to reason with....just because you do not believe such does not make it a fact....if it is a fact...prove the non-existence of my God.....if you can. BD
That can't be proven either. That is why agnosticism is the only rational belief. Anything else is belief without logical proof.
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old 07-19-2007, 11:36 PM
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,154
Default

The epic narcissism of Cindy Sheehan
Niall Stanage
July 18, 2007 10:00 PM

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/...f_cindy_s.html

Even the American left's netroots are getting tired of Cindy Sheehan. It's a shame it took them so long.

Sheehan, the epic narcissist who became the face of the anti-war movement, has been banned from posting any further entries on Daily Kos, arguably the most influential of all liberal blogs in the US.

The Kossacks have pulled the plug on Sheehan because of her threat to challenge the speaker of the House of Representatives, Democrat Nancy Pelosi, for her congressional seat.

Sheehan has said she will decide on July 23 whether to go ahead with her attempt to oust Pelosi - who is, incidentally, about as liberal as congressional Democrats get - from her San Francisco district. "Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership," Sheehan recently proclaimed with her customary certitude.

As most people know, Sheehan came to prominence in summer 2005 when she set up camp outside President Bush's Texas ranch. She demanded to meet the president to discuss the death of her son, army specialist Casey Sheehan. He was killed in Iraq in April 2004.

It would be inhumane not to feel sympathy for Cindy Sheehan's loss. But it would also be softheaded to ignore the numerous inconsistencies, self-aggrandisements and missteps that have characterized her behaviour.

Sheehan's initial demands to meet Bush, and her escalating criticisms of him, had a peculiar genesis. Sheehan in fact had already met Bush before she rolled up to the ranch. Interviewed by a local newspaper after the early encounter, she restrained herself to rather mild criticisms of the war's conduct. Of Bush himself, she said he was "sincere" about wanting freedom for the Iraqi people. "I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss," she added.

That seems a rather circumspect judgment on a man she would later denounce as "the Fuhrer" and the biggest terrorist in the world.

Less than two months ago, Sheehan announced her "resignation" from the anti-war movement. "I am finished working in, or outside of this system," she wrote. She told the Associated Press: "When we come back, it definitely won't be with the peace movement with marches, with rallies and with protests."

She is currently in the middle of a march.

A more sinister example of Sheehan's slipperiness came back in 2005. A row erupted over an email in Sheehan's name which contained remarks that, even taking the most forgiving possible interpretation, were suggestive of anti-Semitism. The best reporting on the furore came on Slate, and it hardly coved Sheehan in glory.

All of these events, though, pale into insignificance beside Sheehan's overarching trait: her apparently boundless hubris. Her basic position appears to be that, since she has lost a son in the war in Iraq, every pronouncement she makes about that war, or about the wider world, must axiomatically be correct.

Bereavement is no guarantee of wisdom. Yet Sheehan has been encouraged in her conceits, not just by opportunistic figures on the far left but by media icons, including America's most-overrated columnist, Maureen Dowd.

"The moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute," Dowd declared in a 2005 column.

Is the moral authority of bereaved parents who believe the war was justified, or who continue to support Bush, similarly unimpeachable? Dowd was silent on this point, though her views can easily be guessed at. Sheehan, for her part, described such parents as "brainwashed". "They know the pain and heartache and they should not wish it on another," Sheehan scolded.

The inference - that anyone who disagreed with her could be motivated only by cruelty - was breathtaking in its presumptuousness.

Presumptuousness, though, is yet another signature Sheehan trait. Like so many people at both ends of the political spectrum, she apparently believes that centrist positions can only be arrived at through cowardice, ideological corruption or bad faith.

She has compared Hillary Clinton to the ultra-conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh and has asserted that "there must be an underlying shady reason" for Pelosi's disinclination to bring impeachment proceedings against the president.

In her resignation letter back in May, Sheehan vented at a nation that seemed too slow to bow down before her in gratitude. "I have invested everything I have in trying to bring peace with justice to a country that wants neither," she lamented.

Perhaps her compatriots were reluctant to follow a woman whose desperate drive for self-publicity extended to stretching out on her son's grave for a glossy Vanity Fair photoshoot.

Cindy Sheehan is a self-styled sanctimonious didact. May her second retirement come swiftly, and may it last a lot longer than the first.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


» Navigation

Political Links Page

Blogs by AWE Members

Advertisers support this site - if you're interested in their product, take a look!


$5 monthly donation:

$10 monthly donation:



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0