Where erudite and informed people come to stroll the Boulevard of Right thinking.
No was killed in the Capitol bombing. How many Americans has George Bush had killed in his foolish invasion of Iran?"leftisthebest"
Just because no one died at one bombing, doesn't mean you can compare a domestic terrorist cell to US troops engaged with enemy combatants overseas, can you leftie?They're not the same.
RUE PLEASE FIND OUT WHO THIS LEFT IS BEST PERSON IS, I WISH TO FIND OUT IF HE HAS RELATIVES STILL LIVING IN GERMANY THANK YOU HERR OTTO VON SCHENKER
That is a salient point, 11:04There is much common-ground between today's Left and the Nazism. In fact, Liberals have a long history of facist oppression in this country. Back in the 1930's, the 4 most celebrated world leaders were Stalin, Mussolini, Wilson and Hitler. They were all about creating a Utopian society through the use of limiting freedom, censorship, loyalty oaths, eugenics: all under the auspices of "the common good". Roosevelt went a step further and created his New Deal apparatus, which delved Big Government's hand into our everyday lives.These leaders reveled in what Stalin was doing - who cared that he was murdering millions. They want to reshape society into their mold - one without God, a church, and parents. They want The State to be the be-all, end-all. Back then Totalitarianism wasn't a dirty word. It just meant that The State would be the "total" package for everyone. We are seeing the same old Marxist rhetoric being resurrected by Obama, Pelosi and Reid.Republicans were never the repressors. It's always been the Liberals and their "nice" fascism. It is as obvious as the nose on your face, in fact.
"Just because no one died at one bombing, doesn't mean you can compare a domestic terrorist cell to US troops engaged with enemy combatants overseas... They're not the same"-RSMYou're right Rue, launching a mass-murderous war of aggression against a nation posing no credible threat to your own which results in the slaughter of at LEAST 1.2 million and the creation of some 2 to 3 million refugees is not same... it's far worse. I'm gratified to see that you've finally managed to note the distinction.
Obama wears the blue turban
Holy Hot Hyperbole, BatFool!Coldtype: please start breaking the quaaludes in half next time you come over here to post something as dim-witted and wrong as that! 1.2 million slaughtered? Where pray tell, did that happen? Certainly not in Iraq. Certainly not in Afghanistan. This war has the lowest casualty rate of any war in human history. We've lost 4,148 of our men and women. According to this site there are 43,000 Iraqi deaths. Remember that US Coalition forces didn't kill all of these people, either. Although you and your ilk would like to demonize and categorize our troops as cold-blooded murdering thugs who are acting at the behest of their Imperial Emperor GW Bush. Dude, you're way out of line.
Rue it’s a shame that this late in the game you’re still so uninformed about the basic facts about our criminal occupation of Iraq. Here’s a little something Fox “News” failed to notify you and the rest of the American public about a few years ago: Dr. Les Roberts PhD, Dr. Shannon Doocy PhD, and Dr. Gilbert Burnham MD of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health; and Dr. Riyadh Lafta of Al Mustansiriya University Baghdad published a little peer-reviewed study in the highly respected British medical journal called the Lancet. These scientists, by the way, have conducted similar studies in war zones as far flung as Kosovo, Darfur, and the Congo using the standard accepted methodology in each example--cross-sectional cluster sample surveys. I repeat, their study of excess Iraqi deaths following the USuk invasion of 2003 was peer-reviewed prior to publishing. What this means Rue is that the paper successfully satisfied the standards of its scientific discipline.It appears abundantly clear Rue that you would greatly benefit from a trip down memory lane. Now I don’t want you to stress yourself so I’ve done all the heavy lifting for you. All that’s required of you is to sit back and... read.Let’s begin. In part 1, part 2, and part 3 of this odyssey we explore the corporate media’s reaction (in this case the British version) to the Lancet study and its unwelcome implications.Finally, we conclude our journey with the British polling organization’s Opinion Research Business (ORB) poll of 2007 (as related by Media Lens) which all but confirmed the earlier figures from the Lancet study. Feel free to follow the links therein Rue.PS: Just to leave no stone unturned, here’s the 2006 Iraqi Mortality Survey as published in the Lancet. You’ve no more excuses my friend.
You're quoting Lancet at me? Come on now! Why not just point me to the DailyKOS as your "neutral" source????WOW! I didn't just fall out of a Christmas tree, kafir
Rue, read... then debate. If cross-sectional sample surveys are an invalid method of tracking excess deaths in Iraq, then this standard methodology should be invalid in every war zone or disaster area. We both know perfectly well that this is not the case for it is a commonplace to accept the results from this methodology in other conflicts, however, when the agent of death is the USuk forces, cross-sectional sample surveys--literally the standard methodology--is invalid. Even YOU should find this curious.Read Rue, then debate.
Why are you all scared of Obama? There have been far worse presidents than him. Look who got the welfare ball rolling, Roosevelt! Look at Kennedy. Besides there is still the house and senate who decide what goes on. That's what you really should worry about. (Invest in euro's)
Post irrational bigotry and stupidity from many of you on this site. So Oama is responsile for something this guy did whe he was 8? Sheer stupidity and lemming behaviour.
Post a Comment