Grocery store experience

[Kal-el]

Of all the stupid things in the world. I'm at the grocery store and I see a young woman(18-20 is my guess) with a t-shirt, on the front it said "George W is your president" and on the back "I support my president".

I wanted to go up and give her a one way ticket to Iraq and wish her good luck! Isn't it easy to support such violent action from your privliged white bread suburb, as long as you don't have to put your ass on the line.

 

[loco]

it's fairly easy to do even if you are over there on the front lines. I have 4 really close friend who have all been on the front lines. and they all seem to agree even if they don't agree with the war 100% they signed on the dotted line, and agree to fight for our country and defend it here or abroad, and not just to get a scholarship for college and wages.

oh and I believe fonda plans another anti-war tour next your. and we all know how much she helped the POW's of vietnam.

 

[KingJames]

I don't see anything wrong with her showing support for her country. Since you are so against it do you go around with a t-shirt that has anti American remarks on it?

 

[Duppi_KronKite]

Isn't it easy to support such violent action from your privliged white bread suburb, as long as you don't have to put your ass on the line.

Like I said, supporting the troops is doing what this girl did. Buy yourself a shirt, flag or bumpersticker all of which made in a foreign country. Wear it and pretend like you give a fuck.

Not supporting the troops are the "Assholes" protesting the war who don't want to see fellow American soldiers being knockdown puppets for the government.

You think the US government would ever take criminals from a medium security prison and let them walk free if they fight in the Iraq war??

Your a good man Kal, get educated and prepare for the future.

 

[derringer57]

Your a good man Kal, get educated and prepare for the future.

Sounds cultish. Are you going to take him to a compound in Waco and serve kool-aid to all your followers?

The people protesting the war are idiots. I forgot the site, but a conservative guy randomly selected protesters and interviewed them (sort of like the gameshow, street smarts) and many were completely oblivious to simple knowledge. And when asked a plan of their own they couldnt muster up anything. It was pretty pathetic to see such a bunch of useless ignorant people making so much noise over something they dont intellectually understand. I find it comical their emotional foothold on the whole ordeal, when there grasp of the whole thing was completely offbase (not knowing the name of the ousted dictator, not knowing what W. standed for, not knowing what the UN stood for, etc) It was pretty gross to see their reasoning (all emotionally filled).

We need to stop killing innocent women, children, and the elderly. Other such mantras are exactly what depicts the whole rhetoric. It almost makes me feel bad everytime a protest gets out of hand and they get pelted with rubber bullets... almost.

 

[derringer57]

By the way, I do have a 'George Bush is my homeboy,' tee-shirt I proudly wear in southern cali. I have seen some antibush etc shirts, but none of these people have said a thing when I have protruded my chest in their direction so they could read my shirt. Maybe it took them too long to read, or possibly they realize debating is frivolous when you subconsciously realize your whole side is void of any logic, yet you accept that your emotions keep you on the same path.

 

[Kal-el]

You guys should be the Hallmark of the Republican mantra.
I mean, after all, if you guys won't allow an opposing opinion to be heard, isn't that a very one-sided view of an individual evidently consumed with sickness and hatred? I welcome comments on my posts, but this seems very one-sided, and frankly kinda unfair.

 

[Duppi_KronKite]

I am not a protestor but I am definately not for the war. Like you said many protestors don't even really know what is going on. The average American doesn't either and probably couldn't find Iraq on a map.

My above comment was to clearify the fact that pretending to support the troops is good, actually supporting the troops is bad. Anything we (Americans) do to the Middle East is good, when they retaliate they are evil. We torture, rape and kill 1,000's of them.. (most innocent) that is good. They kill 50 of us, that is bad.

But I guess this is all in good nature because the "Terrorist" is out there and could be lurking in our basements so we must give up all our rights to the mighty Patriot Act and Homeland Security. You can only give up so many rights before you are a slave, and if they are willing to treat Muslims badly, what will they do to the Middle-Poor class citizens of America once we have no rights?

Ah fuck it. I can't get through to you anyways.. go back to tugging your cock.

I admire your passion Kal, but trying to get through to people on a Penis Enlargement forum is 5 steps backwards.

 

[LambdaCalc]

I think we need to kill more innocent women and children. In fact, I think we should build smart weapons to kill only innocent women and children. Keep in mind that we will only kill innocent women, any women that are deemed...not inncoent will be spared. Children are just out of luck, we will kill the children regardless of their moral standing. We will collect their bodies and make trinkets out of them. This will be done for oil.

 

[Duppi_KronKite]

I think we need to kill more innocent women and children. In fact, I think we should build smart weapons to kill only innocent women and children. Keep in mind that we will only kill innocent women, any women that are deemed...not inncoent will be spared. Children are just out of luck, we will kill the children regardless of their moral standing. We will collect their bodies and make trinkets out of them. This will be done for oil.

Agreed.

"And advanced forms of biological warfare that can "target" specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool."

-Rebuilding America's Defenses (Sept. 2000)

 

[against_odds21]

Of all the stupid things in the world. I'm at the grocery store and I see a young woman(18-20 is my guess) with a t-shirt, on the front it said "George W is your president" and on the back "I support my president".

I wanted to go up and give her a one way ticket to Iraq and wish her good luck! Isn't it easy to support such violent action from your privliged white bread suburb, as long as you don't have to put your ass on the line.

How the hell do you know she doesn't have a brother or sister over there? Way to jump to conclusions. :s

 

[Juggers]

I actually just joined on sept 29th...I'll keep my opinions to myself. So far ppl seem to be backing my decision up so I guess its all good

 

[Kal-el]

As much as I hate to dredge up the past, I ask you Republicans this: How would you have felt if you saw a teenager in a store 7 or 8 years ago wearing a T-shirt that said "Bill Clinton is your President. I support my President."?

 

[loco]

that's a fairly fine line there bro. most republicans are conservative-religious folks (christians, jewish, catholic, etc...) and I bet you would find that most would agree they didn't care for clinton's lack of morals, or at least skewed morals but at the same time would say God is in control of everything and has a purpose for who he puts in authority over us. so in that case they wouldn't have a problem with that. you don't have to agree with someone 100% to support them.

now if the shirt said "Bill Clinton is your President. and getting oral sex is in no way having "relations". support your president" then they probably would have issues with that.

 

[Duppi_KronKite]

As much as I hate to dredge up the past, I ask you Republicans this: How would you have felt if you saw a teenager in a store 7 or 8 years ago wearing a T-shirt that said "Bill Clinton is your President. I support my President."?

I think its time we start treating the Democrats and Republicans as one. If the 2004 elections didn't tell you that, well then I don't know what will.

As a Republican, George Bush is pushing more of a Liberal agenda than Clinton did. But I'm sure they are all singing from the same song sheet. That goes for Dems, Republicans and Prime Ministers.

 

[Kal-el]

Originally posted by derringer57
The people protesting the war are idiots. I forgot the site, but a conservative guy randomly selected protesters and interviewed them (sort of like the gameshow, street smarts) and many were completely oblivious to simple knowledge. And when asked a plan of their own they couldnt muster up anything. It was pretty pathetic to see such a bunch of useless ignorant people making so much noise over something they dont intellectually understand. I find it comical their emotional foothold on the whole ordeal, when there grasp of the whole thing was completely offbase (not knowing the name of the ousted dictator, not knowing what W. standed for, not knowing what the UN stood for, etc) It was pretty gross to see their reasoning (all emotionally filled).

Don't tell me what I can and cannot protest. You have a right to your opinion, but you're commanding tone implies you know oh-so-much more than the rest of us about war, death, and the struggle for a free and open government.

None of us know what an open government is. We've lived for three generations under secretive, power hungry richie fucks. Who knows what they're doing? I sure as hell don't. And when people don't know what it is you're doing, and it affects their lives, they ARE going to assume the worst.

It goes very much to our leader's credibility, the reasons why we went to Iraq. I hear a lot of people, when the blame starts coming down, especially the guilty, say "Oh, no sense blaming anyone, we're in the situation now"

Yeah, and people, real fucking people, not numbers on some goddamned chart you dug up off the internet but real, flesh-and-blood people, people we love, people we cherished, people we fucking grew up with, are dead.

But you and your fellow repubs choose not to understand death, or even to feel it's effects. That's fine, you do that, but don't proselytize your death cult to me, I simply don't want to hear it.

That seems to be the main problem with republicans. They fail to put themselves in anyone else's shoes.

 

[Kal-el]

Originally posted by against odds21 How the hell do you know she doesn't have a brother or sister over there? Way to jump to conclusions.

My friend's cousin and nephew never complained about going off to war. In fact, they and their families were quite proud. Why is that so often the argument from your side - that if they didn't want to risk their lives, they shouldn't have joined the military? They weren't idiots - they fully understood what they were getting themselves into. One was a Marine, for Chrissake. My *point* was that it's the loved ones left behind who suffer for the rest of their lives. And the maimed soldiers. And the irreversibly psychologically damaged ones. I'd be willing to bet none of them complained about having to go over there in the first place. The fact is, they're dead. Or maimed. Or damaged. It's what comes after that's the hardest.

 

[Bulldog05]

We shouldn't even be over there. Iraq is no threat to us at all. The whole reason we are over there is because the leaders in our country want control of there oil fields. And plus alot of the leaders in our country wanted to go over there and control iraq to help bring about a NEW WORLD ORDER. Saddam didn't have the equipment to lunch any kind of biological weapons from there to here. Hell he didn't have the equipment to lunch biological weapons in Pakistan which is a neighboring country. I'm going to give you all some advise believe nothing of what you hear and half of what you see.

 

[Kal-el]

I have to interject this: It may seem (it pretty much is) like Bush's war,but we've got a system of checks and balances with the press and congress to help prevent that. The problem is the checks and balances aren't working.

No, we're too busy talking about wether the war is right or wrong, whether or not we can hang commandments in a court room, whether or not motorcyclists can wear helmets. None of that matters when the very government is off it's frikin rocker, doing what it wants, earning a King's ransom for pay. The real problem here is the government.

 

[Kal-el]

Originally posted by loco
that's a fairly fine line there bro. most republicans are conservative-religious folks (christians, jewish, catholic, etc...) and I bet you would find that most would agree they didn't care for clinton's lack of morals, or at least skewed morals but at the same time would say God is in control of everything and has a purpose for who he puts in authority over us. so in that case they wouldn't have a problem with that. you don't have to agree with someone 100% to support them.

now if the shirt said "Bill Clinton is your President. and getting oral sex is in no way having "relations". support your president" then they probably would have issues with that.

Good point loco, maybe I should have phrased it like this, "Let me ask you Clinton bashers for your opinion." Thank you for reminding me why I didn't choose the Republican side, as much as I hate stereotypes, as they lead to prejudice, Republicans seem to go by this slogan, "If it dosen't benefit me, I don't care."

 

[Kal-el]

I think we need to kill more innocent women and children. In fact, I think we should build smart weapons to kill only innocent women and children. Keep in mind that we will only kill innocent women, any women that are deemed...not inncoent will be spared. Children are just out of luck, we will kill the children regardless of their moral standing. We will collect their bodies and make trinkets out of them. This will be done for oil.

You are kidding me, right? I guess if you are you are trying to get a rise out of me.

 

[derringer57]

Its called sarcasm he is mocking your mantra, "omg we are killing "innocent women and children"" Had to interject that extra quote because that is overused so much. Im like how many women and children, have you seen videos, of our men killing them?

We shouldn't even be over there. Iraq is no threat to us at all. The whole reason we are over there is because the leaders in our country want control of there oil fields. And plus alot of the leaders in our country wanted to go over there and control iraq to help bring about a NEW WORLD ORDER. Saddam didn't have the equipment to lunch any kind of biological weapons from there to here. Hell he didn't have the equipment to lunch biological weapons in Pakistan which is a neighboring country. I'm going to give you all some advise believe nothing of what you hear and half of what you see.

^^^ Lol exactly what I am talking about.

I am sure you have all these facts to back your side, but Ill stick with 2. We got less than 2% of our oil from Iraq and those numbers havent changed drastically to date. Also Sadam broke countless UN resolutions, repeatedly. Even then dems who claim we need to wait on the UN for the 'ok,' already gave us the ok in those resolutions. Also, do we want to wait for the 'ok' of an organization whose major players were all caught in scandals with oil contracts with them.

I find it funny democrats bashing us for wanting oil etc by liberating Iraq (yes we can say liberating now, they have their own government ), and they fly under the same flag (representing that rhetoric) as Germany, Russia, and France... yes all 3 of those countries were busted for exploiting the food for oil program with illegal contracts... which is exactly why they didnt want us to go in there. Stop protesting the government that has protected your ass at home and at large, siding with the people that are doing the very thing you are protesting your government for... *breathe* Which quite honestly your government hasnt done....

It is all prettty ridiculous. Kal-el you even admit you dont know what they are doing, so instead of assuming the worst get informed. Unfortunately my lackluster and lack of care arguments and prescence is almost the only one on my side, because Bib, who knows a hell of a lot more about this shit than any of us, isnt going listen to your lack of knowledge, misconceptions, and outright ridiculous thoughts.

All in all, the people that make money and know what they want for themselves and for their families will be get educated, and vote for who will do this. These people are labeled the 'evil rich' or republicans. Then there will be the democrats. A few rich people looking to pander to the poor uneducated for votes, hoping it will keep them in power and rich. I am pretty happy about the internet and conservative organizations spreading the truth. Talk radio and news are no longer dominated by liberals, and you can see the trend in states toward conservative. Look at Californias voting #s and where they are going.

There will always be the ignorant, uneducated, easily led astray, and emotionally driven people, but I am gonna stay positive with what I have seen and can hope for; that logic and truth will reign king.

 

[Kazan]

I don't support the war because the American people were decieved into supporting it. I support the soldiers and I want them safe, though not necessarily by having them shipped back, because leaving before the formation of a reliable government in Iraq would be idiotically irresponsible. There needs to be clearer action planned out for the future of the troops in Iraq. I don't demand a time table for withdrawl but a good indication of what the troops wish to do in order to strengthen the new Iraqi government would really get more people willing to bear with it for as long as that might take. I also beleive that the current US administration should admit that they were wrong about WMDs or at least give a strong supporting evidence or at least clear theories of the disposal of such weapons to assuage the enraged masses, who unfortunately aren't as educated as they ought to be in order to be "raising a ruckus" as some here have put it. By providing a bit more information or at least putting up a more diplomatic face about the entire business of it all I beleive that the country would at least be marginally more united instead of thrown between two extremes the way it has been. What politicians have trouble understanding is that if you at least let out some of the truth it will engender trust in the people or at least make distrust less common. I'm not a fan of conservative thought, but I would rather that the current face of the government try to find a way to discourage the complete polarization of the American people that has occured and become very prominent following 9/11. Not that there wasn't a strong amount of polarization before that. People [on both ends of the liberal-conservative spectrum] are just nastier about it now.

 

[Kal-el]

First things first, Derringer57 wrote this:

I am pretty happy about the internet and conservative organizations spreading the truth. Talk radio and news are no longer dominated by liberals, and you can see the trend in states toward conservative. Look at Californias voting #s and where they are going.

If that's not ridiculous enough, he then went on to say:

There will always be the ignorant, uneducated, easily led astray, and emotionally driven people

You are very much right, sir. You just need to go look in the mirror to find one.

Finally, derringer57 said:

but I am gonna stay positive with what I have seen and can hope for; that logic and truth will reign king.

O man, that makes one of us.

 

[penguinsfan]

Of all the stupid things in the world. I'm at the grocery store and I see a young woman(18-20 is my guess) with a t-shirt, on the front it said "George W is your president" and on the back "I support my president".

Was she hot? I need the important details. I suppose most would consider me a little more conservative than liberal and I've been keeping my eyes open for a good little Republislut.

 

[penguinsfan]

You guys should be the Hallmark of the Republican mantra.
I mean, after all, if you guys won't allow an opposing opinion to be heard, isn't that a very one-sided view of an individual evidently consumed with sickness and hatred? I welcome comments on my posts, but this seems very one-sided, and frankly kinda unfair.

Well Kal, here's the deal. To your credit you participate in numerous forums on the board, but you run your mouth off with political rants more than anyone else here in the "Deep Thoughts" forum. I just looked at the first page and found 12 threads here started by YOU. I hardly think you've been silenced or have failed to get your opposing opinions heard.

I think you would freely admit you are more passionate in your anti-war sentiments than the average person. Also, consider your thread on your anti-violence beliefs. Polls show most people favor captial punisHydromaxent. Most of what I have read also indicates most people have little problem with deadly force in self defense and far less interest in trying to determine the psychology of criminal behavior. Your views on some things are undeniably out of the mainstream. When opening such a thread and inviting discussion on such matters, be prepared for disagreement. You're welcome to discuss most anything here at [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words], but anyone is welcome to comment on it as well, so I refer back to the cliche: If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

 

[penguinsfan]

Anything we (Americans) do to the Middle East is good, when they retaliate they are evil. We torture, rape and kill 1,000's of them.. (most innocent) that is good. They kill 50 of us, that is bad.

Where is your evidence for these statements? How many people have our soldiers raped? 10,000? 10,000,000? 10,000,000,000,000,000? How do you define torture? Is this anything beyond the underwear on the head? Does it surpass the beheadings of civilian workers? Where do you get the breakdown of how many of those killed by the U.S. military had nothing to do with terrorism, wahabism, etc.?

But I guess this is all in good nature because the "Terrorist" is out there and could be lurking in our basements so we must give up all our rights to the mighty Patriot Act and Homeland Security.

Well, I'm sure there are terrorists among us, but you do bring up a very good point here. As I've said before folks: www.infowars.com

Ah fuck it. I can't get through to you anyways.. go back to tugging your cock.

I admire your passion Kal, but trying to get through to people on a Penis Enlargement forum is 5 steps backwards.

What's your point? Everyone here is an idiot and not as smart as you because they practice Penis Enlargement? What the hell are you doing here if you are so critical of Penis Enlargement and those that believe in it?

 

[penguinsfan]

As a Republican, George Bush is pushing more of a Liberal agenda than Clinton did. But I'm sure they are all singing from the same song sheet. That goes for Dems, Republicans and Prime Ministers.

Okay, that is another good point. No serious person could actually give a convincing argument that Bush is even remotely conservative outside of tax policy and foreign policy and even that is really debatable when one really looks at what conservatism really means. I too find him more liberal than Clinton on many issues. I would take Slick Willy over Bush in a heartbeat except I do think Bush has done better with al-Qaeda.

 

[penguinsfan]

As much as I hate to dredge up the past, I ask you Republicans this: How would you have felt if you saw a teenager in a store 7 or 8 years ago wearing a T-shirt that said "Bill Clinton is your President. I support my President."?

I remember seeing the "Thank me. I voted for Clinton" bumper stickers and I never even once thought about approaching the person for any kind of debate and I had much more Republican tendencies back then. People have different viewpoints. Life's a bitch. Deal with it.

I can understand getting irritated and confrontational over a shirt that called liberals communists or conservatives nazis, but not over a shirt simply stating support for an individual. Supportive shirts have a positive message towards an individual, not a negative slap at opposing views. I know Democrats that supported Bush because of his military efforts. I also know Republicans that supported Kerry because of his stance on things like stem cell research. Who the hell are you or am I to get worked up and confrontational over such a thing as a statement of support? What would I say to a Republican that got really upset over a pro-Clinton shirt? The same thing I would say to a person that got really upset over a pro-Bush shirt? And that would be...YOU'RE A TOTAL FUCKING LOSER.

 

[Duppi_KronKite]

HAHAHA Wow man you need to relax, go get some pussy or something. Why are you up so early in the morning to start your rant anyways, a healthy person needs sleep at those times. You are going to stunt your Penis Enlargement gainability...

Do you really think a Penis Enlargement forum is a place where people are seriously going to care about debates such as this?

Kal makes some very enlightening posts, and the majority who disagree with him don't really have anything to say. So I say that him trying to reach people or show them is real views on anything wouldn't be worth it on a Penis Enlargement forum.

This is the place were you would have a thorough conversation about last nights football game or something like that. But discuss the meaning of life??? nah I don't think so.

I still don't understand why we all haven't got past the label of Democrat and Republican, you speak as if they are from a different country or race than you.

But anyways for probably the 5th time I have to tell the ones like you I am not critical to Penis Enlargement itself. It is discrediting to the whole thing however when the "Penis Enlargement Ghandis" say they gained 5 inches length and 3 inches girth with no solid before and after pics, or no pics at all. Also strange how the guys who go from 5.5 inches to 6.5 inches in 3 or so years are the only ones with solid ruler pics showing every step of the way.

Time for work, can't wait for the angry bashing replies. Always remind yourself, it's just a computer screen and those are just words.

 

[Duppi_KronKite]

As far as my proof for torture I will see what I can do for you as far as things you can read.

I wasn't really trying to elaborate on the issue much as my info was just from pictures and word of mouth. What do I mean by this?

I was watching a documentary in England about the torture in guantanamo bay. It was about an hour or so and was to be a re-creation of the events that supposeably go on there. Their information to do the re-creation came from written reports from an FBI agent who had gone undercover and was trying to have people prosecuted.

Anyways the show had 10 or so (can't remember exactly) participants to withstand a lighter version of the torture that was written about. Most of the participants quit as the torture was too harsh. It was more psychological torture (being forced to urinate and desicrate in their jumpsuit),(stripped down and ridiculed infront of their cellmates which is a no no for Muslims apparently). Being interrigated and punched and slight sexual abuse although the reports said sexual abuse was more severe. Being stripped naked and handcuffed ankles to wrists, and squatted infront of a fan blowing cold air with headphones on that played white noise loudly for days straight. The kinda torture that should make you go crazy. That is all they would show on the documentary but kept saying the reports were more detailed and they couldn't show it on Television.

If you don't think women and children are being killed in Iraq do to bombings or bad aim, well that is up to you. But like I said, I wasn't really planning to elaborate when I said that one sentence just stating my belief.

 

[penguinsfan]

HAHAHA Wow man you need to relax, go get some pussy or something.

Don't reckon I would mind getting some pussy. I'll consider that another one of your good points.

Why are you up so early in the morning to start your rant anyways, a healthy person needs sleep at those times. You are going to stunt your Penis Enlargement gainability...

I actually hadn't gone to sleep yet, because I work till around 3:00 AM. I do actually find politics and foreign policy threads interesting, but I generally avoid them, because the thinking and responding usually wakes my brain up at a time when I need to be winding down. In addition, they just take up too much time. I haven't responded to the London Attacks thread in a few days, because I haven't had the time and I'm sure this thread will inevitably eat up more time.

Do you really think a Penis Enlargement forum is a place where people are seriously going to care about debates such as this?

No, I do not. Obviously very few people are going to be deeply interested in digging into such subjects, but I just didn't see any need to be derogatory about it. A person that is a passionate as Kal would be well-served to spend time on boards such as www.democraticunderground.com and similar places. That being said, as I acknowledged earlier, he spends a great deal of time on the other [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] sections. Kal is a good member that contributes, but my main point was don't come on here with a point that is out of mainstream and then bitch if the majority of responses disagree.

Kal makes some very enlightening posts, and the majority who disagree with him don't really have anything to say.

Well, for as out of the mainstream as some of Kal's view are, I do think he normally conducts himself in a civil manner and seems like a decent guy, but I don't think of him as an intellectual giant among [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] members. He may make some good points, but I would definitely say guys like Bib are every bit as impressive while respresenting the opposing viewpoint. I have read a fair number of posts from Kal that I can debunk, but again I can't make politics at [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] my life with the small amount of spare time I have.

I still don't understand why we all haven't got past the label of Democrat and Republican, you speak as if they are from a different country or race than you.

I agree. I admire people like Zel Miller for going against the grain and likewise Nancy Reagan for taking on the administration on matters such as stem cell research. If someone says one party is entirely right on everything while the other party is entirely wrong, I assure you you're listening to a person with the intellect of a flea. I am still registered Republican although I intend to change that. I could probably name somewhere between 10-25 things that are wrong with the Republican trend. Do you think Al Franken or Howard Dean would ever be willing to do an honest critique and fess up to things that are worng within their own party? No, because they're partisan hack phonies, not real people like myself. When it's more of a job or career than about what is right or wrong for the country at a given time, you're doing a disservice to America.

But anyways for probably the 5th time I have to tell the ones like you I am not critical to Penis Enlargement itself.

Well sorry to make you say something five times, but I haven't read all your other posts. I agree with you on Penis Enlargement. There are some claims that just should to good to be true, but I do believe in it. I have seen gains myself, although I could swear I've lost some flaccid size. Anyhow, 30,000 people can't be entirely wrong. I'm sure the reason why [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] and places like TP have so much activity isn't because tens of thousands of guys have nothing better to do with their time.

Time for work, can't wait for the angry bashing replies. Always remind yourself, it's just a computer screen and those are just words.

Okay, but I don't think I lost my head or anything. I was never pissed off or anything. If I see something I want to criticize, call out, or debunk I'm the kind of guy to do it, because that's just me. It's not personal. No angry bashing reply here.

 

[Kal-el]

Originally posted by penguinsfanI remember seeing the "Thank me. I voted for Clinton" bumper stickers and I never even once thought about approaching the person for any kind of debate and I had much more Republican tendencies back then. People have different viewpoints. Life's a bitch. Deal with it.

I can understand getting irritated and confrontational over a shirt that called liberals communists or conservatives nazis, but not over a shirt simply stating support for an individual. Supportive shirts have a positive message towards an individual, not a negative slap at opposing views. I know Democrats that supported Bush because of his military efforts. I also know Republicans that supported Kerry because of his stance on things like stem cell research. Who the hell are you or am I to get worked up and confrontational over such a thing as a statement of support? What would I say to a Republican that got really upset over a pro-Clinton shirt? The same thing I would say to a person that got really upset over a pro-Bush shirt? And that would be...YOU'RE A TOTAL FUCKING LOSER.

So... I take it you think school officials that order kids to turn anti-war and anti-Bush T-shirts inside out or go home and change are TOTAL FUCKING LOSERS, too, then? Just want to make sure we're on the same page, here.

Actually, I personally would not have been upset by the girl and her T-shirt. I would have rolled my eyes and thought, "Kids these days" and moved on. But I don't blame someone else for being upset by it - it is clearly implying that we should all blindly support our President (namely the "GWB is your President..." bit). If it ONLY said "I support GWB" or "I support my President," or "Thank me, I voted for GWB," there'd be quite a bit less of that implication there.

If you're fine with a shirt that promotes Dictatorship, goody for you. As I say, I wouldn't have been particularly upset by it, mainly because I would have just written that kid off as being a misinformed numbskull who doesn't know any better and continued trying to find my favorite type of Cheerios.

Originally posted by penguinsfan
Well Kal, here's the deal. To your credit you participate in numerous forums on the board, but you run your mouth off with political rants more than anyone else here in the "Deep Thoughts" forum. I just looked at the first page and found 12 threads here started by YOU. I hardly think you've been silenced or have failed to get your opposing opinions heard.

I think you would freely admit you are more passionate in your anti-war sentiments than the average person. Also, consider your thread on your anti-violence beliefs. Polls show most people favor captial punisHydromaxent. Most of what I have read also indicates most people have little problem with deadly force in self defense and far less interest in trying to determine the psychology of criminal behavior. Your views on some things are undeniably out of the mainstream. When opening such a thread and inviting discussion on such matters, be prepared for disagreement. You're welcome to discuss most anything here at [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words], but anyone is welcome to comment on it as well, so I refer back to the cliche: If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Well, I was under the impression that participation was encouraged here? I like to help other members participate, and I enjoy reading opposing viewpoints. Like I said in another post I like to think "outside the box" so to speak, and my views probably aren't the mainstream's opinion. I realize there are alot of members on here probably more enlightened, intelligent, and informed than I am. I admire people like Swank, Bib, iwant8inches,yourself, and others I ran into. I Thank you for pointing out that I started alot of threads on here, I didn't realize it. I will try to tone it down.

 

[penguinsfan]

As far as my proof for torture I will see what I can do for you as far as things you can read.

I wasn't really trying to elaborate on the issue much as my info was just from pictures and word of mouth. What do I mean by this?

I was watching a documentary in England about the torture in guantanamo bay. It was about an hour or so and was to be a re-creation of the events that supposeably go on there.

Well the term "rape" was what I found particularly outrageous. Our soldiers are helping build schools, wire internet and utilities, etc. They are NOT raping anyone. That is not to say there may not be some isolated incidence of such, but it is absolutely not the behavior of the military as a whole, but the way you term it made it sound as though it were...and that is outrageous. You can disagree with the war till kingdom come, but that does not change the compassion shown by so many of the rank and file. Make no mistake about it--if people continue with such ridiculous rhetoric I can PROMISE you what it will bring about...more Republican seats in the House and Senate in 2006 and I really don't care to see that. There is a definite reason why liberals have gotten hogcollared in the last few elections.

I have heard some of the allegations of Gitmo. I don't know how much to believe and how much to write off as nonsense. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle of what one would heard on Rush Windbag versus Randi Rhoades on Enemy America radio. What I do know is that these individuals do not have Geneva protections. Of course, our government is saying they will receive humane treatment, but there is not legal entitlement to it. To receive Geneva Convention protections you must be fighting in a UNIFORMED, IDENTIFIABLE standing army. Anyone that tells you otherwise does not understand the laws. Believe me, while people like Ramsey Clark whine bitch and moan, their time in the spotlight is paramount to what is actually going to bring security and an end to military operations ASAP, regardless of what they might say. Even if we recognized al-Qaeda, Taliban, and like terrorist forces as a legitimate standing military (which we would not because they violate the rules of warfare) Geneva protections do not apply if that standing military does not reciprocate Geneva protections, which the again fail to do.

The military truly needs to make an honest inquiry into each individual held and determine their level of involvement in whatever they are accused of. I have little doubt that the majority of those held in Gitmo are the scum of the earth, but there may well be some innocent individuals there too. I suspect it is much like the American penal system--yes, there are innocent people in America's prisons and it is tragic, but the problem is likely not what criminal defense advocates make it out to be. Anyway, the absolute worst of the worst that have an overwhelming amount of evidence against them, I have no problem with whatever is done to them. I mean, I don't believe in absolute ongoing torture at all. If you're never going to free someone because he is too dangerous, then move on with permanent imprisonment or execution, but I don't condone 30 years of daily torture and interrogation. For instance, that bastard that slit Danny Pearl's throat can never be freed, because he is undoubtedly going to go right back into the terror networks. We would lose some of our humanity to simply beat him daily until his mature death, even being the piece of shit that he is. In such a case, just dig a hole, tie a blindfold, chamber a round in the M-16 and be done with it.

 

[penguinsfan]

If you don't think women and children are being killed in Iraq do to bombings or bad aim, well that is up to you. But like I said, I wasn't really planning to elaborate when I said that one sentence just stating my belief.

I am sure they are. That's war. And of course that sounds devaluing to just say that, but what I mean is it truly is inevitably. There is no way to ensure zero civilians casualties. But there is a real moral distinction between the fact that civilians killed by our military are killed completely by accident versus intentionally. There is also a huge moral distinction between the U.S. actions regarding civilian deaths and those killed by the insurgents themselves. In another thread, when talking to Kal, I brought up the story from a couple weeks ago about a suicide bomber that killed 29 civilians in order to kill a soldier (who probably decided to take a break from "raping") that was passing out candy to children. You cannot compare 29 people that were killed in error to 29 people that some terror group decided was acceptably collateral damage. It is absurd to think that the U.S. would ever strike someone in such a situation.

 

[penguinsfan]

So... I take it you think school officials that order kids to turn anti-war and anti-Bush T-shirts inside out or go home and change are TOTAL FUCKING LOSERS, too, then? Just want to make sure we're on the same page, here.

Pretty much on the same page, but it's not quite an equal comparison. First, I doubt this kind of censorship within our schools is an epidemic, given the influence of the teachers unions. Second, we would be comparing a shirt expressing postive support to one with negative criticism. One is generally more accepted than the other. There is not as much controversy with a Pittsburgh Steeler jersey as there is with a black and gold shirt that says "Fuck Cleveland" as a college buddy used to have. Obviously you would not get away with wearing that shirt, even in a Pittsburgh school. Third, kinda relating to my last sentence, schools tend to enact various dress guidelines that are meant to curb much of anything that is considered controversial. Fourth, as taxpayer-sponsored institutions, schools really should try to maintain as much political neutrality as is possible. Last, it just depends on how offensive the shirt is perceived to be. Sending someone home for a "Not My President" shirt is uncalled for, IMHO. However, I have no problem with sending someone home for something like "Military=Murderers" shirt as it would undoubtedly offend someone and is just asking for a gym class brawl.

School district policy is pretty much up to the individual community at he end of the day. That being said, I would absolutely call any teacher that took it upon himself to send a student home for a political message providing it is not too outrageous a TOTAL FUCKING LOSER, regardless of whether it leans left or right.

Of course, out in public one pretty much has unrestricted freedom, but everything varies in a school or private building. From my younger, more foolish years, I have a shirt laying around that says "Friends Don't Let Friends Vote Democrat". I assure you if I were to wear it to work on casual Fridays I would be sent home or sent to the mall to buy a different shirt, because there is a political neutrality policy within the office and it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference if the word "Republican" were substituted for "Democrat". Kal, surely you don't really think I wouldn't be hypocritical on such as issue. Any liberal or neo-con has the same freedoms as myself.

Well, I was under the impression that participation was encouraged here? I like to help other members participate, and I enjoy reading opposing viewpoints. Like I said in another post I like to think "outside the box" so to speak, and my views probably aren't the mainstream's opinion. I realize there are alot of members on here probably more enlightened, intelligent, and informed than I am. I admire people like Swank, Bib, iwant8inches,yourself, and others I ran into. I Thank you for pointing out that I started alot of threads on here, I didn't realize it. I will try to tone it down.

I was just saying don't complain about things if you start a thread and find that the responses are overwhelmingly disagreeing with you. That is how it sometimes goes when kicking around politics and social issues. You are certainly welcome to participate here and you're welcome to start threads as well too. I was just pointing out that no one has done anything to silence you and keep your viewpoints suppressed in any way. As a moderator, it would be irresponsible for me to discourage you for posting here. Glad you enjoy it and thanks for mentioning me in those you have admiration for. As long as someone is not coming on here to personally insult people and using [words=http://www.mattersofsize.com/join-now.html]MOS[/words] purely to stir up anger, infighting, and controversy, we're all fine with that. Most of what I've read from you has been well-spoken and civil. You seem like a likeable guy, regardless of whether we agree on much of anything or not. With me, even if it does end up getting a little bit heated, it's just debate, not anything personal.

 

[Kal-el]

Only simple-minded people get all worked up over a t-shirt, however in my original post I didn't intend nor do I think I conveyed that I was anything but annoyed by a young pampered girl in safe suburbia(and yes in my community, especially where the store is located, it is just that)was disconcerting to me.

I didn't confront her, I did just roll my eyes and continued on to my car. It would seem to me that some people in this thread are the ones who got angry over me posting my annoyance of the shirt and who was wearing it. No problem, I wasn't angry when I posted my observation and I'm not angry now. Just wanted to blow off steam about a seemingly ignorant shirt.

Originally posted by penguinsfan
Was she hot? I need the important details. I suppose most would consider me a little more conservative than liberal and I've been keeping my eyes open for a good little Republislut

Not really, I'd still bump her though. I'd be sure to put a bag on her face and one on mine in case hers fell off!

Originally posted by penguinsfan
Okay, that is another good point. No serious person could actually give a convincing argument that Bush is even remotely conservative outside of tax policy and foreign policy and even that is really debatable when one really looks at what conservatism really means. I too find him more liberal than Clinton on many issues. I would take Slick Willy over Bush in a heartbeat except I do think Bush has done better with al-Qaeda

I almost agree with that whole statement. Bush probably Is more liberal than Clinton on many issues. However, I don't even think that Bush is doing a "satisfactory" job with al-Qaeda.

 

[derringer57]

You are very much right, sir. You just need to go look in the mirror to find one.

Nice flame. I find it funny I am presenting some factual, logical arguments, maybe one of the few, and I just get flamed and ignored? Is it because Kal-El has nothing more to say, no facts, no retort that is factually based? I think so.

Point is you keep spamming your propaganda in these forums and seemingly every reply ended with a direct, (or ultimately ended up) with you flaming me, or ignoring me... Obviously your just a loudmouth leftwinger looking to win some ignorant people to your side and/or stir up the mislead/ignorant already on your side. Try to keep your threads down to a few and put some actual thought, if that's possible. Itd make you almost look legitimate

By the way dont even knock me for coming at you back... you posted nothing factual or even relative to the matter at hand, so what am I supposed to post back? Haha. Kal-el youre a joke Im just going to put a little warning in all your threads and that is all. Something like this...

[b]WARNING LIBERAL PROPAGANDA: Read are your own risk. All [i]OPINIONS[/i] stated are emotionally charged and lacking factual basis. Please, ignorant readers beware.[/b]

 

[Kal-el]

Originally posted by derringer57
Nice flame. I find it funny I am presenting some factual, logical arguments, maybe one of the few, and I just get flamed and ignored? Is it because Kal-El has nothing more to say, no facts, no retort that is factually based? I think so.

Point is you keep spamming your propaganda in these forums and seemingly every reply ended with a direct, (or ultimately ended up) with you flaming me, or ignoring me... Obviously your just a loudmouth leftwinger looking to win some ignorant people to your side and/or stir up the mislead/ignorant already on your side. Try to keep your threads down to a few and put some actual thought, if that's possible. Itd make you almost look legitimate

By the way dont even knock me for coming at you back... you posted nothing factual or even relative to the matter at hand, so what am I supposed to post back? Haha. Kal-el youre a joke Im just going to put a little warning in all your threads and that is all. Something like this...


Code:
WARNING LIBERAL PROPAGANDA: Read are your own risk. All OPINIONS stated are emotionally charged and lacking factual basis. Please, ignorant readers beware.

Do you have anything at least semi-intelligent to say? Or is everything spewing out of your mouth just insults lunged towards me? I really don't know what to say, after reading your last couple posts, I can't seem to stop laughing.

 

[derringer57]

Hahaha... hypocrite. Keep making snide remarks and ignoring the posts you dont have any snide remarks for. Good job, you are just bolstering the opposition, in the minds of intelligent people, because they can see your a transparent loudmouth looking to push an agenda without facts. Just a bunch of quotes and links to other sites of the same people doing the same thing as you haha... Reply to the information retorting your remarks and that are relevant to this debate, in my posts, or just dont reply to me at all, thanks.

 

[Kal-el]

Originally posted by derringer57
Hahaha... hypocrite. Keep making snide remarks and ignoring the posts you dont have any snide remarks for. Good job, you are just bolstering the opposition, in the minds of intelligent people, because they can see your a transparent loudmouth looking to push an agenda without facts. Just a bunch of quotes and links to other sites of the same people doing the same thing as you haha... Reply to the information retorting your remarks and that are relevant to this debate, in my posts, or just dont reply to me at all, thanks

No problem, my question is this- why are you getting all worked up over this?

 

[derringer57]

You are spamming this forum with your liberal agenda, which you cant back up? <- Simplest way to put it. You also ignore other posts or just libel against the person who made the post (attack the messenger, not the message)

 

[iwant8inches]

I actually just joined on sept 29th...I'll keep my opinions to myself. So far ppl seem to be backing my decision up so I guess its all good

No one is against the troops obviously, but against the reasons for this war in Iraq. You'll be trained to carry out orders and no matter what it'll be in the name of the U.S. There's nothing wrong with joining the military. Good luck as it will be a life changing experience without doubt. Whatever is said about the troops being over there has little to nothing to do with the troops themselves. It has to do with the people giving the orders, planning policy, and governing the civilians. Did you plan the war to go into Iraq? No, but you volunteered to serve in the military which is engaged abroad in something a good amount of people disagree with and subsequently would like to see our family and friends in the service back home safe and sound or at least somewhere they are needed more. As it stands the situation in Iraq is a catch-22. "We" broke it or in other words made the country less stable and potentially helped create more terrorists, killed who-knows (100,000+) Iraqi civillians, and now "we" have to fix it. However, it seems there are American troops and civillian contractors for example in danger if we stay there in the same fashion and we are all in danger even if the troops are sent home as there is more incentive for terrorists who are potentially more capable and willing to plan attacks around the globe. The West is now as vulnerable as ever. No one can say that either side has their hands clean to date. I hope Bush is right and will be someday proven right, but right now it seems highly unlikely that will ever be a part of reality as there is nothing to suggest terrorism is going to stop being planned in Iraq in the least bit.

 

[Kal-el]

Originally posted by iwant8inches As it stands the situation in Iraq is a catch-22. "We" broke it or in other words made the country less stable and potentially helped create more terrorists, killed who-knows (100,000+) Iraqi civillians, and now "we" have to fix it

You said it.I know it might be hard for you republicans to recognize, but that is what truth looks like. Instead of swallowing the "propaganda" put out by the Bush administration and the main stream press, maybe you should rethink your pathetic resigned position of "aw shucks guys, were there, so we just have to deal with it" Quite frankly that is a bullshit position.

 

[derringer57]

Who-knows exactly? Do you have the facts or are you 'swallowing that (liberal) propaganda'? I am sure we have killed far less innocent than Saddam did deliberately with gas

 

[Kal-el]

Who-knows exactly? Do you have the facts or are you 'swallowing that (liberal) propaganda'? I am sure we have killed far less innocent than Saddam did deliberately with gas

I highly doubt that, even though Saddam murdered a lot of people, we killed a whole lot more with sanctions, invasions, and especially, this illegal occupation.

 

[penguinsfan]

I highly doubt that, even though Saddam murdered a lot of people, we killed a whole lot more with sanctions, invasions, and especially, this illegal occupation.

Obviously the military campaigns have killed some Iraqis, but the sanctions thing is horseshit. Those sanctions were UN sanctions, not US sanctions. It wasn't called the "US Oil For Food" program, but the "UN Oil For Food" program. So, it's not as if the sanctions didn't pass the same "global test" that would have supposedly legitimized the war, regardless of whether the war was a wise decision or not.

The whole death by sanctions argument is nonsense, because Saddam was able to buy food and medicine under the program, he just didn't like the restrictions that were a condition of ending Gulf War I. He did not participate in the program to the degree that would have made a meaningful impact to his people. This death by sanctions argument does not even pass the test of liberal ideology. Liberals tend to believe in an endless amount of social assistance programs to take care of every need of every individual from cradle to grave. Then they turn around and blame the US for what the UN established, instead of this guy that had numerous multimillion dollar palaces but would not comply with the program to take care of then needs of his people. It fails the test of logic.

 

[against_odds21]

I highly doubt that, even though Saddam murdered a lot of people, we killed a whole lot more with sanctions, invasions, and especially, this illegal occupation.

Haven't kept up with the whole thread. Just chimmed in to see where it was at, but where are your numbers? :s

You hear a few civilians died so you think nothing was worth fighting for. There's going to be civilian casualties in any urban combat warefar. Why don't you take up your problem with war itself and not the war in Iraq, as you degrade and devalue what the armed services are doing to stop terrorism, inadaquate human rights, and everyone that suffered from Saddam's tyranny? I know why you don't though, you're just one of those people that doesn't get it, but that's okay. We have democracy for this reason.

 

[Kal-el]

Obviously the military campaigns have killed some Iraqis, but the sanctions thing is horseshit. Those sanctions were UN sanctions, not US sanctions. It wasn't called the "US Oil For Food" program, but the "UN Oil For Food" program. So, it's not as if the sanctions didn't pass the same "global test" that would have supposedly legitimized the war, regardless of whether the war was a wise decision or not.

The whole death by sanctions argument is nonsense, because Saddam was able to buy food and medicine under the program, he just didn't like the restrictions that were a condition of ending Gulf War I. He did not participate in the program to the degree that would have made a meaningful impact to his people. This death by sanctions argument does not even pass the test of liberal ideology. Liberals tend to believe in an endless amount of social assistance programs to take care of every need of every individual from cradle to grave. Then they turn around and blame the US for what the UN established, instead of this guy that had numerous multimillion dollar palaces but would not comply with the program to take care of then needs of his people. It fails the test of logic.

Penguinsfan, I posted a link on another post I made alot earlier about all the deaths caused by UN sanctions. 500,000, and 10,000 of them children. Yes, Saddam does have alot of blood on his hands, but it pales in comparison with the US and company.

 

[iwant8inches]

Obviously the military campaigns have killed some Iraqis, but the sanctions thing is horseshit. Those sanctions were UN sanctions, not US sanctions. It wasn't called the "US Oil For Food" program, but the "UN Oil For Food" program. So, it's not as if the sanctions didn't pass the same "global test" that would have supposedly legitimized the war, regardless of whether the war was a wise decision or not.

The whole death by sanctions argument is nonsense, because Saddam was able to buy food and medicine under the program, he just didn't like the restrictions that were a condition of ending Gulf War I. He did not participate in the program to the degree that would have made a meaningful impact to his people. This death by sanctions argument does not even pass the test of liberal ideology. Liberals tend to believe in an endless amount of social assistance programs to take care of every need of every individual from cradle to grave. Then they turn around and blame the US for what the UN established, instead of this guy that had numerous multimillion dollar palaces but would not comply with the program to take care of then needs of his people. It fails the test of logic.

It was supported heavily by the U.S. (the UN sanctions.) The Oil for Food program was abused and with the way it was set up there should have been little shock of how little the amount of money actually went towards aid. Corporations took most of the money that was supposed to go towards medicines and food. It was just too easy for say contractors to cover up the real accounting records. I mean it was a hard situation to be handled what with madman Saddam doing what he had done and the U.S. being as pissed as they were at Saddam. Those two factors worked against the people of Iraq to get the help they deserved. The way the program was organized and ran really hurt them. Dual usage was banned under the sanctions and I think this included several essential elements to regain sanitary living conditions. Water purification was a problem and the program's policy of no chlorine hurt the people there badly. It was a shitty situation. It didn't work out and there isn't much that can said for the Iraqi people's future other than Saddam and his party not being as "influential" in the country now. The Iraqi citizens now have the U.S. to protect them I suppose but it's one thing to believe in and be lead by an idea, but another to be able to plan for something appropriately without thinking of policy first and have it work out for the overall good of the people. Here's to the idea though and I hope the current Iraq situation works out because the U.S.A. could use a good friend in the future over there in the Middle East.