|
"The "politics of division" is kind of the norm in this country.
I disagree. Difference in political stances in the norm. Division is the realm of the modern Republican Party.
That's a good thing.
No, it is not a good thing, it is a bad thing. Democracy, pluralism, these concepts require cooperation and compromise. Those who would pursue division are antithetical to cooperation and therefore not good for democracy.
It would be a shame if everyone agreed with liberals, at least from a conservative perspective.
I’m not quite sure exactly what you mean. It would be a shame if everyone, including conservatives (spelled correctly, mind you) agreed with liberals? Why would that be a shame? And could you continue to call them conservatives if they did just that?
Perhaps you mean it would be a shame if there weren’t differences of opinion
And the GOP doesn't have a monopoly on that sort of thing.
The GOP doesn’t have a monopoly on what? On shame? On agreeing with liberals? On the politics of division? This sentence makes no sense.
Remember Bill Clinton?
Are you saying that Clinton engaged in the politics of division? If so, could you please cite examples of this. I am a liberal and always considered Bill Clinton too far to the right for my tastes. He governed very much to the middle and right. I don’t see how that could be called the politics of division, unless you were implying that he divided the liberals between the conservative leaning and the liberal leaning. Certainly, he didn’t drive a wedge between conservatives and liberals.
Now, on to the issues that you've raised in your Liberal Manefesto......
First off, trade is regulated. It is called a free market, and it works.
No, the free market is unregulated. That is the entire conservative agenda for the last 25 years, remove all regulations as they interfere with the free market. I prefer to call them protections rather than regulations. In order to protect people, we regulate business.
Now, this ‘free market’, it works for whom? Certainly the wealthy benefit when no protections are in place, when they are free to exploit anyone anywhere. The average person in the US and around the planet suffers though. It does not ‘work’ for them.
If you read the works of the first proponents of capitalism you will see that they understood completely that unrestrained capitalism, that is a market with no moral responsibility to fellow humans, was an evil and could never, in the long run, work.
Finally, I disagree with your concept of a free market. I do not see a free market at all. I see certain countries, certain economic classes and certain corporations given hugely unfair advantage over potential competition. Where exactly do you see this free market?
Who is it that you would like to impose tarriffs against?
There are many more ways of managing a national, or even global, economy that simple tariffs. Rather than “imposing tariffs”, sounds so punitive the way you put it, I would like to see unfair advantages to certain corporations removed to make the market fairer. That would be my first move.
China, perhaps?
Why, yes, since you mention it. In the 1990’s China dumped below cost apples into the US market. China was able to do this because they were using cheap labor and slave labor. They also did this in violation of US/China trade agreements. The result was that US apple growers were thrown out of business, the bulk apple market, wholesale for juice and applesauce and the like, was taken away from them because companies whose eyes were on maximizing profits rather than on protecting their fellow citizens and had no moral qualms about buying products produced by slave labor, bought those Chinese apples. Within three years, 75% of US orchards went out of business. Family farms that had been running and successful for over a hundred years.
Of course, our government wasn’t going to allow China to do this damage to US farmers, to violate trade agreements, to allow US companies to purchase these below cost apples, without a fight. They fined China $1 million dollars. As the Chinese had made several billion dollars doing this, the fine was not a problem for them.
Now, of course, China has raised the price of apples. Of course, they won’t lose market share because there are no US farmers to compete with them anymore.
So, yes, I would like to see tariffs against China for that reason among others.
I'm not crazy about dealing with communist China, but appearantly plenty of people in this country have no problem doing that.
Unlike you, I am not afeard of ‘communists’. I’m glad to know that there are still Cold Warrists out there beating the drum against the godless communists. I would hate to lose that quaint and charming political belief from the past. I have no problems ‘dealing’ with China. I have problems in dealing with China as if she were an equal with the US. China imprisons people for their political beliefs and then works them as slave labor. Of course slaves are cheaper than free people. That’s not a free market and that’s not fair trade.
Also, I do not agree with you that plenty of people have no problem with that. I believe that most people are unaware of the human cost of those inexpensive Chinese goods. Were they more aware, China would find these purchases diminishing. Of course, some of the biggest supporters and users of this unfair Chinese practice, such as Wal-Mart, make a concerted effort to move into a community and destroy any possible competition. Again by getting unfair advantages such as tax breaks. Once there is no competition the people have no ability to choose to purchase other than from China through Wal-Mart. Again, not fair trade and not a free market.
The difference between you and me is that if the rest of country wants to save a buck or two by shopping at Mao Mart, I'm content to let them spend THEIR money on whatever they damned well please. You think you know more about where your fellow Americans should spend their money than your fellow Americans do. Why not just butt the hell out of their business at let them buy what they want? Why deny them the opportunity to buy products that can be made cheaper elsewhere?
I most certainly would not tell my fellow citizens where they can and cannot spend their money. However, if they want to destroy their neighbors jobs, support slave labor and enrich the wealthy in an enormously slanted and unfair market place, I would at least like them to stand up and say so and not hide behind the “cheaper prices” gimmick. State clearly that you want your things and you want them cheap and you don’t care who it hurts or who dies in the process or the long-term damage it does to your country, you just don’t give a shit as long as you can get your things.
If you'd like to deny the working stiff blue collar types access to cheaper products because you think they ought to get off their assess and not play with consumer electronics or spend so much time in front of the tube, then go right on ahead and tax the piss out of imports.
I find it endlessly mind-numbing that the working stiff blue collar types have been hurt the most by the last 25 years of conservative rule and yet they seem to be it’s strongest supporters. You are working as hard as you are because your wages have gone down over the last 25 years. You are blue collar because the economic elites have eliminated any chance of upward mobility. You need to buy cheaper products because the US manufacturing base has been destroyed by those same neo-con conservative Republicans policies that favor the wealthy and treat the working man like dirt. Can you name anything they have done in the last quarter century that has helped you?
Why are you such a strong supporter of those who have contempt for you and have done everything in their power to take money out of your pocket and put it in theirs? What exactly do you have in common with the millionaires and billionaires and corporate giants? How are you benefiting from them being in power? I just don’t get how you can so consistently support your enemies. And I guarantee you, they are sitting around their estates shaking their heads at how stupid you must be to support them, how easy it was to fool you, how great it is to live in a time when you can steal a man’s legacy and have him thank you for it, when you can destroy the future for that man’s children and have him continue to vote for you.
Secondly, an oil-based economy might indeed be suicide. How about you show some personal leadership in this area and convert all of your synthetic piston seals in your guns to leather and use sperm whale oil instead of petroleum-based oil to protect the blued steel finish of your rifles and pistols? Sell your car and buy a bicycle. You can get off your computer, too, since a lot of petroleum is used to make the thing. You could go a step further by showing your disdain for the petrochemical industry by getting rid of your shoes that have any manmade materials in their construction and at the same time tell China to piss up a rope with your symbolic stand. You might have problems with your liberal friends from PETA, since your shoes will now have to be made out of leather and held together with glue made by animal rendering, so perhaps just running around in the nude would send a more effective and more unifying message......
An oil-based economy isn’t suicide, it’s just stupid and short-sighted. We will run out of oil. There is now question about that. Imagine the world with no oil and no gas. Really, I am serious. How do you transport all of those Chinese goods to the US market with no fuel? Planes, nope. Boats, nope. Hmmm. I guess you can’t. Of course, you could buy your shoes from the guy who makes them in your town except, oh yeah, you put him out of business 20 years ago. Say, how do you get food from the farm to the grocery store when there’s no oil? No trucks. No trains. Hmmm. I guess you don’t. Of course, you could buy you meat and veggies from your local farmers except you put them out of business.
Rifles? Pistols? Man, we’re talking bow and arrow. You are not using your imagination. You don’t realize who many millions upon millions of your fellow citizens are going to die before we work something out. You haven’t lived until you’ve seen food riots, cannibalism. When social order breaks down and there is no law.
Of course, realizing that we are going to run out of oil, we could be adult and start now to convert our economy over. We could prevent a collapse by planning for the future.
The reason why diesel doesn't sell here isn't because Ford and DC don't want to.
It is exactly because of busybody liberal do-gooders like yourself.
Doubt that? Visit a Jeep forum and look at all of the people clamouring for a diesel-powered Wrangler. Diesel would help automakers meet CAFE standards, so it isn't in their big, bad interest to keep diesel away from you.
I’m sorry, but your tone seems to indicate the doing good is somehow bad. Do-gooders are people who do good. Usually applied to people who are doing good for other people rather than for themselves. Diesel isn’t a solution to an oil-based economy. You are still not realizing the full implications of peak oil and the eventually drying up of all oil fields. You cannot manufacture vehicles without petroleum. If you can’t make them it doesn’t matter what fuel you want to use, you can’t. There aren’t any.
Individual automobiles will cease to exist. (Unless, of course, we begin right now to convert to some form of renewable fuel for them) There just won’t be any Jeep dealerships. In fact, the highways and byways will begin to disintegrate because we won’t be able to resurface them.
Again, you really need to have some vision here of the horrors of a catastrophic end to oil and stop talking nonsense about diesel.
The reason why diesel is hugely successful in full sized pickups and unseen in other personal conveyance is because full size pickups aren't required to meet the same emissions standards that lighter-duty vehicles do.
Yes, this is true. However, in order to do this, some humans must die. A certain number must die from the pollution created by the non-CAFÉ standard vehicles. More importantly, though, is the enormous number of human deaths from the effects of Global Warming. This could reach into the billions.
I guess I’m just a little old-fashioned to think that maybe we should try to save those lives. I guess that the busybody part of me.
I'm all for clean air, and I am so thankful that guys like former governor Jerry Brown had the foresight to give California the toughest air pollution and vehicle emissions laws in the nation.
I'd rather have clean air, and thank liberals for forcing that upon us.
Us? Us? I am part of us. Most people support restrictions on pollution. So most of ‘us’ are thankful.
Now that you got your way there, you have to live with the consequences, which some conservatives and auto industry types told you would happen.
Are liberals willing to lower California vehicle emissions standards for the greater common good?
It’s not for the common good, though. I would like to raise the standards. I would like to outlaw petroleum burning vehicles entirely.
Didn't think so. So stop bitching about diesel. Because the reason that diesel cars and light trucks haven't taken the market by storm is because they aren't clean enough to meet California emissions standards, which are adopted by other states outside of California. Here, our clean air laws work exactly like those punitive tarriffs that you are fond of imposing. The result is less choice.
No, there is still choice, however, the choice is not between low-emission vs. high-emission, the choice is between life and death. Between being adult and dealing with the realities of peak oil and global warming or carrying on as if there was nothing wrong. In that choice, California’s emissions laws are a joke. They don’t go nearly far enough.
In the business of our dollar being tied to oil,you have correctly identified a potentially serious problem. I am even willing to stipulate that the problem isn't a potential one, but a very real certainty.
But you liberals are all pissed off about the war in Iraq. You whine about WMDS that aren't there. You bitch about government lying to you while praising one of the biggest liars to ever hold public office in the form of Bill Clinton. And while you now recognize that the value of the dollar is tied to oil, your lack of capability for logical thought won't let you see that fighting a war with Iraq was a damned good idea, WMD or not, for this very reason.
Hmmm, illegally and immorally invading a sovereign nation so we can steal their oil and lying about it (terrorism, 9-11, WMD’s, spreading democracy) is just about the most idiotic thing I have ever heard. And would you please stop bringing up Bill Clinton? Jesus, the man lied about cheating on his wife, I’d do the same. He didn’t lie to the US, to Congress and to the world so that he could cynically steal the natural resources of an unarmed nation. His lie didn’t lead to a quarter million civilian deaths. Get a grip on reality, dude, and leave Bill back in the last century where he belongs.
When did we actually invade Iraq? When Saddam stated that he would accept payment for oil in Euros, rather than Dollars.
Wait, shouldn’t Saddam have been allowed to accept payment for oil in Euros? Isn’t that what a free market would allow? Are you saying that it’s only a free market if it helps us, otherwise it’s some sort of communist plot – oh, excuse me, terrorist plot? Gad, that’s pretty blatantly hypocritical, no?
If you think that this issue is big enough to radically revamp the basis of our entire economy, then one might argue that it is big enough to fight a war over.
No, peak oil and the eventual drying up of the wells are going to radically revamp the world. My idea of revamping our economy is to avoid the devastating impact of that change. Simply because oil is a dwindling resource, I don’t think that justifies our stealing it from other nations. How would you feel if China invaded and started pumping out all of the oil in the US and sending back to China?
No, an immoral act of stealing is immoral regardless. Unless you believe in moral relativism? In which case, you can change your morals depending on your own needs.
A liberal wouldn't though, because ultimately, a liberal has nothing worth fighting for.
Actually I am fighting for all humans on this planet. Not just myself, not just my buddies, everyone. I think that’s worth fighting for. Besides, just because I think it’s immoral to lie and cheat in order to start a war whose sole purpose is to steal another countries resources has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative. It’s simply morality.
We've got oil reserves in this country. I wonder whose idea it is to not drill for them?
Again, you retain this idea that if we steal from Iraq, or if we drive diesel, or if we drill in the Arctic, all of our problems will be solved. That is so shortsighted and so wrong.
It isn't those evil oil companies making all of those sick, disgusting profits. It is liberals in government, that's who. It is easier to bitch about a problem than do anything constructive to solve it. That is what liberals remind me of - a bunch of bitchy housewifes who lead unfulfilling lives and want everyone else to be as miserable as they are.
Hmmm… I take it you think housewifes (the word is housewives, by the way) are batches? That’s not a very charitable view. Especially as the conservative view is that it is those uppity liberal women who are out there in the workplace instead of in the home where they should be. So, most of those housewifes you think are bitches are conservatives, like you. Like your mother.
And yes, yes, yes, when liberals say “If we don’t stop doing that we are going to…” we may sound like we are bitching to you, however, we are pointing out potential dangers that we feel we should protect ourselves against. It sounds like whining to you because you don’t realize that there is really anything wrong. You are also seriously wrong saying we aren’t doing anything constructive to solve these problems. Quite the contrary, as you just pointed out complaining about the CAFÉ standards.
We have many ideas and many plans and would love to have an intelligent public discussion about them. However, the current group of conservatives has completely shut liberals from having a say in anything in this country. You are completely and totally in charge. So, when we complain about these minor problems like a quarter million dead in Iraq, you may think were just whining, but we don’t control the country, you do. Why don’t you do something about these problems, like maybe mentioning them or acknowledging they exist?
Here's a news flash for you. Oil winds up on the beaches of Ventura and Santa Barbara County whether you drill for it or not. The fact of the matter is that if you DID allow drilling, LESS OILY CRAP would wind up on the beach. The environment would be healthier and we'd have more oil to burn. Sounds like a winner to me, but I'm not a liberal....
Nor are you a very deep thinker. Again you have this view that if we get another 10 barrels of oil everything will be fine. Drill everywhere on the planet you want, it doesn’t change the problem. Oil on the beach, CO2 in the air, soot in the lungs, acid rain in the sky, and on and on and on. An oil based economy is the problem, not the present availability and price of oil.
Another thing that pisses me off about you libs.... You bitch constantly about everything under the sun. One of the things you bitch about is how old people get screwed and how teachers are too poor to retire. Well, who ultimately benefits from those insanely gross oil profits?
People who invest in oil stocks do. Folks like those who participate in government-run pension plans like CALPERS do. So how popular do you think it would be to screw big oil and teacher's unions, firefighters unions, and police unions, all at the same time?
Yes, the average teacher has huge funds invested in oil stocks. And besides, investing in stocks is a great thing, just ask the people who lost their shirts with Enron. Great. Consciously and intentionally ripping off the public does, temporarily, raise ones profits and the price of one’s stock. That doesn’t mean it is right or good and it certainly won’t last. The insanely gross oil profits will not ‘trickle down’ to the average stock holder anyway. Even the oil companies say they are plowing that money back into the companies, not into the stockholders pockets. Oh, yeah, a couple of billion goes in the pockets of corporate officers. Yes, that all really helps teachers and old people.
And thanks to you liberals, gasoline is something that government taxes the crap out of. The higher the price is at the pump, the more money goes into government pockets. So it isn't just big, bad evil oil companies that are hauling in the cash at the expense of the poor working man. Your big, bureaucratic, massively obese government is also cashing in on the deal, big-time.
Oh, please. All of the tax money we are all paying into the system is going in to the war industry and the pockets of the wealthy. This by the hands of the people you defend. The damage to the poor working man is not the taxes being taken, it’s that his income is going up, it’s that that money is not coming back to him in community services, it’s that he is not benefiting from those taxes, only the wealthy are. That’s the problem. And don’t get me started on the spending this administration is doing. They are spending us all into bankruptcy. Taxes are going to be irrelevant if the economy tanks.
So these inflated prices at the pump help pump bucks into everything from bilingual education to free medical care for illegal aliens -stuff that is sacrasanct to libs.
This is plain bullshit. All of those programs to help people are being cut to the bone or eliminated. Yet the taxes aren’t going down. Where is that money going? Into the pockets of the wealthy and the corporations. Not into communities, not to help people, not to the average working stiff.
This business of nationalized health care is a joke. It amazes me that with all of your hatred of "W" that you would trust your health to the idea that "W" or something similar would have a say in your medical treatment. Unless you think that your inferior liberal ideas will trump conservative ones, which may indeed happen. I think it would be ultimately hilarious if libs get their way, health care is nationalized, and then some heartless, penny-pinching GOP type denies some AIDS victim treatment on the basis that it costs too much.
Is that what you really want?
Actually, penny-pinching GOP types are already denying AIDS victims treatment. Not on the false basis that it costs too much, but because they don’t care. I would rather the GOP types, certainly the ones currently in power, are allowed to make any decisions at all. They have proven themselves incapable of governing and should not be allowed at the table with adults until they take remedial citizenship classes.
And yes I want universal health care. Every single person in this country should have compete medical care. Anything less is shameful. Now, how it’s done, well there are many ways. I would love to have that discussion with you. However, you must first agree that it is morally proper for all citizens to band together and gather their common resources to help one another. You must agree that it is shameful that we have people who cannot get health care. If you don’t, we have nothing to discuss as you are incredible selfish and heartless.
I didn't think so, but if you get your way with nationalized health care, you run the risk of getting exactly that -a bunch of uneducated, right-wing, neo-conservative, born-again Christians deciding who gets treatment for AIDS or anything else.
Hmmm…no comment on that one.
And just like you don't trust the GOP, I don't trust libs.
Actually, most Republican voters are okay people, most people are okay. However, the current crop of thugs that has taken over your party and is ripping off the public treasury and undermining the Constitution, well, yes, I don’t trust them. At all.
As if I want my health care ultimately determined by a guy who doesn't know what the definition of "is" is, or can't comprehend what does and does not constitute sex, or does or does not consititue violation of possession of controlled substance laws, or the "smartest woman in the world," who brazzenly displayed her intellect by marriage to that bozo.
Hmmm.. apparently you have a severe case of Clinton-itis. I never particularly liked Clinton. Far too conservative. You are apparently unaware of how a national health care program would work. It wouldn’t be run by the President. Of course, the current crop does think that the president should be running things like this, should be making the decisions. This is a new idea. Usually, government is run by career professionals. They are no political. They span all political spectra. Just like, oh say, a free market. However, they have professional competence and administrative skill to run a program like this.
Oh, yeah, this current crop, they don’t like career professionals. They drive them out. They ignore their advice. They don’t consult them. They appoint old friends and contributors. FEMA sure is working better now that we’ve gotten rid of the troubling career professionals who actually knew what they were doing.
Here's an idea.
How about you libs butt out of my life and leave me alone to live at as I see fit?
Because your selfish and shortsighted behavior is destroying the environment my kids live in. Because your political beliefs have already killed a quarter of a million innocent people and created millions who hate and despise me because I live in the same country as you. Because your leaders are destroying one of the greatest social contracts in history, the Constitution, for short term political and financial gain. Because your leaders will not leave me alone to live my life as I see fit.
How about letting me decide whether I want to keep driving my 20 year old Porsche or trade it in on a diesel car?
Hmm…whatever.
How about letting me decide between Kaiser Permanente, Cigna, or Blue Cross, or something else?
Because you only get that choice if 45 million other Americans get no choice and have no health care. It’s called common sacrifice for the common good. It’s the American way.
How about letting me decide whether I want to waste my money and screw over the American working man by buying a television with parts made in China in it?
In a free market with true fair trade, that television with the Chinese parts would cost more than an American television. If you really want a free market and really want fair trade, I’m all for you spending 10 times as much on a Chinese TV than an American one. Go for it.
Now, if you want an unfair market and unfree trade so that you can own a cheap TV, well, sorry, I’m against it. It’s just not American.
How about letting me decide what guns I am fit to own?
Personally, I don’t care what guns you own.
How about if worry about your own damned political party? Not only are you trying to run my life, now you think I need your help in fixing my political party!
I tell you what...... You give up Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Diane Fienstien, Charles Schumer, Dingle, and other brain trusts and I'll consider the wisdom of getting out of the pockets of Big Oil.
Hmmm.. you’ve completely missed the politicians who support my point of view. You must think that those people are liberals. That’s funny.
Better yet, why don't you libs divorce yourselves from gay rights groups, econazi groups, gun control groups, trial lawyers associations, anti-war protesters, people who want to legalize pornography, drugs, and so forth, then tell the teacher's union to pound sand, and maybe us conservatives will tell big oil to piss up a rope.
Again, exactly what do you gain by being the shill of Big Oil? When I support gay rights, I am supporting people and their pursuit of happiness. (I’m not sure what an econazi is, so I can’t respond to that. Funny, I’m a student of the NSDAP and their rise to power, but I’ve never heard of that branch.)
I don’t care about gun control one way or the other. I believe the reason we shoot each other in such horrendous numbers has nothing to do with the numbers or types of guns but has more to do with the ideas in the minds of people like you who think owning guns is somehow really really important.
Hmmm…trial lawyer associations. I guess I missed that class. Exactly what is the horrible problem with trial lawyer associations? Oh, the right to assemble. I think that’s somewhere in the constitution.
Anti-war protesters. Are you serious? I am an anti-war protestor. How could I divorce myself from myself? Oh, the right to free speech, I think that’s in the constitution also.
People who want to legalize pornography. Well, I think that adults should be allowed access to materials you are calling pornographic. I really don’t understand your objection here. Aren’t you the one who wants the government to leave them alone to live as you see fit? Also, making pornography illegal, isn’t that restricting free trade? And free speech?
Drugs. Well, there are legal drugs, lots of them. There are illegal drugs. Not so many of them. The US stance on ‘drugs’ is the most bizarre and hypocritical I could imagine. That alcohol is readily available, easily purchased and socially acceptable and marijuana is a controlled substance just makes no sense at all. If you can justify our idiotic stance on ‘drugs’ I’d be glad to hear it. Of course, again we are restricting what Americans can by. The government is interfering in your right to live your life as you see fit. So, your attitude on that is a confusing and contradictory as our drug policy.
Tell the teacher’s union to pound sand. What have you got against teachers? Or teachers unions? Perhaps you think our educational system under No Child Left Behind is doing just fine? Perhaps you think that owning the White House, the Congress and the Supreme Court has allowed you to fix all of those problems we horrible liberals created in education? Oh, and since you guys are in charge of everything, what do you care what the teacher’s union says?
Oh, you conservatives, at least this generation of conservatives – Barry Goldwater and Ike were a different breed than you (gad, even Nixon was) – will never break from Big Oil. It funds your engine. It pays for your party.
In other words, worry about the issues in your own damned party, and......
LEAVE ME ALONE. I DON'T WANT GOVERNMENT TO BE MY DADDY AND I DON'T THINK SOCIETY OWES ME ANYTHING EXCEPT THE RIGHT TO PURSUE HAPPINESS.
Society doesn’t owe you the right to pursue happiness. The Constitution says that you were endowed with this right by your creator. Unalienable. It’s not so much what society owes you, but what you owe society that worries me. You really are saying you don’t want government to be your daddy and you don’t think you owe society anything at all.
Well, you are certainly supporting the wrong people if you don’t want government to be your daddy. This current crop, your guys, have created the biggest, most expensive, and most intrusive government in the history of the world. The government interferes in your life way more now than under any liberal administration.
However, if you want validation that you can pursue your life freed from the burden of worrying about or caring about your fellow citizens, then you picked the right bunch as these guys in Washington don’t care about anybody but themselves. Of course, that means they don’t care about you either, but I’m sure you’ll overlook that come Election Day.
And it would make me happy if you libs would confine your bitchy, busibody attitude and your penchant for telling other people you think are stupider than you how to run their lives to PTA meetings and such.
PTA meetings are small local politics. This is large national politics. No difference except the number of participants and the gravity of the decisions.
You know what? I do think you are stupider than me. I started out trying to simply argue my point of view. But you have convinced me you really have no grasp of economics, you have no grasp of globalization, you have no real understanding of history, you don’t seem to grasp the fundamentals of American democracy, you are totally ignorant of the rest of the world, you have a moral gap concerning the welfare of your fellow humans and you are completely oblivious to the fact that you are supporting people who despise you and use you and care no more for you than those dead bodies floating in New Orleans. I think that qualifies as stupider than me.
RANT OVER"
Ahh…but my rant has just begun!
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(710 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
