DaVinci

I find it a shame someone as "enlightend" as you claim to be holds such prejudeces. Are Blacks breed to be lazy also? Maybe you are not welcomed by the Republican party since you seem to attack people a bunch? And maybe since you admit to not like them, they don't tend to want to have you around? HAHAHAHAHA. Then maybe the left works off only insulting others?

Well at least you admit you do it....Kinda makes trying to dscuss anything with you pointless however.

If that came from me to someone else...Would you consider that an insult or attack? The remainder of your post is quite good and I agree on many counts. Points of contention A good amount of what Bush was told was standard chicken little "The sky is falling". I am sure we had intel about attacks being planned in the US. However, we have those pieces of intel ALL the time. And some people are raging against Bush for the actions he does to try and protect the US. An example is the wire tapping without legal warrant. Now, you can claim that the wire taps are bad or not, but you must admit that the reason was good...To try and prevent future attacks. But many do not bother to look at it that way and focus on how Evil Bush is, but if an attack happens on his watch again, or even close after he leaves some will crucify him for not doing enough. That is a really bad position to be in. Try and do something and get called evil, or do nothing and be held at blame. One thing I can give Bush credit for is it seems to me that he does what he thinks is right no matter how others think of him for it. I think we are sucking due to the very nature of the situation. Fighting an insurgency is almost never going to work. As for Iraq not being necessary, several other with much more knowledge than either of us thought it was...Kerry, Clinton ect. Unless you wish to admit that maybe they just voted the popular opinion and never bothered to research and make a choice on their own? (Which is EXACTLY what I feel they did BTW). Agree. But don't you think that is the carrot does not work , maybe the stick should be tried? Disagree. One could say that some think you either hate Bush of you are an evil war monger with ties to Halliburton. Both sayings are not true, but people on here do not seem to get that. If you would admit that both sides do exactly that I would agree. Both parties have people that talk that way. There are some on here that if you even think of saying anything against them, they try to belittle you or insult you. Add in starting to call anyone that disagrees with you as a Fascist, and I would agree. I would also like to point out that YOU mentioned the Blowjob first!

1. I am not your Cupcake. I very much doubt I would like to BE your cupcake since you seem to strike at anyone that does not agree with you. 2. I find it funny you took a bit from my thread where I showed how you claimed to not bash, then went and started bashing. And your response was nothing but more bashing. At least you atmitted it this time.

Cute, but I mean one guy gave a pretty good story of HIS military EXP and you responded with "I can read the contempt for gays in your wriitings. " I can't sense anything bad about gays in his writtings. How do you? What clued you into his deep secret hatred?

what I loved was the first poster asked a really good question and I thought it was quite open and honest with no bias at all. Then we had tons of crap thrown in from one side with no one really answering the question asked...To be honest Amazon did answer, but it was quite laced with attacks on the right. Why must every question be used as a way to attack the "bad side"?

From this, I think it is clear you never went to basic either. Or maybe you just forgot what it was like. Quote

That is not true, the average republican is as sick of the idiots breaking the law as the most liberal person.

You think ignoring them worked? Supporting them didn't So is terrorism. Ignoring the words of the people who claim to be your enemy is not very smart either. Who would know better why they hate you and wish you dead than the ones that claim to hate you and wish you to die?

No, but your story, and others, is that Clinton rocked and Bush did all the bad things. Not really, but it is what you and others sure seem to say. Well you have one bit right, it did happen on Bush's watch. But I would have to say that US policy for years lead to the miss. You wish to blame only Bush however and obsolve Clinton for his sins. Again, I blame Bush AND Clinton...You only want to blame Bush. If you mean "democratic" as those that vote...Yeppers. But if you mean "Democrats" as in the party? Nope. But even you will admit, I hope, that if the people who voted to allow the use of force voted "no" , the war would have been delayed or not have happend. But I love how you ignore the simple facts that public opion for the war was high and the democrats voted the popular way. And now that it is popular to oppose it...They oppose it. Now, if you care to debate, not try to belittle. I'd love to discuss this. But you have several times in just this post made statements that are not even close to my posted views.

Sticking your head in the sand will not make the bad people go away.

Do a search....It was supported, even by many in congress. You can debate if they were lied to, but not the fact it was supported. In fact it was not until June 2004 that the public opinion started to turn. Christian Science Monitor - November 21, 2005 editionhttp://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1121/p01s02-usfp.html Which goes to show what I am saying, people supported the war, and now are growing sick of it....But they did support it. The graph at the bottom of that source shows intial opposition was around 24% it has since grown to over 50%. Which goes to show that those who did support it, are now sick of it. The source does a good job of explaining why even. W got the start of a recession from the dotcom bust when he took office, that and the 9/11 attacks were both not W screw ups. Edit also please look at this poll from USA Today/Gallup Poll. Oct. 6-8, 2006. N=1,007 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3. "In view of the developments since we first sent our troops to Iraq, do you think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, or not?" From 3/03, 23% said it was a mistake, 75 % said it was not. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Sept. 21-Oct. 4, 2006. N=1,804 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3. RV = registered voters. "Do you think the U.S. made the right decision or the wrong decision in using military force against Iraq?" 3/03 71% said it was the right decision. source:http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

Not a chance.

I agree, but find it funny that many on the left don't agree while Bush is in office, but did when Clinton was. Same can be said of the flip side as well. But my point is simply if you want to blame the bad on him, maybe he should get credit for the good as well?

You mean like all the Dems that voted to allow the use of force, voted for the patriot act ect and then flipped when it was no longer popular? Nothing new here folks, people both left and right voted for the popular thing and now that it lost it's shine are voting popular again against it.

Nah, Please point out an example. I will point out your hypocrisy in one second. Then you say RIGHT after...: You say you don't Bush bash...Then you do it! Thats just priceless.

I liked this one: The thing is if you recall a few years ago it WAS the popular thing. So we have a President that does not decide policy based on the fickle popularity polls. The polls back then supported going to Iraq. I would rather have a Leader that does not just follow polls but does what he thinks is correct. Also: The unemployment rate fell unexpectedly to a 5-year low, as new jobs increased and hiring in each of the two prior months was revised up. Wages rose, but productivity was flat. Is this his fault as well? Really, you may not like the guy, and you may hate his calls. But, he does do what he thinks is right and not waiver with the flow of public opinion. And if you are going to blame him for all the wrong that happens in office....How about showing some love for the things that went right?

What are you doing here?

I am going to be really glad when the Dems are in power and things are still screwed up. It will be great to watch the left be on the defensive for a while.

Yes, but then to claim that others are mindwashed screams of hypocrisy. A bad source is a bad souce no matter WHY you use it. When all you do is make claims about how others are blind and lockstep with others....Its really funny to see you do the SAME.

You have quoted and posted sites as references that are very left leaning before. So please do not claim to be balanced when it suits you. As for my news sources...I tend to avoid any sources with agendas like Newsmax and Moveon or the morons like Rush or Al Franken. I also tend to watch/listen to sources that actually differ in my leanings. So I listen to NPR and the BBC quite a bit. You will also notice I don't automaticly attack anyone that disagrees with me.

OK, but my post was about people blaming Bush for NK getting the bomb. And you knew that. So while I agree that one man is responsible, I would hope you would agree that man is Kim, not Bush. And that the failures that lead to this is long and from both parties. I fail to see a good side to NK having nukes. I fail to see anyone having them as good, but some countries are better suited than others. Countires with crazy leaders (NK, Iran come to mind...I am not crazy about Pakistan either) seem worse.

If not Moveon, then any other number of left leaning sites. Sorry if I did not pick the *exact* one. The extremists attacked us before George was in power....So that theory is shot. As for NK and the nukes. Like I said, the list of people that failed to stop that is long and does not start with "W".

You are a big guy....That would work for you. A small woman it may not work as well. The thing with weapons is they require some training to use. A small stick can be a great weapon in the hands of someone that knows how to use it. But in a high stress situation training is required to use any weapon and some weapons are easier to effectively use than others. If I have a short time to train someone for defense I pick an easy to use weapon that will still be effective. In my house (No children) I have a loaded S&W model 65 "Lady Smith" (Means small grips) http://shooterssupply.org/gundetail.aspx?gunid=122 Mine has the enclosed internal hammer (Bodyguard). Making it a good carry weapon since the hammer cannot catch on anything. It is double action only which means a higher trigger pull force, but not enough to matter. Simple and easy to use. No safety, but the only way to fire it is with a good amount of trigger pull. Chambered with .38 hollow point it has stopping power, but little risk of over penetration. That being said, the rule in my house is that the door gets locked to the bedroom, the gun and PHONE are grabbed and run into the bathroom. Lock the bathroom door, call 911 get into the tub and point the gun at the door.

I would agree with alcohol as well. Question: What is the alcoholic rates in countries that allow children to drink with their parents?