25 reasons to vote Democrat

damnewc said:
The reason people are insulting me is because I chose to paste that onto the GB of Lit. Insults abound when there is a dirth of reason.

That's true. People are insulting you because you're the kind of person who would use things like pedophilia for political gain.

damnewc said:
You are British. Whose picture is on your money?

There are lots of people on Canadian money. Mainly former Prime Ministers.
 
Drinking Cap said:
That's true. People are insulting you because you're the kind of person who would use things like pedophilia for political gain.



There are lots of people on Canadian money. Mainly former Prime Ministers.
How come you guys can't make a real quarter? There's nothing worse than needing a quarter for a vending machine and only having a canadian one. You people suck!
 
Drinking Cap said:
That's true. People are insulting you because you're the kind of person who would use things like pedophilia for political gain.

And what office am I running for?
 
KRCummings said:
How come you guys can't make a real quarter? There's nothing worse than needing a quarter for a vending machine and only having a canadian one. You people suck!

You think that's bad, try tipping one of our strippers with a loonie.
 
damnewc said:
I do. I would love to save the world.
Do you reckon they want to be saved?

I tend to see everything on a personal level. No matter how screwed up my life may be, unless I ask someone directly for help, their advice, no matter how well-meaning, is only going to make me mad. And if someone came in and said, "Lavared, I'm going to fix up your life for you because I know what's best." I would be beyond livid.
 
Drinking Cap said:
Karl Rove does many things for political gain despite never running for elected office.

As do many people. However, I am not attempting to make political gains. Just stir up some shit. Which it would seem I did. :D
 
damnewc said:
As do many people. However, I am not attempting to make political gains. Just stir up some shit. Which it would seem I did. :D
No, all you did was get a bunch of people to not like you. Not really much of an accomplishment.
I do that every day without making threads about it.
 
Lavared said:
Do you reckon they want to be saved?

I tend to see everything on a personal level. No matter how screwed up my life may be, unless I ask someone directly for help, their advice, no matter how well-meaning, is only going to make me mad. And if someone came in and said, "Lavared, I'm going to fix up your life for you because I know what's best." I would be beyond livid.

I understand that. But, now I have to go. My lovely wife is taking my keyboard away. She has real work to do.

Love to all, and many of you I love twice as much as you desrve.
 
Lavared said:
Okay.

This is a somewhat but not 100% related question. Do you believe that our country has the right to act as policeman (which is the best word I can come up with but it isn't exactly what I'm trying to say) to the World? Do you believe that our country has the obligation to do so and if so why or why not?

Sorry about the school essay-sounding question but I am genuinely curious as to your thoughts.
NO, I do not think we should be the worlds policemen.

Lava, as far as war is concerned, I think like Pat Buchanon.... You never go to war unless it's in your national interest...... as I saw it, Iraq was not in our national interest.

But let's say Castro was building a nuke..... that would be in our national interest.

Keep in mind, that many Dems and Pubs think we should go into Darfur, Sudan, because these tribes are being killed by the 100's of thousands.

Going into Sudan would not be in our national interest. However, many people think we should go in for humanitarian reasons.

What's your take on that??????????
 
garbage can said:
NO, I do not think we should be the worlds policemen.

Lava, as far as war is concerned, I think like Pat Buchanon.... You never go to war unless it's in your national interest...... as I saw it, Iraq was not in our national interest.

But let's say Castro was building a nuke..... that would be in our national interest.

Keep in mind, that many Dems and Pubs think we should go into Darfur, Sudan, because these tribes are being killed by the 100's of thousands.

Going into Sudan would not be in our national interest. However, many people think we should go in for humanitarian reasons.

What's your take on that??????????
If you're gonna do one then you gotta do the other. Anything else is hypocritical.
How many times in the last 20 years have we gone into a country because we're told that they need/want our help? Yet we conveniently ignore the many countries who need it worse.
 
KRCummings said:
1...If you're gonna do one then you gotta do the other. Anything else is hypocritical.
2...How many times in the last 20 years have we gone into a country because we're told that they need/want our help? Yet we conveniently ignore the many countries who need it worse.
1....My thoughts are.... no war unless it's in our national interest...period.
How is that being hypocritical?

2....KR, we should not have been in Yugoslavia..... Their genocide was not our problem.

As said before, we should not be in Iraq.

We should not be in the Sudan.

Let's take Vietnam..... It was thought that it was necessary to stop creeping communism....As such, in our national interest. Remember the cold war was still on.

I agree, intervention in the Sudan would be a noble cause...... the question is..... should we do it..... What's your call?
 
garbage can said:
1....My thoughts are.... no war unless it's in our national interest...period.
How is that being hypocritical?

2....KR, we should not have been in Yugoslavia..... Their genocide was not our problem.

As said before, we should not be in Iraq.

We should not be in the Sudan.

Let's take Vietnam..... It was thought that it was necessary to stop creeping communism....As such, in our national interest. Remember the cold war was still on.

I agree, intervention in the Sudan would be a noble cause...... the question is..... should we do it..... What's your call?
Wasn't saying you were being hypocritical, our government is.
I think if there is genocide then any country that is able to help, should. There should not be world policemen but any country who claims to be civilized should be honor bound to help those who cannot help themselves.
 
garbage can said:
Going into Sudan would not be in our national interest. However, many people think we should go in for humanitarian reasons.

What's your take on that??????????
Going into Somalia didn't work out too well for us.

Addressing both your and KRC's points... I do not think the job of our military is to act as a humanitarian aid organization. Their job is to defend us against those who would overtake or destroy us. I want them to be tougher than nails; so tough that the very thought of going up against them fills the hearts of those who would be our enemies with dread.

If we have given our word to another country that we will help them in time of need (as we have) then we must keep that word and render assistance to them when requested and as specified in the terms of our agreement or give up forever any thought of being decent and trustworthy.

When Washington warned of foreign entanglements he was absolutely correct but the World was much larger then. Now it may be impossible for us to avoid them because they will come to us; we need not seek them out. I wish this were not so but it is the reality of the modern world.

It is difficult to see some of the horrors that people groups inflict on one another and not want to run in and "fix" everything like the cavalry riding over the hill with bugle blowing. But to use your example of Sudan, the situation is so complex that it is beyond our ability to fix. Their hatreds lie deep. They each earnestly believe themselves to be on the side of right. We can not come in from afar and fix the result of generations of problems quickly and the American people have proven that they have little patience with protracted military engagements.
 
Lavared said:
Going into Somalia didn't work out too well for us.
Backing the insane murdering warlords against the islamic government may have something to do with that.

Addressing both your and KRC's points... I do not think the job of our military is to act as a humanitarian aid organization. Their job is to defend us against those who would overtake or destroy us. I want them to be tougher than nails; so tough that the very thought of going up against them fills the hearts of those who would be our enemies with dread.
Sorry to break it to you, but Iraq may just be the final nail in the coffin of respect for the US military.

If we have given our word to another country that we will help them in time of need (as we have) then we must keep that word and render assistance to them when requested and as specified in the terms of our agreement or give up forever any thought of being decent and trustworthy.
The US has also signed treaties at the UN.

When Washington warned of foreign entanglements he was absolutely correct but the World was much larger then. Now it may be impossible for us to avoid them because they will come to us; we need not seek them out. I wish this were not so but it is the reality of the modern world.
The present administration said it was going to be insular when it was elected. Events, dear boy.Events.
 
Lavared said:
Going into Somalia didn't work out too well for us.

Addressing both your and KRC's points... I do not think the job of our military is to act as a humanitarian aid organization. Their job is to defend us against those who would overtake or destroy us. I want them to be tougher than nails; so tough that the very thought of going up against them fills the hearts of those who would be our enemies with dread.

If we have given our word to another country that we will help them in time of need (as we have) then we must keep that word and render assistance to them when requested and as specified in the terms of our agreement or give up forever any thought of being decent and trustworthy.

When Washington warned of foreign entanglements he was absolutely correct but the World was much larger then. Now it may be impossible for us to avoid them because they will come to us; we need not seek them out. I wish this were not so but it is the reality of the modern world.

It is difficult to see some of the horrors that people groups inflict on one another and not want to run in and "fix" everything like the cavalry riding over the hill with bugle blowing. But to use your example of Sudan, the situation is so complex that it is beyond our ability to fix. Their hatreds lie deep. They each earnestly believe themselves to be on the side of right. We can not come in from afar and fix the result of generations of problems quickly and the American people have proven that they have little patience with protracted military engagements.
KR.........your statement about opens a little can of worms, Saddam was commiting genocide against the Kurds.

As for world policemen, I suppose a case can be made that the UN handle the problems.... I.E. Darfur.......... with equal input from all the nations in the U.N...... on a per capita basis.


Lava......Good post, I agree with just about everything.... and yes, the governments job is to protect us.

This brings up a multitude of problems.... what do we do if our oil supplies are cut off? This certainly is in our national interest.

The conservatives believe we should be self sufficient in our energy needs.... yet, we are not allowed to drill for oil and natural gas, or build nuke plants, coal plants, refineries etc etc.

I'm now rambling, and I have to get to a doctors appointment.

See you guys later.
 
SeanH said:
Sorry to break it to you, but Iraq may just be the final nail in the coffin of respect for the US military.

Until you need us to come save your Island again.
 
wow, i didn't know they made morons -this- moronic anymore. live and learn, i guess.
 
Back
Top