Oh Good Lord

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Typhoid, when I refer to pre-911, I was specifically referring to foreign policy. I thought that was pretty self-evident. I guess I could have used different terms, but pre-911 is just easier.

I know what you meant.
Thats why I said "not to quote you".
I too, thought it was pretty self-evident that I wasnt referring to you specifically.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

I know what you meant.
Thats why I said "not to quote you".
I too, thought it was pretty self-evident that I wasnt referring to you specifically.

Must have missed that part. My apologies.

[Jason1]

Congrats, Professor. Another stirring topic bringing up key Republican bull****!

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Jason1

Congrats, Professor. Another stirring topic bringing up key Republican bull****!

Wow.

Could you please explain to me how severely criticizing the Republican choice for Secretary of Defense is me bring up key Republican bull****? True, I delved into some Dem vs. Rep topics, but only after someone else took the coversation in that direction and I pointed out that it was off-topic.

The actual point of this thread is a severe criticism of Republican policy. So severe, in fact, that I think this policy could create dire consequences for the entire world. I hope you bothered to read the entirety of the thread first before responding in such a inflamatory manner. If not, you might have some egg on your face right now, beyond the fact that your comment was both dismissive and completely lacking in substance.

Also, if your main argument in politics solely rests on the opposing viewpoint being "bull****!", you might serve your party and yourself better by not voicing it.

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by Professor S

I hope you bothered to read the entirety of the thread first before responding in such a inflamatory manner.

Nope, cant say that I did. But I was really referring to your second post, the one replying to GM's comment anyways. Truth be told, the world will be a much better place now that the Democrats are in power. In fact, once our lame duck president is finally finished in 2008 or 9 or whenever, and we get Obama elected president, the United States will probably become so great, and the rest of the world will like us so much, that there will probably be dancing on the streets, not to mention world peace.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Jason1

Nope, cant say that I did. But I was really referring to your second post, the one replying to GM's comment anyways. Truth be told, the world will be a much better place now that the Democrats are in power. In fact, once our lame duck president is finally finished in 2008 or 9 or whenever, and we get Obama elected president, the United States will probably become so great, and the rest of the world will like us so much, that there will probably be dancing on the streets, not to mention world peace.

And you seriously think any of this will happen? Like it or not, America is still too racist of a nation to elect Obama. I'm talking to you, southern states. Obama will never carry the swing states he'll need to be elected. Regardless of race, I would love to hear something besides Tony Robbins-esque catch phrases from Obama. He talks a great game is a wonderful orator and motivator, but I haven't heard much substantive argument from him.

As for the world being a better place under Democrats... maybe. Who knows, the future hasn't happened yet and the Denocrats did elect conservative blue-dog reps. If recent history of Democratic leadership is any indicator, we'll pull back and forget anything ever happened. 10 years from now, we'll be attacked again and most likely this time with a nuclear device.

World peace? Regardless of Republican and Democratic control, that will never happen. Human beings are a violent, war-like people. In the history of civilization there has always been at least one war going on somewhere in the world. We will always fight one another and there is nothing you or I can do about it.

Your comments, while likely intended to get a rise out of me, are the common contention between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives think, while liberals feel. World peace would be wonderful, but logical analysis quickly brings the conslusion that world peace is an impossibility. So while conservatives recognize this fact and act in ways to try and protect themselves and their people, liberals refuse to apply logic and lessons learned in history and insist on believing that if we were just nice to everyone the world would be filled with lollypops, dandylions and free Phish concerts.

You can pick bewteen reality and idyllic fantasy. I pick reality, even if it lacks a sweet, bubble-gum center.

[Jason1]

Originally Posted by Professor S

As for the world being a better place under Democrats... maybe. Who knows, the future hasn't happened yet and the Denocrats did elect conservative blue-dog reps. If recent history of Democratic leadership is any indicator, we'll pull back and forget anything ever happened. 10 years from now, we'll be attacked again and most likely this time with a nuclear device.

So your blaming 9/11 on the Clinton Era? Please. You cant blame 9/11 on anybody. But you can blame the Bush Administration for how poorly they handled the situation. Instead of actually finding and capturing the person that is responsible for 9/11, they go and finish what daddy Bush started, which had nothing to do with 9/11. FACE THE FACTS: Hussien might have been a bad man, but he had NOTHING to do with what happened on 9/11. But hey, we got him right? While Osama runs free in the desert...

go watch Farienheit 911.