SuperJerk

Funny how I can cite my source, but its not good enough, while Mike can throw a 800+ page book at us and tell us "its in there, look for it yourself" and be taken seriously.

Well, significantly better than allowing him to fall has played out. I'd respond if I had any idea what you were talking about. I'm not SURE if you've noticed --- but Iran is a bit of a theocracy. It was in most of the papers. I'm not SURE if you know what you're talking about, but Iran was a democracy until 1953, when the US overthrew their elected leader in a coup. It was in most of the history books. Yes --- and allowing the Shah to fall made the situation EVEN WORSE. Mossadegh was overthrown because he nationalized (or, in simple terms, stole) British oil interests. Really, not THAT complicated. -=Mike I see. I just didn't realize "allowed to fall", as you put it, was being used as a euphemism for "being overthrown by Islamic extremists who objected to his violent and bloody dictatorship". On the one hand we SAY we want the people of a country to determine their government for themselves, but then when they do we try to rewrite the outcome in our favor (see Vietnam). The original point, which I think you missed, was that the Iraqis may very well use their democracy to elect someone we find objectionable. Iran was the closest example of this already happening, when Iran's elected government began leaning towards socialism. What would happen in that case? Would the U.S. really be willing to allow the Iraqi people to run their own affairs, even if it meant they adopted policies that conflicted with our interests? Or would the U.S. government once again intervene and topple their government? Food for thought.

I had considered that, but decided to give the fellow the benefit of the doubt, since he was so keen on only using "actual" sources.

My point was that pork and personalities is what keeps people in power, not positions or policies. Of course both parties do it.

I found it. Its 858 pages long. http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf Care to be a dear and narrow the the search down for us by citing the page number you read that quote on, Mike? Shouldn't be hard for you to do since I'm sure you read the whole thing yourself.

Its been shown time and time again that most voters have no clue where the anyone really stand on the issues, but would rather base heir decision on how much they "relate" to a candidate (Presidential level) or on how much pork they can acquire for their state or district.

My point was that I've never even heard of YOUR source. Actually, you were the one bitching because I found information that contradicted your precious preconcieved notions.

Its been shown time and time again that most voters have no clue where the Republicans really stand on the issues.

That's a fine thing to say, considering that the Taliban was using a sporting event arena, namedly a soccer stadium, to carry out public executions in. If this Awad guy is coming to come into this argument, thinking his shit don't stink, he might as well "get right back on the boat." Since Nihad Awad probably isn't actually part of the Taliban, then "his shit" certainly does not stink. You might want to read up on CAIR. From Wikipedia: Try reading ACTUAL sources. Try reading the Sept.2003 report from the Senate Judiciary Committee on Terrorism, Technology, and Homeland Security Gee, I seem to have misplaced my copy.

Well, significantly better than allowing him to fall has played out. I'd respond if I had any idea what you were talking about. I'm not SURE if you've noticed --- but Iran is a bit of a theocracy. It was in most of the papers. I'm not SURE if you know what you're talking about, but Iran was a democracy until 1953, when the US overthrew their elected leader in a coup. It was in most of the history books.

Considering the fact that the WRESTLEMANIA name alone sells the PPV about as well as any given match, the ads are just supposed to let people know that its coming up and what the date is.

Well, significantly better than allowing him to fall has played out. I'd respond if I had any idea what you were talking about.

The story was about how the information was just released, which IS a current event.

The majority of the voters are not Republicans.

That's a fine thing to say, considering that the Taliban was using a sporting event arena, namedly a soccer stadium, to carry out public executions in. If this Awad guy is coming to come into this argument, thinking his shit don't stink, he might as well "get right back on the boat." Since Nihad Awad probably isn't actually part of the Taliban, then "his shit" certainly does not stink. You might want to read up on CAIR. They are an organization that is about as evil as NAMBLA. From Wikipedia: I see your point.

You are correct, sir.

This has Curtis LeMay's finger-prints all over it. If he wasn't involved, I'd be shocked. Suddenly the people who claim the US government framed Lee Harvey Oswald sound a lot more reasonable. After Operation: Ajax, nothing the US government did during the Cold War should surprise us.

That's a fine thing to say, considering that the Taliban was using a sporting event arena, namedly a soccer stadium, to carry out public executions in. If this Awad guy is coming to come into this argument, thinking his shit don't stink, he might as well "get right back on the boat." Since Nihad Awad probably isn't actually part of the Taliban, then "his shit" certainly does not stink.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/y2jerk/450.html My thoughts on Dean, from my blog last December.

Rather than starting a new thread for this, I thought this was related to the State of the Union Address, since it deals with Bush's proposals. http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/05/...t.ap/index.html Okay, maybe he left all of that out of his speech for a reason.

I guess after Limbaugh lost his hearing, he developed mental telepathy? Man, how I hate conservative talk radio. There's intelligent conservatives out there who use facts and logic to prove their points (George Will, William Buckley, William Safire). Then there's TV and radio talk show hosts that use exaggeration and ad hominems to assault the character of those they disagree with (Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly). I love revisonist message board posts that omit important facts like (a) we were at war with them at the time, because (b) they attacked us first.

WHUH? Its already out???? **runs to Walmart**

Was that ever really the plan? I figured they only had Triple H traded just so they'd have an excuse to have Triple H vs. Eddie later that night. They never actually planned on putting Triple H on Smackdown permanently, did they?