He didn’t call you a racist, he suggested you like to pin blame for issues in various areas.
However, when you alluded that mexicans crossing the border could be compared to locusts or cockroaches, you did set yourself for people to interpret that as a racist statement. Do you remember saying that or is this a job for the search engine so that you can have your memory refreshed?
At the same time, you’ve gone and shown how civil you are by calling him a “bitter fucking loser”, however the hell you have chosen to define that.
Although you argued against it, I think you are proving my point for me. The rabid right are very very uptight when their own tactics are used against them.
What’s good for the goose isn’t good for the gander?
–
Zeb, proof comes in things like the fact that the administration is adjusting it’s stance or statement on how it will deal with any leaks.
Originally the White House stated that anyone involved in leaks would be fired. This was made clear by the gonad that speaks for the president on several occasions.
Now, as things progress, this has been changed to a statement that firing will only occur if illegal actions are proven. This is a far cry from the moral standards the White House has told us they would uphold.
You may not consider this proof, but the statements made before and after are a matter of public record. You can go and look them up, or probably read this thread and see them quoted or discussed.
Your view of those facts, the alteration of the statement, may be different, but at the same time, it is a very good example of how and why I form my opinion of the administration. Cheney swearing during hearings is another reason.
Both of these issues are known public records. The fact that the administration allowed and presumably set the tone for how prisoners are to be handled, and did not even attempt to act above the rest of the world, but simply fell all the way down to allowing torture or extradition to countries that allow torture, is not something I can respect.
Falling for Chalabi, and thinking that a liberated Iraq would be a cakewake, throwing away the lives of young soldiers on a daily basis for something that nobody can define. Wait, today it is the quest for democratization and freedom in the middle east.
The railroading of senators to cast votes based on the threat of future negative attacks concerning patriotism. The use of the swift boat vets tactic, which was the epitome of low class… my god, did you want proof?
You don’t have to believe these items represent proof, but they are the foundation of the republican machine, which idiots like Newt and DeLay and so on, getting chastised constantly for failing to follow ethics guidelines.
Is that proof enough? You can interpret those events differently than I, but I see a morally bankrupt republican party that is playing hardball, thinking the ends justify the means. It is morally repugnant.
Hopefully, the next time republicans lose, the democrats will play a cleaner game and I won’t be developing the same sense of disgust that I currently have for the republicans and their wilfully blind cheerleaders who are willing to piss away the freedoms their forefathers fought and died for.
Look, think, form an opinion, and don’t try to discount peoples opinions with mere talking points.
Arguing that X (such as Clinton) did Y, does not negate any of the viewpoints. Saying Z (such as Islamofascists) are worse, does not in any way change the fact that we should do better. Try something real, instead of some republican diversionary and discrediting tactic.
Do so, and your comments won’t be worthy of insult.
