Thank You, President Clinton!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

Go over that again, libs: THREATS OF VIOLENCE LEADS TO PEACE?

Pssst: That actually works, Cold War and stuff…

Pssst: Munich, 1938.

Threats can temporarily lead to peace, but in the case of social welfare, the threat has to be forever. My contention is that it is not logically possible to have a permanent peaceful society based upon violence, where some members are drained for the benefit of others.

You will also not have a peaceful society if people see no future for themselves except to turn to violence.

What we pay in Europe in welfare costs, the US pays in law-enforcement and jails.

What do you prefer? Yes, it is a form of blackmail, but we either act civilized about it, or its open civil war.

Some ideas are immoral, or rather amoral, but they still work… [/quote]

I respect your intellect, but I believe you are making the same error as the Libs: You’re assuming that people in general will resort to violence if they don’t have their ‘bread and circuses’. True, they would be prone to this if simply left in the dark. If its explained to them and those with means are ASKED to help, the outcome might be far different.

I’m an optimist. I think people are basically good. Naive? Yeah, probably— bur also hopeful. I hope I live amongst civilised beings and not stampeding cattle. If its the latter, then we’re simply doomed as a species.

HH

82

[quote]JeffR wrote:

Why are you so focussed on Iraq?

reckless,

I must give the same advice to an anti-american that I give to the liberals: Don’t accuse others of being stupid if you cannot spell.

What does “focussed” mean?

JeffR

[/quote]

Focussed: being in focus or brought into focus
Also focused.

83

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
vroom wrote:
I think we should also be thanking Ronald Reagan for running from Lebanon without striking at the terrorists during his tenure.

He’s the one who taught the world that the US would run when bloodied (after saying he wouldn’t do so). Ask Osama, they played a clip of him on CNN talking about how that event helped shape is thoughts.

Reagan’s worst mistake was to not see the true nature of radical Islam.

He did not see Hezbollah or Iran for what they really are.[/quote]

Was that why he sold arms to Iran?

84

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Liberalism is simply evil, in its appeasement of evil.

HH
[/quote]

85

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Liberalism is simply evil,
HH
/quote]

omg SO EVIL!

86

[quote]TurboSSR wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Liberalism is simply evil,
HH
/quote]

omg SO EVIL!

[/quote]

Should we include in this LBJ’s Great Society Program (2 trillion dollars later, poverty is the same and black families are decimated)? Should we include how Social Security will bankrupt this country?

You’ve been sold a bill of goods, dude. You traded your freedom for ‘free’ false teeth and a $900/month cheque (the Heritage Foundation calculates that you’d be a millionaire except because of Social Security, if you invested the same money).

You’ve been robbed and tricked, and the worst part is, you think it was for your benefit.

HH

87

[quote]TurboSSR wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Liberalism is simply evil, in its appeasement of evil.

HH

[/quote]

Your silly little poster mentions the clean air and clean water act.

Since these were Nixon’s babies are you implying Nixon was a liberal?

88

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
Let them eat cake!

Let them be men! Let them stand up and face life ON THEIR OWN without a system of legalized blackmail, without nanny-government there to catch them if they fall.

The assumption of the liberals, like most savages, is that individuals only produce under threats. Liberals assume that capitalists are simply beasts who’ll plunder the poor at every opportunity (like Bill Gates?). Instead of relying on public charity, instead of trying to convince the wealth-producers that helping the poor is in their own interests, they believe that threats of violence will lead to peace. Go over that again, libs: THREATS OF VIOLENCE LEADS TO PEACE?

Is such irrationality even possible to these looters? Must be.

HH
[/quote]

I could care less if they ‘need to be men’. Every society has poor people.

89

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
TurboSSR wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Liberalism is simply evil, in its appeasement of evil.

HH

Your silly little poster mentions the clean air and clean water act.

Since these were Nixon’s babies are you implying Nixon was a liberal?[/quote]

Nixon was socialst by todays conservative standards.

FYI - Only congress can introduct bills to the floor for a vote.

The GOP had more to do with Clinton’s success as the executive.

90

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
“It wasn’t that difficult. Clinton gave the North Koreans $4 billion to construct nuclear reactors in return for the savages promising not to use the reactors to build bombs. But oddly, despite this masterful triumph of “diplomacy,” the savages did not respond with good behavior. Instead, they immediately set to work feverishly building nuclear weapons.”

         ---- Ann Coulter
             July 19th column

[/quote]

What do you call the act of giving instruction and resources, related to potential nuclear bomb making abilities, to a foreign country?

TREASON!

91

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
“It wasn’t that difficult. Clinton gave the North Koreans $4 billion to construct nuclear reactors in return for the savages promising not to use the reactors to build bombs. But oddly, despite this masterful triumph of “diplomacy,” the savages did not respond with good behavior. Instead, they immediately set to work feverishly building nuclear weapons.”

         ---- Ann Coulter
             July 19th column

What do you call the act of giving instruction and resources, related to potential nuclear bomb making abilities, to a foreign country?

TREASON!

[/quote]

uuummm…wrong, cos then giving stuff to Israel would be counted as treason.

trea?son Audio pronunciation of “treason” ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trzn)
n.

  1. Violation of allegiance toward one’s country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one’s country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
  2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.

So if NK was a hostile country then yeah, that would be treason. At the same time Bush recently wanted to give them lightwater reactors, that treasonous son of a bitch!!

92

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
“It wasn’t that difficult. Clinton gave the North Koreans $4 billion to construct nuclear reactors in return for the savages promising not to use the reactors to build bombs. But oddly, despite this masterful triumph of “diplomacy,” the savages did not respond with good behavior. Instead, they immediately set to work feverishly building nuclear weapons.”

         ---- Ann Coulter
             July 19th column

What do you call the act of giving instruction and resources, related to potential nuclear bomb making abilities, to a foreign country?

TREASON![/quote]

After 5 years of inaction there is more than enough blame to go around.

Nevermind that…lets invoke the name of the POS white trash that has not been in office more than 1/2 a decade.

93

[quote]Ren wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
“It wasn’t that difficult. Clinton gave the North Koreans $4 billion to construct nuclear reactors in return for the savages promising not to use the reactors to build bombs. But oddly, despite this masterful triumph of “diplomacy,” the savages did not respond with good behavior. Instead, they immediately set to work feverishly building nuclear weapons.”

         ---- Ann Coulter
             July 19th column

What do you call the act of giving instruction and resources, related to potential nuclear bomb making abilities, to a foreign country?

TREASON!

uuummm…wrong, cos then giving stuff to Israel would be counted as treason.
[/quote]

He is talking about nuclear weapons.

France helped Israel develop its first reactor.

Britian appears to have helped them develop the bomb.

94

Godammit HH, answer my questions! You keep squirming away from them. Why? I have yet to say it’s because you can’t answer them, but one more reminder without any notice and what else can I do but call your whole idea of conservatism a joke that falls flat in the face of real opposition. Don’t give me the “I forgot the thread” excuse, cuz that ain’t gonna fly. Defend your ideas, and defend your conservatism.

95

[quote]danmaftei wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
danmaftei wrote:
But there are universal standards of living that all human rights should have access to.

This is why liberalism must use force. What if I don’t WANT to provide someone else with a certain standard of living? A truly compassionate government would then try to CONVINCE me that it is in my interest to help the poor. Instead, they mouth slogans, get enough idiots to vote them into office, then point a gun at me and force me to pay.

What if I don’t? What if many like me decide to no longer cooperate where a gun is an argument?

You see, the liberal scheme cannot work. It must, by its own logic, become a dictatorship. And I’m compassionate enough to say that when you’ll scream ‘But I didn’t know it!’, you will not be forgiven. (Thanks Ayn!)

HH

Who’s forcing you to pay? Are you saying taxes are bad? Are you saying if you get shot in the face and you somehow survive but you have no “I got shot in the face” insurance you don’t want anyone to help you out?

If you think it’s tyrannical to provide those basic rights I mentioned to everyone in your nation through taxes, then get the fuck out of the US, off the planet, and go swallow a vacuum on Mars.[/quote]

Are THESE your questions, buried somewhere here? Ummm…okay…governments force me to pay, yes taxes are bad, and no I would not force someone else to pay me if I had the misfortune to be shot in the face.

I’m trying very hard to restrain myself from insulting you. Is this what you’ve been going on about, for the past several days (pm and so forth)? Aaaaarrrrgggghhhhh!

HH

96

I wrote:

"Who’s forcing you to pay? Are you saying taxes are bad? Are you saying if you get shot in the face and you somehow survive but you have no “I got shot in the face” insurance you don’t want anyone to help you out?

If you think it’s tyrannical to provide those basic rights I mentioned to everyone in your nation through taxes, then get the fuck out of the US, off the planet, and go swallow a vacuum on Mars."

Instead of responding normally, you said:

"Uh-oh, I think a liberal is starting to actually THINK. What I’ve been saying is causing him to feel uncomfortable with his world view and he’s lashing out at me.

Good. If lashing out at me means you also think, then go ahead…

…and careful what YOU swallow.

HH"

Then I went, as I have been for a while:

“You still didn’t answer my questions. Nor did I feel threatened by what you said. Granted, it did make me think, but it didn’t make me change my mind on what liberalism is. I merely got riled up. So go ahead and answer my questions, don’t avoid them.”

Alrighty? GO.

97

If I answer your questions and your response is: 'Quit ducking and answer the questions." then I am led to believe that you’re not being serious.

Okay, now its my turn to ask you: Do you believe that it is correct and moral for some members of a society to be enslaved because of THEIR ABILITY? Is intelligence here to serve stupidity? Do the ambitious exist for the sake of the lazy?

Think of someone here like Nephorm or Boston Barrister. Are they supposed to work for the benefit of those who didn’t want to be bothered?

Then, if so, how do you propose to make this work? THINKING cannot be forced. Creativity doesn’t work well under jail threats. (The person forced either shuts down or seeks escape).

Liberalism seeks to force those who can to help those who can’t (and hence the libs have power, their real motive). Liberalism is simply ‘nice’ fascism — fascism with a human face. Watch for the day when the mask comes off!

HH

98

1 - Who is forcing you to pay these horrible taxes? You can always leave the country, no one is making you pay.

2 - Are you saying taxes are bad? I’m getting the vibe from you that you feel we should have barely enough taxes to operate a small government, which leads me to wonder,

3 - what do you even want from a government? And finally,

4 - How should we respond and/or be prepared for a completely innocent child getting in an accident, and denied any healthcare because his family is too poor to get basic insurance?

Now as for your questions:

Define ability… but I know where you’re going with this, so for the sake of this argument, of course not.

No. The world isn’t fair, but that doesn’t mean that we can’t do everything in our power to make it more so, therefore, those who work hard should not be forced to help those who do not.

No, for the same reason as above.

I don’t understand… who doesn’t want to be bothered? Those helped? No one is being forced to be helped. I think I know how you meant to phrase this, but it came out poorly, so whatever, we’ll let it slide.

Now this is where you fall apart. Where does creativity come into the mix? Are you saying that intelligent men forced to pay taxes they don’t want to makes them less creative? Makes them shut down? You were going along logically and then you introduced a whole new concept (that of creativity) to the end result.

The idea that I think you’re trying to get across is that those who work hard for their money should not be forced to pay those who don’t. And they damn well shouldn’t. That’s not what liberalism is. My liberal idea of a welfare program isn’t to throw money down the streets of the Bronx. I don’t agree with taking money from one person just to give to another.

Where we differ is in our ideas of taxation, and frankly, I don’t think you even believe in taxation as a whole. Government needs taxes from all members of a community to function properly. Everyone is taxes so everyone can be equal. I don’t want to tax some millionaire 50% of his/her income and distribute it in food stamps. I want to pool all taxes from all US citizens and build stronger cities, better schools, create a better job industry, so that EVERYONE benefits. You think of taxation as a Robin Hood ideal of wealth redistribution. I think of taxation as a federal source of income from the people, to the people.

That’s what taxes are for. We don’t even need to get into a detailed discussion about the where/how much/why etc. of the tax spending, but can we agree that what I described is the basic idea behind taxes?

If you don’t even agree with that, then your idea of a working community is skewed. A nation cannot sustain itself without help in the form of taxes. If that’s “being forced” to you, then go live elsewhere.

99

[quote]Ren wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
“It wasn’t that difficult. Clinton gave the North Koreans $4 billion to construct nuclear reactors in return for the savages promising not to use the reactors to build bombs. But oddly, despite this masterful triumph of “diplomacy,” the savages did not respond with good behavior. Instead, they immediately set to work feverishly building nuclear weapons.”

         ---- Ann Coulter
             July 19th column

What do you call the act of giving instruction and resources, related to potential nuclear bomb making abilities, to a foreign country?

TREASON!

uuummm…wrong, cos then giving stuff to Israel would be counted as treason.

trea?son Audio pronunciation of “treason” ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trzn)
n.

  1. Violation of allegiance toward one’s country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one’s country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
  2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.

So if NK was a hostile country then yeah, that would be treason. At the same time Bush recently wanted to give them lightwater reactors, that treasonous son of a bitch!![/quote]

Here’s a clue, North Korea is not a friendly country to the US and Israel is. That is the difference.

100

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
Ren wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
“It wasn’t that difficult. Clinton gave the North Koreans $4 billion to construct nuclear reactors in return for the savages promising not to use the reactors to build bombs. But oddly, despite this masterful triumph of “diplomacy,” the savages did not respond with good behavior. Instead, they immediately set to work feverishly building nuclear weapons.”

         ---- Ann Coulter
             July 19th column

What do you call the act of giving instruction and resources, related to potential nuclear bomb making abilities, to a foreign country?

TREASON!

uuummm…wrong, cos then giving stuff to Israel would be counted as treason.

trea?son Audio pronunciation of “treason” ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trzn)
n.

  1. Violation of allegiance toward one’s country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one’s country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
  2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.

So if NK was a hostile country then yeah, that would be treason. At the same time Bush recently wanted to give them lightwater reactors, that treasonous son of a bitch!!

Here’s a clue, North Korea is not a friendly country to the US and Israel is. That is the difference.
[/quote]

Excellent. Why not draw up a geopolitical map of the world and color every country as either friendly (white obviously) or not freindly (black). That would make diplomacy and international relations much more simple.

No need to bother with the neutrals. You’re either with us or against us. Right?