Air France? Ptui!

Stephen Farrow writes:

: "The assumption that those who fail to share their
: views are ignorant is a uniquely liberal conceit."

You're proving my point. If you'd actually bothered to pick up a
newspaper at any point in the last four or five years, you'd know
that your ****-in-chief is a complete failure *as a conservative*.

More vacuous liberal namecalling. Can't you people do any better
than that? (Well, I suppose that if you could, you wouldn't be
liberals.)


True conservatives should boot him out of office simply for his
disastrous running of your economy,

You mean the economy that was in a recession when he inherited it
from Clinton, but has recently hit record-high Dow numbers? *That*
economy? Just checking...


never mind his dragging you into an illegal and unjustifiable war.

What do you mean, an "illegal" war? Every nation-state has the
right to do whatever is necessary to protect its national security,
even if in defiance of the sainted *cough* United Nations. We gave
you on the Axis Of Weasels every opportunity to play ball with us, but
you wouldn't do it. Now you're ****ed off that we said, "Okay, to hell
with you, then." Too bad. You had your chance.

As for "unjustifiable," the war is plenty justifiable to anyone who
isn't doing the intellectual equivalent of sticking his fingers in
his ears and saying "LA LA LA -- I can't hear you!"

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/L...to_andy_rooney



Geoff

--
"A horse show? Why the hell would Christopher Reeve
wanna go to a horse show? That's like Jews going to
an oven sale." -- Howard Stern

Geoff Miller wrote:
Stephen Farrow writes:

: "The assumption that those who fail to share their
: views are ignorant is a uniquely liberal conceit."

You're proving my point. If you'd actually bothered to pick up a
newspaper at any point in the last four or five years, you'd know
that your ****-in-chief is a complete failure *as a conservative*.

More vacuous liberal namecalling. Can't you people do any better
than that? (Well, I suppose that if you could, you wouldn't be
liberals.)


True conservatives should boot him out of office simply for his
disastrous running of your economy,

You mean the economy that was in a recession when he inherited it
from Clinton, but has recently hit record-high Dow numbers? *That*
economy? Just checking...

OK, I get it, you're a true Republican - you really *don't* have
anything better to fall back on than the tired old "Blame Clinton" mantra.

If Bush has done such a great job of managing your economy, why is the
US dollar now worth considerably less against other currencies than it
was under the previous administration?

--

Stephen

You know? Recapture your godhood and unleash Armageddon, and all of a sudden
everyone wants to be a part of the inner circle.

"Stephen Farrow" wrote in message
...
Geoff Miller wrote:
Stephen Farrow writes:

: Why shouldn't I be?

I see. You've never read a newspaper.


"The assumption that those who fail to share their
views are ignorant is a uniquely liberal conceit."

You're proving my point. If you'd actually bothered to pick up a
newspaper at any point in the last four or five years, you'd know that
your ****-in-chief is a complete failure *as a conservative*. True
conservatives should boot him out of office simply for his disastrous
running of your economy,

Ahhh yes, some disaster that record stock market.

"Stephen Farrow" wrote in message
...
Geoff Miller wrote:
Stephen Farrow writes:

: "The assumption that those who fail to share their
: views are ignorant is a uniquely liberal conceit."

You're proving my point. If you'd actually bothered to pick up a
newspaper at any point in the last four or five years, you'd know
that your ****-in-chief is a complete failure *as a conservative*.

More vacuous liberal namecalling. Can't you people do any better
than that? (Well, I suppose that if you could, you wouldn't be
liberals.)


True conservatives should boot him out of office simply for his
disastrous running of your economy,

You mean the economy that was in a recession when he inherited it
from Clinton, but has recently hit record-high Dow numbers? *That*
economy? Just checking...

OK, I get it, you're a true Republican - you really *don't* have
anything better to fall back on than the tired old "Blame Clinton" mantra.

And you, no doubt, where like all the others who proclaimed Clinton (and
Rubin's) genius when the market ballooned out of control. And that was with
$17 crude.

If Bush has done such a great job of managing your economy, why is the
US dollar now worth considerably less against other currencies than it
was under the previous administration?

If you don't understand how foreign exchange rates work and what determines
them, we can suggest several decent texts for study.

(Geoff Miller) wrote:


Padraig Breathnach coughs up a lung oyster:

Go peddle you distortions to idiots who are prepared to buy them.

If they're really distortions, then you shouldn't have any qualms
about pointing out specifically _why_ they're distortions, should
you?


Rubbish. He misrepresented what I said. That's all.

How? You can't say, can you? My morning flatus was more substantial
than your ridiculous posturing.


I do not owe him or you any clarification.

Let the record show that Padraig is unable to defend his position,
and therefore forfeits the debate. Poor little fellow...

"LOO-zer! LOO-zer!"

More vacuous liberal namecalling. Can't you people do any better
than that?

--
PB
The return address has been MUNGED
My travel writing: http://www.iol.ie/~draoi/

Sancho Panza wrote:
"Stephen Farrow" wrote in message
...
Geoff Miller wrote:
Stephen Farrow writes:

: Why shouldn't I be?

I see. You've never read a newspaper.

"The assumption that those who fail to share their
views are ignorant is a uniquely liberal conceit."
You're proving my point. If you'd actually bothered to pick up a
newspaper at any point in the last four or five years, you'd know that
your ****-in-chief is a complete failure *as a conservative*. True
conservatives should boot him out of office simply for his disastrous
running of your economy,

Ahhh yes, some disaster that record stock market.

Quiz for you. What happens when you increase spending and cut taxes?

--

Stephen

A doodle. I do doodle. You too -- you do doodle, too.

Sarah Banick wrote:

Don't you understand?
The Russians were protecting the Russians
The Americans were protecting Europeans.
We weren't in danger of a German attack.

Nothing is ever that simple.

We were in danger of losing our major trading partners. All wars are
basically fought over economics.

What??????????????

We fought Japan because of economics? Attacking Pearl Harbor had
nothing to do with it? We fought Germany over trading partners?
Attacking our shipping and invading our allies had nothing to do with
it? Wars are primarily fought over religion and territorial conquest
and self defense when attacked.

Padraig Breathnach wrote:
"Tchiowa" wrote:

Padraig Breathnach wrote:
Not so much that, as your misrepresenting my position so as to make
your point.

Well, here is the entire conversation:

******************

Someone posted (not you):
Wouldnt it be a lot easier to just keep your cotton picking bloody nose
out of other countries business instead.

To which MrTravel replied:
Not saying we are alwasy correct in what we do in other countries, but
does Europe wish we stayed out of WW2?

To which you replied:
Did you personally come over and liberate Europe? Were you pleased that
the Russians helped?

*******************

So now you're saying that your obviously snide retort was *not*
intended to say what it was obviously saying?

I thought you were dishonest in the way you misrepresented my
position. I am sorry. I now see that you are merely stupid, and to be
pitied rather than reviled.

In fact your position was so obvious that even *you* can't refute it,
just make these kinds of silly comments.

Sarah Banick wrote:
helped?

The Russians didn't help anyone but themselves.

You seem incapable of acknowledging the Russian contribution to the
defeat of Germany. What about the standard US tactic of accepting your
enemy's enemy as your friend?



Hi Padraig --

I'm sure by now you know that Americans are not taught about the full extent
of Russia's contribution to WWII? When I was growing up the USSR was our
enemy, so we never really got too teary about all that relationship.

Maybe you should have gone to a better school. We were taught all about
it including the tens of millions of casualties among Russian
civilians.

I didn't pick it up until my formal education was finished, when I started to
get passionate about European history. I saw an interesting article several
weeks ago about how WWII spawned a massive number of movies...we all grew up
with the myths that Americans are invincible.

Problem is, it's gonna take more than superior firepower to win this current
war. And many don't understand that.

Actually we all do. The Left likes to pretend that no one understands
it so they can make statements like you just did and feel sanctimonious.

Geoff Miller wrote:
John H writes:

Wouldnt it be a lot easier to just keep your cotton picking
bloody nose out of other countries business instead.

Easier in the short term, but not in the long term. We have the
same inclination to look after our national interests that any
nation has. The difference is, we actually have the wherewithall
and the national character to translate that inclination into
action -- just like any other country would in our place.

Exactly. France tried to "keep their cotton picking noses out" of
Germany's problems and got overrun by the Nazis for their effort.