I hate to say it, but with the situation in Iraq right now anyone stupid enough to fire weapons at a wedding ceremony puts themselves at risk.
I'm not even so sure this was a wedding. Who the hell has a wedding on the Syrian-Iraqi border, anyway?
Printable View
I hate to say it, but with the situation in Iraq right now anyone stupid enough to fire weapons at a wedding ceremony puts themselves at risk.
I'm not even so sure this was a wedding. Who the hell has a wedding on the Syrian-Iraqi border, anyway?
I think they dance whilst firing weapons.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
I agree with DifX. I know some of you just love to find reasons to bash on the military and the adminstration but while your sitting at your computer thinking war is some affair that's supposed to be civil and direct, keep in mind it's not. The US military makes mistakes but our track record is still pretty damned good compared to other countries.
Only an irresponsible murderer bombs a group of people who's identity is unknown. If I were to murder someone I'd want to at least be sure we've both got similar weapons and that he's trying to kill me. But bombing civilians from a plane! What cowardice!
It's the responsibility of those soldiers to be sure they're not killing civilians and it's not the civilian's fault, which is what most of the gung-ho bullshit here seems to be suggesting. Remember who the invaders are in Iraq. They weren't invited to Iraq. Their reasons for their being there have long since disappeared. They should have some respect and kindly refrain from murdering civilians.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?
Indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by AstroBlue
Okay, this Nick Berg stuff is just getting too weird.
Berg's sister confused over Moore's taped interview
BY WILLIAM BUNCH
Knight Ridder Newspapers
PHILADELPHIA - (KRT) - The sister of Nick Berg, the contractor from the Philadelphia suburbs who was beheaded earlier this month in Iraq, says she's dumbfounded by reports that liberal icon Michael Moore had filmed an interview with her late brother for his new anti-war film.
"I'm very skeptical of this," said Sara Berg, a Virginia attorney whose brother's beheading sparked a global uproar.
But she said there was no way to confirm that Moore had sent a tape of the reported 20-minute interview to their parents' home in West Chester, as the filmmaker suggested in a statement Thursday, because the couple has been away.
Moore's acknowledgment that he had interview footage of Berg that had been shot - but not used - for his highly controversial "Fahrenheit 9/11" documentary may be the strangest twist yet in the increasingly weird saga of Berg and his Iraqi travels, which led to his slaying.
The initial story that touched off the controversy appeared Thursday on the online magazine Salon.com.
It said the interview took place in the United States late last year, before Berg, a radio-tower technician, made the first of two trips to Iraq seeking work there as a private contractor.
So, how would a completely unknown young wannabe contractor like Berg come to the attention of Moore, whose anti-President Bush screed "Dude, Where's My Country?" was the best-selling book in the nation at the time?
Stranger than that: Why would Moore or his crew interview Berg for "Fahrenheit 9/11" for 20 minutes, when Berg's family insists the slain contractor was pro-Bush and supported the American military action in Iraq?
The film, which just took top honors at the Cannes Film Festival, blasts Bush and shows graphic war footage from Iraq.
We may never know the answers, because Berg is dead and Moore says he has no plans to release the interview footage to the public.
"We have an interview with Nick Berg," Moore's terse statement said. "It was approximately 20 minutes long. We are not releasing it to the media. It is not in the film. We are dealing privately with the family."
Friends of Berg, the Henderson High School grad, say he was an adventurous, inventive and perhaps naive young man who simply wanted to help in the rebuilding of Iraq but disregarded safety warnings, traveling solo and in private taxis.
Berg was arrested by Iraqi police on March 24, held in custody for 13 days, and released - only to disappear again on April 10. His headless body was found on a Baghdad overpass on May 8, three days before the video of the decapitation was posted.
Despite some contradictory evidence, the CIA claims the execution was done by an al Qaeda terrorist, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Since then, some have questioned why Berg had been in Iraq, as well as some of his strange connections.
The FBI questioned Berg in 2002 to find out why his e-mail password had ended up with an Oklahoma terror suspect linked to al Qaeda terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui.
In Iraq, Berg partnered with an ex-Philadelphia Iraqi expatriate who'd been convicted in a Russian-exile crack-vial ring before becoming the highly visible leader of an anti-Saddam Hussein group backed by the Bush administration.
I would believe a 10 year old sock before I believed MM. He's always complaining that everyone in the WH witholds information to further their own agenda all the while doing this. Kind of hypocritical.
"The FBI questioned Berg in 2002 to find out why his e-mail password had ended up with an Oklahoma terror suspect linked to al Qaeda terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui."
His email password? So he could potentially let al Qaeda members get into his email account?
1.) Iraq is sovereign. Debate the technicalities.
2.) Saddam is being tried by Iraqis, 15 months later.
3.) 10,000 Iraqis dead as a direct result of the Iraq war over the last 15 months. How many Iraqis died in the 15 months leading up to the war as a direct result of Saddam, and the sanctions?
4.) Yemen and Jordan are offering to send troops to Iraq.
5.) We're sure Saddam doesn't have WMDs, now (heheh).
1000 Americans dead, 5000 injured, $150 billion spent.
The last year has been far worse than it needed to be, but thinking over it all, I'm glad we did what we did.
40% of Iraquis polled say they want Saddam freed.
How messed up is that?
Is it really necessary to have three threads devoted to this subject?
It took some digging, but I found a post here:Quote:
How many Iraqis died in the 15 months leading up to the war as a direct result of Saddam, and the sanctions?
Obviously sketchy, but feel free to provide better sources/data.
Using the same method the guy in that entry used, 21,150 people were killed by Hussein in those 15 months. However it is important to stress that while we have a (overly, IMO) watchful press keeping tabs on all numbers that have been killed while the CPA was in charge, no such authority was doing the same when Hussein was in charge. Unless you want to count the UN, but they seem to have been too busy lining Hussein's pockets with oil-for-food bribes. So that 21,150 number is pretty conservative.
Also keep in mind that as violence dwindles down in Iraq so will the death counts, while the Hussein number would've remained relatively constant.
If you are talking about the sanctions, and Saddams SOB response to it. We are talking about a million here. Instead of much needed food and supplies, due to the sanctions, roughly a million died of starvation/malnutrition because Saddam put his defence budget first.
Will this Iraq business help us in our battle to the death with Islamo-fascism? Holding no illusions, I believe it will.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stone
Um how, it has been reported that terrorism had a sharp increase since the Iraq thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Meach
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/10/powell.terror.report/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damian79
Urm no, stop believing tall tales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Here we have the bribes thingy again, while the UN investigation is ongoing and I wont make any premature deductions it does look like it was yet another one of Chalabi´s lies.
These allegations originated from Chalabi, the same guy who was instrumental in the White House WMD, Chemical and Nuclear claims which al turned out to be fake.
Chalabi to this day insists he has irrefuteable evidence of UN corruption yet has not handed over a shred of evidence yet and nothing was found either when he fell out of grace and his offices and home were searched and his documents seized a couple of months ago.
hahaha.
I read that and laughed out loud. Then I showed a co-worker what you wrote and she laughed out loud. Thanks for the entertainment.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Can you deny that the press is reporting incidents as they happen? When 5 Iraqis or Americans die or whatever they report it. When Ted Kennedy wants to foolishly say this is another Vietnam the press reports it. When some soldiers put underwear on the head of Iraqi prisoners the press reports it... over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfkzt
Dont be an idiot.
In any case, no matter your opinion of the press in Iraq now, you cant deny that more people are watching America's actions than were watching Saddam's. Which was my point all along.
I dont doubt a million died, that is however bevouse of the SANCTIONS themselves.
I see nothing here that says those people died becouse of and I quote: Instead of much needed food and supplies, due to the sanctions, roughly a million died of starvation/malnutrition because Saddam put his defence budget first.
Saddams regime DID NOT RECEIVE MONEY, instead it received food for the oil Iraq provided, you cant keep weapons programs going by paying in oranges and flour.
None of the links you provided backs up your allegations, in fact quite the contrary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Whats so funny, can you let me in on the joke?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
I was saying it was a mix of both. If Saddam didn't put any money into his weapons program, then would there have been as many deaths. I don't like to say on way or another, but rather say it was due to both of them combined.
Well you DID put the blame for 1 million deaths solely on him didnt you and claimed outright that that was becouse he was starving his people for the benefit of his weapons programs while none of those things are even remotely true.
No, reread what I said. I was saying it was a combination of both these things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
Quote:roughly a million died of starvation/malnutrition because Saddam put his defence budget first.
DiffusionX I am still waiting.
Do you have anything factual to add or are you just continue to bask in your own ignorance with regards to the subject and the arguments I brought forward?
Original quote:Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
Way to take things out of context.Quote:
Instead of much needed food and supplies, due to the sanctions, roughly a million died of starvation/malnutrition because Saddam put his defence budget first.
OK lets just say you worded it badly and I took it the wrong way then?
:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
Still waiting to hear from Diffusion BTW.
hahahaha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
hahahaha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
As I suspected then, parroting empty acusations, pass em of as fact despite REAL evidence pointing to the contrary and acting as if I am the one who said something laughable.
Must be a fun little bubble you live in.
hahahaha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security...1/oilindex.htm
Check the links shithead.
Constantly updated with the latest news.
Here is a good one: http://www.globalpolicy.org/security.../0316fraud.htm
Ahmad Chalabi, member of Iraq’s Governing Council, alleges the Saddam Hussein regime diverted nearly $2 billion from the UN oil-for-food program to personal accounts. To date, no evidence has been presented offered to support the charges. (Reuters)
hahahahaha.
Hahahaha indeed
Ridicule, the last refuge of the OWNED.
hahahaha.
Don't kill the intelligence of this thread and these arguments with ignorance.
Yep. If you can't refute Ali's points, don't make yourself look any worse than you already have.Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
Almaci can say whatever he wants, I think nothing of him and I dont care if he thinks he owned me. Seriously. Responding to his nonsense just implies that Id have to do it again in the future. I'll address anyone else but him, and that's the truth.
That's fine, but the point is you've only made yourself seem like a douche the last couple of pages, not him. You've undermined any points you might have made in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Im sorry Kano.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kano on the Phone
And I guess you're right.
I hope you all still love me. =D
Thing is he didnt have any points to begin with.
All he did was throw out some wild acusations which at this point dont seem to have any credibility whatsoever.
The shareef don't like it
Rockin' the Casbah
Rock the Casbah
The shareef don't like it
Rockin' the Casbah
Rock the Casbah
Now the king told the boogie men
You have to let that raga drop
The oil down the desert way
Has been shakin’ to the top
The sheik he drove his cadillac
He went a’ cruisnin’ down the ville
The muezzin was a’ standing
On the radiator grille
Chorus
The shareef don’t like it
Rockin’ the casbah
Rock the casbah
The shareef don’t like it
Rockin’ the casbah
Rock the casbah
By order of the prophet
We ban that boogie sound
Degenerate the faithful
With that crazy casbah sound
But the bedouin they brought out
The electric camel drum
The local guitar picker
Got his guitar picking thumb
As soon as the shareef
Had cleared the square
They began to wail
Chorus
Now over at the temple
Oh! they really pack ’em in
The in crowd say it’s cool
To dig this chanting thing
But as the wind changed direction
The temple band took five
The crowd caught a wiff
Of that crazy casbah jive
Chorus
The king called up his jet fighters
He said you better earn your pay
Drop your bombs between the minarets
Down the casbah way
As soon as the shareef was
Chauffeured outta there
The jet pilots tuned to
The cockpit radio blare
As soon as the shareef was
Outta their hair
The jet pilots wailed
Chorus
He thinks it’s not kosher
Fundamentally he can’t take it.
You know he really hates i
Update
Dick Cheney is a big fat lyar: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...t§ion=news
Hans und Frans will BUMP YOU UP(Just Frans to be honest, Hans is still in hospital after the white tiger attack)
Jack Hensley
Eugene Armstrong
Kenneth Bigley
R.I.P
Coughs
heh, oh boy...
Oh, fuck this.
I don't know if anyone caught it on Sunday, but 60 Minutes had a segment on Joe Darby, the Abu Ghraib whistleblower.
Seems his hometown thinks he's a traitor and put the enemy above his comrades.
I'm speechless.
Extremism comes in many guises.
Saw segments of that on CNN.
DAMN.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
Oh lookie here
As always I was right.
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
ß∆∂∫ˆ¨∑´∫ ∑¬∑´¥¢˙ƒ˙ƒ¨˙¨˙∂™§¶ßåœßœ¡& #161;åå≈å˜ ∂≈©çº£™£µµº√®≤£¢≤£¢ƒ –√®µ¢ƒ≤¢£–¢º˚µ≤çºçµç COCKS IN YOUR MOUTH
Damn, im looking good
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshClick for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
ß∆∂∫ˆ¨∑´∫ ∑¬∑´¥¢˙ƒ˙ƒ¨˙¨˙∂™§¶ßåœßœ¡¡åå≈å˜ ∂≈©çº£™£µµº√®≤£¢≤£¢ƒ–√®µ¢ƒ≤¢£–¢º˚µ≤çºçµçCOCKS IN YOUR MOUTH
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
Click for full size
ß∆∂∫ˆ¨∑´∫ ∑¬∑´¥¢˙ƒ˙ƒ¨˙¨˙∂™§¶ßåœßœ¡¡åå≈å˜ ∂≈©çº£™£µµº√®≤£¢≤£¢ƒ–√®µ¢ƒ≤¢£–¢º˚µ≤çºçµçCOCKS IN YOUR MOUTH
Huahuahuahua
I just gave Josh a card with a description that was slightly off. I'm sure he'll forgive me.
I have such fond memories of this thread. Face it, Almaci is almost always right about Iraq and the Bush Administration is almost always wrong. At least so far.
My track record is spotless, hung like a horse baby, hung like a horse
When's Stone coming back?
Why did we dig this thread up and why does Almaci care so much? He doesn't even live here.
Gas is gonna keep going up, politicians are going to keep fucking us over, the war is never going to end, Bush is either a reckless cowboy or just plain stupid, what the fuck else is new? You people act like the human race has only been around for 80 years.
Well, believe it or not, progress happens in the world. Talking about issues is the first step in resolving them. It may seem hopeless to you (too bad you're so willing to be quietly assraped), but blowing off steam and discussing articles on a message board is one thing people do to try gain a more exact understanding of what is going on in the world.
I hope people are also voting and donating time and money to issues they believe in and not just shrugging their shoulders and making jokes on the Internet whenever they see some horrific piece of news.
And Almaci does "live here." Every country in the world is affected by the actions of the United States. Why do you think the idea of a European Union has gotten to the point it has? Regardless of why it was started, it's a safe bet that the power of the U.S. is the main driving force behind its growth.
Stone's too busy making fedia, sippin' Cristal, rollin' in dubbed-out buggies, and pimpin' to care about TNL.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
There's a big differance between talking about an article or current happening or digging up an old thread just to make yourself feel superior and smart (which Almaci is neither).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick
Until this country develops a new system for electing our leaders it is highly highly unlikely that any of these issues will ever be resolved (which isn't going to happen).
Just because a black man drives a nice car you automatically think he's up to something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calliander
When people are agressive, arrogant, and wrong, its great to see history knock them down.
Plus I always find it funny to see people so damn sure of incorrect things.
What would you suggest for an election process?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gohron
Allowing non-elite and non-super rich citizens to have a reasonable chance at running an election campaign. Everyone in office now is pretty much supported by special interest groups and their financial support.Quote:
Originally Posted by JefmcC
Just because a girl wanna dress fancy and stand on a street corner near some whores you automatically think she's hookin'?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Welcome to life as a libertarian, Gohron.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gohron
http://the-nextlevel.com/board/attac...1&d=1178399577Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
Your track record is spotless, because it's one big pile of shit that no one was stupid enough to step in.
Personally, I think there needs to be major revisions to the American voting process. It's erratic in terms of technology and methods used in the actual voting, and the popular vote counts for shit. It's amazing that the world's biggest free country can have people lose the presidency when the majority of the voters voted for them. It's bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by JefmcC
Electronic voting ftw I guess.
Technology is a problem, but the Electoral College isn't. Being in Puerto Rico, you should be rabidly in favor of the Electoral College. If we ever make the mistake of giving you the right to vote, you'll get much more pull with the Electoral College than you would with a popular vote. People in other small population states have the same benefit. The last thing we need is California deciding every election.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
The only reason it would be a "mistake" for you is because we'd be overwhelmingly democratic (ironic, since the Republicans are the ones most in favor of granting statehood).
That's more American irony for you. The same people who are trying to "bring" liberty and freedom to people in a region that don't want us there have no problem with 4 million citizens who aren't able to vote for the president or have voting representation in Congress.
Huahuahuahua
Majority rules is a mistake, period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
Having 3 or 4 states deciding elections (Fla, NY, CA, Texas) because more people live there isn't an answer. It's also how guys like Hitler came to power. The electoral college is fine and there's a reason the founding fathers drew up the government this way. And quit harping about your lack of voting ability and statehood, the people of PR don't even want it.
("The view of the continuance of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is the most popular position with 69.4% of US Puerto Ricans support. Voters cast a 48.6% decision in favor of remaining a commonwealth of the United States. Of the commonwealth proponents 71.4% are first generation Americans, 24% are second generation, and 4.5% are third generation. The political ideologies of commonwealth proponents are 27% liberal, 26.5% moderate, and 46.5 conservative. The language ability is as follows: Only English 2%, better in English 26.3%, no difference 25.5%, better in Spanish 38.1% and only in Spanish 8.1% .")
Lol, that's so wrong it's not funny. The majority of Puerto Ricans want to at least be able to vote for president.Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru
No wait, this is even more wrong. Commonwealth has never gotten that high a percentage in any of the three plebiscites held here, not even the first in 1967, in which it got 60%. It's been steadily dropping ever since.Quote:
The view of the continuance of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is the most popular position with 69.4% of US Puerto Ricans support.
Those numbers say nothing about the stories behind either plebiscite or the current status scene, since the last vote was held a decade ago. Also, those language numbers are wrong too. Here are the most recent and correct ones.Quote:
Voters cast a 48.6% decision in favor of remaining a commonwealth of the United States. Of the commonwealth proponents 71.4% are first generation Americans, 24% are second generation, and 4.5% are third generation. The political ideologies of commonwealth proponents are 27% liberal, 26.5% moderate, and 46.5 conservative. The language ability is as follows: Only English 2%, better in English 26.3%, no difference 25.5%, better in Spanish 38.1% and only in Spanish 8.1% .")
What's most ironic is that the very same political status that Congress repeatedly says is not viable and must be changed, is the same one they always hide behind with the "it's what the people there want" bullshit. The reason people here have voted for commonwealth in the all the plebiscites is because Congress hasn't lifted a finger to sponsor any effort to change the status, and the people here know that nothing will change even if they vote for statehood or independence.
You can't sit there and tell the people "you have to make up your mind about what you want" when you haven't told them what changes you'd accept or even that you'd do anything at all if they did chose.
You can't vote for president without being a state. 50.2% of PR voted against statehood in 1998. Look around and blame your comrades. We're in the United States of America.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
It's still not a majority and your national language is Spanish, as voted on by Puerto Ricans again, which isn't acceptable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
Why should Congress lift anything if the majority of the residents of PR don't want to become a state? And why is it their (our) responsibility? PR needs to get their shit together, collectively, first before statehood is even a condsideration and it's obviously something that they haven't wanted as the popular vote proves over the last few decades.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
Become a sovereign nation, stay a commonwealth, become a state. The choice is entirely up to the people of PR who have already chosen, many times, over the past 30 years.
Doesn't somewhere have to petition to become a state before they can become one? I may be fuzzy on the rules, but I thought that was required.
Again, you don't know the joke history behind the 1998 plebiscite, which was entirely concocted in favor of statehood by that party. That's why 50% voted against all the options. It was a trick election that no one wanted to allow to send the wrong message.Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru
And even if 100% had voted for statehood, it wouldn't have meant shit, since Congress has repeatedly dragged its feet about supporting any efforts to resolve the status issue or even recognize that any of the three plebiscites were even held.
Um, it wasn't voted on by Puerto Ricans. It's the language they've been speaking since almost 200 years before the U.S. was even founded. And the language issue is really a U.S. cop-out, since no one made any complaints about it when Hawaii became a state. (You do realize that Hawaii voted for statehood in a plebiscite only after Congress had passed the statehood act and Eisenhower signed it into law, not before, like everyone thinks PR should do. Congress acted first). Puerto Ricans don't speak English in the home, but it's the language of business and the courts, and most of them read it and understand it, but don't speak it due to lack of practice. English is one of the official languages here, and considering that virtually half the population wants statehood while the other half wants permanent union with the U.S., the language issue is more of a problem for the ethno-phobes in Congress than it is for the people here.Quote:
It's still not a majority and your national language is Spanish, as voted on by Puerto Ricans again, which isn't acceptable.
How do you know this? Has Congress ever offered statehood to PR? No. Has it ever said "these are the options we will accept, and if you want statehood, then you can have it?" No.Quote:
Why should Congress lift anything if the majority of the residents of PR don't want to become a state? And why is it their (our) responsibility?
Again, you're only looking at some statistics. I've lived here for twenty years and have voted in 2 plebiscites and every general election and primary since 1989. PR doesn't need to get anything together. Congress is the one saying that the commonwealth (which you repeatedly point out is what PR wants) is not acceptable as a permanent solution, but then won't tell us which options are acceptable. How can you expect the people here to decide when no one tells them what they're supposed to choose from?Quote:
PR needs to get their shit together, collectively, first before statehood is even a condsideration and it's obviously something that they haven't wanted as the popular vote proves over the last few decades.
PR is held to the territorial clause in Article IV of the U.S. constitution, which says that Congress, not the local populace, has the final power over the fate of the island. Therefore, it's Congress that has to take action.
No, they've voted in 3 non-binding plebiscites that Congress ignored, for an option that Congress has said is not viable. Worse, Congress wouldn't have done anything about the issue, no matter what the results would have been, because they endorse the vote. It's been that way forever. The actual commonwealth itself is a political limbo authorized by Congress just to shut the people up. Now it's bitching about how it's not a long-term solution, but it doesn't bother to say which options are. In fact, Congress just had public hearings on the issue just two weeks ago, and danced and sang and did nothing.Quote:
Become a sovereign nation, stay a commonwealth, become a state. The choice is entirely up to the people of PR who have already chosen, many times, over the past 30 years.
You can't keep telling people they have to decide their future, when you're the one who has the final decision and won't tell them what their choices are. It's bullshit, plain and simple.
I guarantee you that if Congress authorized a plebiscite that said "statehood, yes or no" PR would vote overwhelmingly for statehood.
Instead of being a retarded right wing shill how about paying me the 2k us$ you owe me for the white betas I shipped you all those years ago Haohmaru?
Its not because I didnt remind you or took action for a couple of years that I forgot about em.
Yeah you made a killing on em and cleaned out on the lil sand niggers expense didnt you?
In the end you still lose because you are YOU and I am not YOU so I come out ahead.
...
wow
Dont you go WOW here, you guys bailed his ass out once as well with Cart Mart.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
But having 8 or 10 states decide elections because it's predictable months, in some cases even years, in advance that they'll be the only ones with a close race is better? The electoral college was a good idea 200 years ago, but all it accomplishes today is to rob 'red state' progressives and 'blue state' conservatives of their voice, and as one of the former I want it gone yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by haohmaru
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordPerrin
QFT as a California Republican or a Tennesee democrat you know that 10.000 of your votes are worth less then a single vote by a Brooklyn jew or a Florida freeloading CANF terrorist Cuban American.
Something to be REALLY proud of...
It was funny when Puerto Rico ran out of money to pay its state employees and they had to close up shop.
Like the Minnesota did in 2005, New Jersey last year, and the U.S. government had to do ten years ago? Yeah, hilarious, especially if you have family members who work for the government. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
Doesn't most of the island work for the government?
And NJ didn't run out of money, they were just bitching about the budget. Government buildings were still open. In Puerto Rico, however, almost everything shut down.
Around 30% does, which is entirely too high, but it doesn't have anything to do with the government shutting down.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
New Jersey had a budget crisis, no? That's what happened here. The governor and the legislature couldn't agree on one in time, and the government partially shut down. It was only partial though, and there were many offices that still remained open.Quote:
And NJ didn't run out of money, they were just bitching about the budget. Government buildings were still open. In Puerto Rico, however, almost everything shut down.
Who changed this thread to be about Puerto Rico? Also, why is everyone pretending they know shit that the guy who actually lives there doesn't?
So that's what liberals think of minorities once they outlive their usefulness...Quote:
Originally Posted by Almaci
As for the Puerto Rico thing, you libs need to make up your minds; should we be an imperialist nation or not? Imperialist only when it means more blue votes?
Huh? Never said we should be imperialist. I've always said we should do whatever the fuck the people of PR want to do, and let that be that. But the current commonwealth situation needs to come to an end.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
God I wish Republicans would just shut the fuck up about immigration.
Fuckers had the House and Senate for 6 years and did NOTHING about any of it. Hell they did nothing at all really, 3 workday week lazy freeloaders.
Anyway fuck the whole issue, like the reality of Iraq, the reality of immigration is pretty hopeless. You'd never be able to wrest all those immigrants working for slave wages away from the people who pay em, and you'd never get the people who pay em to give em up because they get to keep it all off the books.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Its not an oppinion, its an observation.
The cold hard truth if you will.
LOL, what are you even talking about? Statehood is the complete antithesis of imperialism, in fact it's anti-imperialistic. The situation they're in now, which traces all the way back (surprise surprise) to a Republican imperialist administration is rank imperialism and needs to change, somehow.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Well, considering that the White House Task Force Report on the PR situation, published last year, came to the conclusion that PR was the property of the U.S. and could be given away without the consent of the populace, what do you think?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
But we all know that the U.S. is too busy spreading democracy around the Middle East to deal with the half dozen territories it has in its own backyard.
What do these places all have in common? They're fucking blue states. Hell, even Slick Willy was in charge when the Federal government shut down.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
Lol.
