Conquer Club

gdeangel wrote:Let's recap the "recent decent" of the American political debate...

0) Bill Clinton defeats George Bush, whose tax increases and spending cuts put the country back on track after years of Reagan's "binge" economics. Bill Clinton does so by being young, charismatic, appearing on MTV, and playing the saxophone.

1) George Bush beats Al Gore (and McCain in the primary) by hawking his "good old boy" charm on the sliver haired Jesus crowd.

2) George Bush beats Al Gore through the support of the same "silver hairs", along with the military supporters who are reacting to the resurgence of 1970's "war is evil" idiocy which leftist talking-heads have found appeal with to hawk their books and news "exposes", and which, despite a very deliberate effort, Mr. Kerry and the democrats are unsuccessful in distancing themselves from.

3) Barack Obama runs a "feel good" primary, and the rank and file voters fall in line for the primary.

4) John McCain goes toe-to-toe at Obama's level to challenge his "broad consensus" as elitist and out of touch.

Now all of a sudden we've descended into "fluff" politics? My fellow American chumps, it's been that way for a long time, going all the way back to Kennedy (who nearly got the country blown up because of missiles in Cuba... sound like anything that's going on now in with Russia and the interceptor bases??) Nixon got a famous bump from talking about his little dog "Checkers".

The bottom line, in a large country where people have to vote for candidates that they have no personal knowledge of, and where there is no "official" state propaganda and intimidation, people will by a large margin, pick the candidate that they can identify with. So Obama's little "pig" comment about Palin (quite a different usage than reference to a policy) cuts to the quick at the decision criteria people make. Nobody wants to identify with a pig. Very few people want to identify with a neo-nazi pit-bull dog. These are the lowest form of political attack. They are dumbing down what is already a "choice not on the issues" to the level of a popularity contest on the grade school playground. McCain and Palin have a right to take issue. Referring, even indirectly, to a woman as a pig (meaning she is fat and undesirable) is very different than calling "big oil" pigs (i.e., insatiable appetite for profits), or calling a guy a pig (meaning he is someone who objectifies women as sexual objects). From a bunch of third graders you expect to hear people saying: don't pick Sara to the team captain... she's fat and ugly. But, even though American's may not understand how to balance a check book, let alone evaluate economic stimulus proposals, they do sometimes take note of offensive behavior.

If Obama wants to get by this one, he will have to make a public apology. But for a man whose base idolize him, that is not without it's own risks. So he's testing the waters... just like he did before he denounced Farakan publicly. You watch. By this time tomorrow, he won't be talking about "the silly party of the campaign season"... he'll be saying "I sincerely apologize to Governor Palin for any offense she took personally from what was intended as a general figure of speech about my opponent's campaign."

gdeangel wrote:When it became politically incorrect to do anything that might hurt your enemies other than (1) killing them on the open battlefield and (2) taking away their "freedom" by putting them in a 8x10 room with a bed and toilet, you ended up with a no-win situation - the bad guys just find ways to avoid getting caught out on the open battlefield, and we can't hold the ones we catch in 8x10 rooms forever.

America hides behind its air and naval dominance but that cannot do much when civilians are mixed in with the bad guys unless we drop some of our pretenses about "moral" war. War is hell. To try to deny that fact - to try to make soldiers act like police - is just like "putting lipstick on a pig".

But let's face it, even if it every came to a shit kicking contest on the open battle field, China would win. They outnumber us 3 to 1 (more like 5 to 1 if you peek into the demographic composition of the two populations ATM) and they have the weaponry and centralized infrastructure to do it. We need to start recruiting India of we are screwed.

pimpdave wrote: Also, it's all France's fault somehow. Generally, everything is France's is fault, but this time it's really true.

Jenos Ridan wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

HC, you seem to have no problem tells us Americans what to do, but if anyone thinks to question how your nation works you practically fly off the handle.

Upon conculting the dictionary, I found the word I was searching for; hypocrite. As in you are a hypocritical, pompass limey twit.

Have a nice day.

Speaking of hypocrites . . . Hello Pot.


Honibaz

In what way am I a hypocrite? ....

Jenos Ridan wrote:

HC, you seem to have no problem tells us Americans what to do, but if anyone thinks to question how your nation works you practically fly off the handle.

jonesthecurl wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

HC, you seem to have no problem tells us Americans what to do, but if anyone thinks to question how your nation works you practically fly off the handle.

I have to say (and I could be wrong, it can happen) that I wasn't particularly aware of HC ever flying off the handle in defence of his nation. Did I miss something?

Iliad wrote:

gdeangel wrote:When it became politically incorrect to do anything that might hurt your enemies other than (1) killing them on the open battlefield and (2) taking away their "freedom" by putting them in a 8x10 room with a bed and toilet, you ended up with a no-win situation - the bad guys just find ways to avoid getting caught out on the open battlefield, and we can't hold the ones we catch in 8x10 rooms forever.

America hides behind its air and naval dominance but that cannot do much when civilians are mixed in with the bad guys unless we drop some of our pretenses about "moral" war. War is hell. To try to deny that fact - to try to make soldiers act like police - is just like "putting lipstick on a pig".

But let's face it, even if it every came to a shit kicking contest on the open battle field, China would win. They outnumber us 3 to 1 (more like 5 to 1 if you peek into the demographic composition of the two populations ATM) and they have the weaponry and centralized infrastructure to do it. We need to start recruiting India of we are screwed.

Ouch

jiminski wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

HC, you seem to have no problem tells us Americans what to do, but if anyone thinks to question how your nation works you practically fly off the handle.

Upon conculting the dictionary, I found the word I was searching for; hypocrite. As in you are a hypocritical, pompass limey twit.

Have a nice day.

Speaking of hypocrites . . . Hello Pot.


Honibaz

In what way am I a hypocrite? ....

heh not wishing to spoil Bk's fun in his own defence.. but i think, and this is just my opinion, that all the evidence you seek is in the above posts.

if you genuinely need me to explain i will.

b.k. barunt wrote:

jiminski wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

b.k. barunt wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:

HC, you seem to have no problem tells us Americans what to do, but if anyone thinks to question how your nation works you practically fly off the handle.

Upon conculting the dictionary, I found the word I was searching for; hypocrite. As in you are a hypocritical, pompass limey twit.

Have a nice day.

Speaking of hypocrites . . . Hello Pot.


Honibaz

In what way am I a hypocrite? ....

heh not wishing to spoil Bk's fun in his own defence.. but i think, and this is just my opinion, that all the evidence you seek is in the above posts.

if you genuinely need me to explain i will.

Actually i was reminiscing about bygone days when he proved to be (in my humble opinion) the most blatantly hypocritical member of the obnoxious CC "Jesus Freaks". I wouldn't have brought it up, but to see that cheesewanker call someone else a hypocrite gives me a case of the red ass. Imagine that.


Honibaz

Jenos Ridan wrote:b.k. barunt:

In what why am I a hypocrite? I've asked you once politely, so where is you answer?

Jenos Ridan wrote:Thor, I don't need you leaping on every creep who talks crap about me. Why you're doing it at all is a mystery to me.

Anyway.....

b.k. barunt:

In what why am I a hypocrite? I've asked you once politely, so where is you answer?

heavycola wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:Thor, I don't need you leaping on every creep who talks crap about me. Why you're doing it at all is a mystery to me.

Anyway.....

b.k. barunt:

In what why am I a hypocrite? I've asked you once politely, so where is you answer?

What is the enormous phallus doing in the bottom left corner of your avatar? Pointing at you, it would seem.

Dancing Mustard wrote:

Jenos Ridan wrote:b.k. barunt:

In what way am I a hypocrite? I've asked you once politely, so where is you answer?

BK fucking said you were, so you fucking are. You understand me?

Dancing Mustard wrote:Don't get all doubting of his almighty wisdom and benevolence; compared to his senior counsel you are but a mental tadpole.

Dancing Mustard wrote: He wins debates versus you simply by virtue of him being him and you being you. Relent, yield and surrender. It is over, he has won and scavengers are free to pick clean your sun-bleached bones as they lie shattered in the ashes of this ravaged field.

jay_a2j wrote:If people voted on what really matters, like the state of our economy and such, someone like Ron Paul would have the nomination and win in a landslide. Both of the current candidates talk about change, but nothing will change. It never does. A guy said one of the reason's he's voting for McCain is because he's pro-life. Now, do you honestly think it even matters? Like McCain will reverse Roe vs. Wade? We have an ignorant voting population, and we will get the government we deserve.

boogiesadda wrote: a hipocrate (sorry if I offend but it is true).

boogiesadda wrote:I said my piece and wont return for useless banter back and forth

pimpdave wrote:Dude, you realize that even in those periods of history when were most heavily taxed (i.e. not now) it has still ALWAYS been at a lower rate of taxation than ANY European nation?

Snorri1234 wrote: also because the US fucking scares me.)

jay_a2j wrote:
I live here and it scare me!

jay_a2j wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote: also because the US fucking scares me.)

I live here and it scare me!

b.k. barunt wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote: also because the US fucking scares me.)

I live here and it scare me!

I live here and it pisses me off.


Honibaz