State of the Union

[KinkGuy]

And let us not forget, the Congress (republican) stopped the Clinton administration from capturing/killing Osama when we had him cornered. They also prevented our going into Afghanistan at the time. Both of which were high level CIA-FBI-European recommendations based on very sound information. And, the former CIA director Tenent (sp?) was running all over Capitol hill warning and begging anyone, especially the White House to pay attention to the reports regarding impending attacks. The Clinton administration had a plan in place to at least, hopefully address and take action, but it was trashed and the warnings ignored. Iraq and WMD's were moved to the top of the "action list" with no real data to support an invasion, or the loss of hundred of thousands of lives.

ChiGuy, can I borrow your suit?

 

[ChiGuy123]

Ok so i was wrong on some things.....
but now an even more bizarre thing.....we are discussing the President on a Penis Size Forum :blink: .....i doubt crazier things have happened......

anyways back to the discussion..... B)

 

[KinkGuy]

Originally posted by ChiGuy123@Feb 17 2005, 12:55 PM
we are discussing the President on a Penis Size Forum :blink: .....i doubt crazier things have happened......

[post=283977]Quoted post[/post]​

Just wait. I don't think we've seen anything yet.

 

[jonb]

Heh. One of the things the Bush appointees complained about was the obsession Clinton holdovers had with one Osama ibn-Ladin.

 

[jay_too]

Originally posted by gwinea2000@Feb 17 2005, 05:22 PM
You guys are pathetic -- completely incapable of holding a civilized discussion. Accusing someone of being on inhalant powders? . . .

In both of the responses which drew attack, I didn't get the sense that either poster was a head-over-heels Bush fanatic. . . .

Just as Sean Hannity's words are meaningless to everyone but ardent GOP supporters, so too are your words lost on anyone but the staunchest of Left-Wing fanatics.

[post=283968]Quoted post[/post]​

Dude..

Lighten up. Sorry if I stepped on a sensitive toe. I have friends that missed most of the last half of the 90's because of various inhalants.

In both of the responses which drew attack, I didn't get the sense that either poster was a head-over-heels Bush fanatic. . . . huh?

I thought Sean Hannity was a commentator rather than a news reporter. News has some basis in fact; whereas on the otherhand, commentaries may have no basis in fact or reality.

Cheerfully,

pathetic

 

[13788]

gwinea2000:

Originally posted by jay_too@Feb 17 2005, 10:37 PM
Dude..

Lighten up. Sorry if I stepped on a sensitive toe. I have friends that missed most of the last half of the 90's because of various inhalants.

In both of the responses which drew attack, I didn't get the sense that either poster was a head-over-heels Bush fanatic. . . . huh?

I thought Sean Hannity was a commentator rather than a news reporter. News has some basis in fact; whereas on the otherhand, commentaries may have no basis in fact or reality.

Cheerfully,

pathetic

[post=284040]Quoted post[/post]​

Dear Pathetic in Penisville,

Don't worry, I don't need to lighten up. I don't take political conversation on a site devoted to cock talk all too seriously. Just as I do with 'Celebrity Endowments', I read here for entertainment. Even if I tried, taking seriously any commentary scripted alongside a poster's jockstrap-encased junk would be, um, tough to do.

My reply is due to 100% to the reactionary style of argumentation used by just about everyone left of center. There is very little reality and even less legitimate analysis. It's much easier to point fingers than it is to create solutions (let alone offer constructive criticisms).

I realize this is a VERY liberal site. I have no problem with that -- if I did, I wouldn't be here. However: I would expect us, as mature adults, to ber above taking issue with an individual due to their perspective. Perspective is opinion-based. The Left is not right. The Right is not right. Not all of us drink the conspiracy Kool Aid. Not all of us drink the GOP Kool Aid. Some do. So be it.

When dealing with 'opinion' threads, I can only respect posts that argue a point. When they argue 'at' a poster as opposed to the content, it drives me nuts. It is, as I stated previously, pathetic. Then again, it's tough to expect such immature minds to have grown out of the 'sore loser' stage. Pointing fingers, inventing grand (though delusional) schemes to explain and justify.... Don't get me wrong. I DO sympathize -- losing is a bitch. (ahh, see how lame personal attacks are?)

With all my love, hugs, and kisses,

Dude

 

[13788]

Banjax: I'm not in much of a position to comment on this topic, as I'm not a citizen of the United States, and didn't hear the speech in question, but I have gathered that there appears to be some idea to privatise your social security system? Sorry to drag the conversation in a totally different direction...

I'm a UK civil servant working in the Pensions Service and I can tell you that a private company would not have the intrinsic compassion that a public service should have. It is part of my job to try to be as fair as possible to the pensioners and to attempt to maximise the money we can give them, I can't see a private company trying that.

Privatisation has developed rather a bad name here in Britain. Rail companies that sacrifice safety for profit and has resulted in several major crashes in the 9 years since privatisation. We have schools built under the PFI scheme (vastly complex, basically a private company builds it, the local authority then has to lease it off them, costs the taxpayer more no matter how you look at it...) that weren't completed in time for the start of term. PFI hospitals that aren't built with enough beds, aren't properly maintained or even cleaned properly! Don't even mention the part-privatisation of air traffic control or the Post Office and steer clear of the Public-Private Partnership for the Tube...

My message to you all over the pond, beware of the privatisation of the public sector!

 

[jay_too]

gwinea2000

Just how did you miss the 90's?

jay

 

[KinkGuy]

[/quote]
Dear Pathetic in Penisville,
Even if I tried, taking seriously any commentary scripted alongside a poster's jockstrap-encased junk would be, um, tough to do.
Dude

[post=284068]Quoted post[/post]​

[/quote]

How did my "jockstrap encased junk" get in to this? I DO NOT remember calling you any names? If you are going to reference myself, or my "junk" please at least quote my writings and show me where I have argued a "person" instead of the position or politics. Quote me. I want you to find any thread where I have called ANYONE anything other than a big dick. And around here, that's a compliment! If you are going to use me or my "junk" as an example, at least get it right.

 

[13788]

gwinea2000: jay too,
I was too into inhalant powders and not reading the newpapers or watching the evening news to notice much else. How was it?




KinkGuy,
I wasn't trying to attack anything you said. I just always notice your 'package' on the left-hand side of the screen when scrolling through threads. It's one of the more noticeable avatars, that's all. Anyway, it wasn't intended to piss you off. It was just a reference to the fact that this is a 'Penis' forum. As such, it shouldn't be too tough to keep our spirits light, regardless of conflicting viewpoints.

 

[jonb]

As for KinkGuy's "jockstrap-encased junk", I've got two words for you: Jeff Gannon. It seems Bush likes everything with a military motif, from his photo ops to his homosexual prostitutes.

 

[Freddie53]

Originally posted by jonb@Feb 18 2005, 01:00 PM
As for KinkGuy's "jockstrap-encased junk", I've got two words for you: Jeff Gannon. It seems Bush likes everything with a military motif, from his photo ops to his homosexual prostitutes.

[post=284275]Quoted post[/post]​

Now, Now Jon. We must not let truth get in the way here. we all know that little Geroge is a cowboy from Texas. He bought himself a ranch. He has cowboy boots too. Of the secret service has to help him put them on. I want to see George live the life of a cowboy, as in delivering calfs, taking cows to the slaugher, and all those wonderful things that happen on a ranch.

Of course, George doesn't live there much of the time now that the voters gave him a rent free house in Washington.

We all know that George is a well upstanding, honest citizen of this country who would never pretend to use a group as a hate group in order to win reelection. George is for civil unions for gays. That is great, but he covered that up with his federal marriage amendment.

Now really, do we want the federal government in charge of all marriages, divorces and all of that. If we pass this amendment, the all of this will be moved to the federal courts.

But I thought Republicans were for states rights. And they are for balanced budgets too. This could go on for ever. No need for truth to get in the way. Republicns will campanign for whatever they think will get them votes right now aNd then forget about what is was they promised.

Bush with his homosexaul prostitues. Interesting! If it were Bill Clinton, there would be a 100 million dollar investigation. But with little George in office. Fat chance of any investigation of any wrong doing by a Republican regardless what he did or didnt' do and how much evidence there is. Doesn't matter He is a Republican.

Thou shout not question the motives of Repubicans or the supposed doctrine. If anyone can find out what is is except mass profits for certain Republicans.

So much for this. If it seemed disjoined and all. I was trying to make it fit the ocassion of little ole George back in the White House again. Horrors.

Those from other countries, keep us in your prayers. We need them.

Freddie

New detainee in Cuba
Sin: Big Mouth

 

[jonb]

Heh. Cowboys? Red Rider was the gayest movie of the black-and-white era.

The Republicans changed a lot under Reagan. First dubious economic theories. When that didn't work, they decided on ideology. Simply the size of government was bad, rather than the associated costs. (Privatization costs more, and certainly forcing them to cut down by lowering taxes costs more. Both of these are basic arithmetic.) Unearned income was immoral, but not embezzlement from the government or inheritance. (Actually, I can think of how those are "earned". That's what prisons are for.)

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Originally posted by Freddie53@Feb 20 2005, 11:25 PM
But I thought Republicans were for states rights.

Until some of those states want to enact laws allowing euthanasia, gun control, gay marriage, increased environmental safeguards, evolution based science, tougher labor laws, etc.

SG

 

[jonb]

With "evolution-based science", you might as well say biology. It's to biology what matter is to physics: Nothing about biology makes sense without natural selection. (And yes, natural selection itself contradicts the Bible. A parable about how God provides for even the birds. We all know that most animals die before sexual maturity, even the birds.) And without speciation, the similarity doesn't make sense.