Forums: Community: Campground:
Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Campground

Premier Sponsor:

 


curt


Dec 19, 2004, 6:39 PM
Post #1 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
By SAM DOLNICK, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - After winning re-election and "reshaping the rules of politics to fit his 10-gallon-hat leadership style," President George Bush for the second time was chosen as Time magazine's Person of the Year.

The magazine's editors tapped Bush "for sharpening the debate until the choices bled, for reframing reality to match his design, for gambling his fortunes — and ours — on his faith in the power of leadership."

Time's 2004 Person of the Year package, on newsstands Monday, includes an Oval Office interview with Bush, an interview with his father, former President George H. W. Bush, and a profile of Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove.

In an interview with the magazine, Bush attributed his victory over Democratic candidate John Kerry to his foreign policy and the wars he began in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"The election was about the use of American influence," Bush said.

After a grueling campaign, Bush remains a polarizing figure in America and around the world, and that's part of the reason he earned the magazine's honor, said Managing Editor Jim Kelly.

"Many, many Americans deeply wish he had not won," Kelly said in a telephone interview. "And yet he did." ............

Discuss.

Curt


rijid


Dec 19, 2004, 6:43 PM
Post #2 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 30, 2003
Posts: 42

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

His 2nd Win, his family now has three on their mantleshelf.

Previous award recipients:

1927- Charles Lindbergh
1928- Walter Chrysler
1929- Owen Young
1930- Mahatma Gandhi
1931- Pierre Laval
1932- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
1933- Hugh Johnson
1934- Franklin Delano Roosevelt (2nd time)
1935- Haile Selassie
1936- Wallis Simpson
1937- Chiang Kai-Shek and Soong May-ling
1938- Adolf Hitler
1939- Joseph Stalin
1940- Winston Churchill
1941- Franklin Delano Roosevelt (3rd time)
1942- Joseph Stalin (2nd time)
1943- George Marshall
1944- Dwight Eisenhower
1945- Harry Truman
1946- James F. Byrnes
1947- George Marshall (2nd time)
1948- Harry Truman (2nd time)
1949- Winston Churchill (2nd time)
1950- The American Fighting-Man
1951- Mohammed Mossadegh
1952- Queen Elizabeth II
1953- Konrad Adenauer
1954- John Dulles
1955- Harlow Curtice
1956- Hungarian Freedom Fighter
1957- Nikita Khrushchev
1958- Charles De Gaulle
1959- Dwight Eisenhower (2nd time)
1960- U.S. scientists
1961- John F. Kennedy
1962- Pope John XXIII
1963- Martin Luther King Jr.
1964- Lyndon Johnson
1965- William Westmoreland
1966- Twenty-Five and Under
1967- Lyndon Johnson (2nd time)
1968- Frank Borman, Jim Lovell, William Anders
1969- The Middle Americans
1970- Willy Brandt
1971- Richard Nixon
1972- Richard Nixon (2nd time) and Henry Kissinger
1973- John Sirica
1974- King Faisal
1975- American Women
1976- Jimmy Carter
1977- Anwar Sadat
1978- Deng Xiaoping
1979- Ayatollah Khomeini
1980- Ronald Reagan
1981- Lech Walesa
1982- The Computer
1983- Ronald Reagan (2nd time) and Yuri Andropov
1984- Peter Ueberroth
1985- Deng Xiaoping (2nd time)
1986- Corazon Aquino
1987- Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev
1988- Endangered Earth ("Planet of the Year")
1989- Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev (2nd time)
1990- George H. W. Bush
1991- Ted Turner
1992- Bill Clinton
1993- Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk, Yasser Arafat, and Yitzhak Rabin
1994- Pope John Paul II
1995- Newt Gingrich
1996- David Ho
1997- Andy Grove
1998- Bill Clinton (2nd time) and Kenneth Starr

Changed to "Person" of the Year


1999- Jeffrey P. Bezos
2000- George W. Bush
2001- Rudolph Giuliani
2002- The whistleblowers: Cynthia Cooper of Worldcom, Sherron Watkins of Enron, and Coleen Rowley of the FBI
2003- The American Soldier


curt


Dec 19, 2004, 6:54 PM
Post #3 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

It is interesting to look back at that entire list, isn't it? Whereas some people on that list had relatively little long term impact on the world, there is no doubt that they were extremely important figures in their time. Of course, some people on that list also changed the world forever. Interesting choices, indeed.

Curt


johnson6102002


Dec 19, 2004, 7:44 PM
Post #4 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 23, 2004
Posts: 843

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
It is interesting to look back at that entire list, isn't it? Whereas some people on that list had relatively little long term impact on the world, there is no doubt that they were extremely important figures in their time. Of course, some people on that list also changed the world forever. Interesting choices, indeed.

Curt

yes indeed it is interesting viewing all of the selections and trying to compare there impacts!


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 12:39 AM
Post #5 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
"The election was about the use of American influence," Bush said.


The election was about fear!!! :x


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 12:43 AM
Post #6 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
•I attacked and took over 2 countries.

•I spent the U.S. surplus and bankrupted the US Treasury.

•I shattered the record for the biggest annual deficit in history (not easy!).

•I set an economic record for the most personal bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.

•I set all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the stock market.

•I am the first president in decades to execute a federal prisoner.

•In my first year in office I set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history (tough to beat my dad's, but I did).

•After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, I presided over the worst security failure in US history.

•I set the record for most campaign fund raising trips by any president in US history.

•In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their jobs.

•I cut unemployment benefits for more out-of-work Americans than any other president in US history.

•I set the all-time record for most real estate foreclosures in a 12-month period.

•I appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.

•I set the record for the fewest press conferences of any president, since the advent of TV.

•I signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any other US president in history.

•I presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.

•I cut health care benefits for war veterans.

•I set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind.

•I dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.

•I've made my presidency the most secretive and unaccountable of any in US history.

•Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (The poorest multimillionaire, Condoleeza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.)

•I am the first president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously struggle against bankruptcy.

•I presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud in any market in any country in the history of the world.

•I am the first president in US history to order a US attack AND military occupation of a sovereign nation, and I did so against the will of the United Nations and the vast majority of the international community.

•I have created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States, called the "Bureau of Homeland Security"(only one letter away from BS).

•I set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any other president in US history (Ronnie was tough to beat, but I did it!!).

•I am the first president in US history to compel the United Nations remove the US from the Human Rights Commission.

•I am the first president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the Elections Monitoring Board.

•I removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history.

•I rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant. I withdrew from the World Court of Law.

•I refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions.

•I am the first president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors access during the 2002 US elections.

•I am the all-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations.

•The biggest lifetime contributor to my campaign, who is also one of my best friends, presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation).

•I spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history.

•I am the first president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied, saying the enemy had the code to Air Force 1)

•I am the first US president to establish a secret shadow government.

•I took the world's sympathy for the US after 9/11, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history).

•I am the first US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.

•I changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.

•I set the all-time record for the number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling their huge investments in corporations bidding for gov't contracts.

•I have removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history.

•I entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down.

•RECORDS AND REFERENCES: I have at least one conviction for drunk driving in Maine (Texas driving record has been erased and is not available).

•I was AWOL from the National Guard and deserted the military during time of war.

•I refuse to take a drug test or even answer any questions about drug use. (wink,wink)

•All records of my tenure as governor of Texas have been spirited away to my fathers library, sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.

•All records of any SEC investigations into my insider trading or bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.

•All minutes of meetings of any public corporation for which I served on the board are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.

•Any records or minutes from meetings I (or my VP) attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review.


This is what you do to get Time's Person of the year?! :evil:


Partner melodicllama


Dec 20, 2004, 12:44 AM
Post #7 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

buck fush


Partner melodicllama


Dec 20, 2004, 12:46 AM
Post #8 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
•I attacked and took over 2 countries.

•I spent the U.S. surplus and bankrupted the US Treasury.

•I shattered the record for the biggest annual deficit in history (not easy!).

•I set an economic record for the most personal bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period.

•I set all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the stock market.

•I am the first president in decades to execute a federal prisoner.

•In my first year in office I set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history (tough to beat my dad's, but I did).

•After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, I presided over the worst security failure in US history.

•I set the record for most campaign fund raising trips by any president in US history.

•In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their jobs.

•I cut unemployment benefits for more out-of-work Americans than any other president in US history.

•I set the all-time record for most real estate foreclosures in a 12-month period.

•I appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.

•I set the record for the fewest press conferences of any president, since the advent of TV.

•I signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any other US president in history.

•I presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.

•I cut health care benefits for war veterans.

•I set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind.

•I dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.

•I've made my presidency the most secretive and unaccountable of any in US history.

•Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (The poorest multimillionaire, Condoleeza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.)

•I am the first president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously struggle against bankruptcy.

•I presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud in any market in any country in the history of the world.

•I am the first president in US history to order a US attack AND military occupation of a sovereign nation, and I did so against the will of the United Nations and the vast majority of the international community.

•I have created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States, called the "Bureau of Homeland Security"(only one letter away from BS).

•I set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any other president in US history (Ronnie was tough to beat, but I did it!!).

•I am the first president in US history to compel the United Nations remove the US from the Human Rights Commission.

•I am the first president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the Elections Monitoring Board.

•I removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history.

•I rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant. I withdrew from the World Court of Law.

•I refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions.

•I am the first president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors access during the 2002 US elections.

•I am the all-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations.

•The biggest lifetime contributor to my campaign, who is also one of my best friends, presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation).

•I spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history.

•I am the first president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied, saying the enemy had the code to Air Force 1)

•I am the first US president to establish a secret shadow government.

•I took the world's sympathy for the US after 9/11, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history).

•I am the first US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.

•I changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.

•I set the all-time record for the number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling their huge investments in corporations bidding for gov't contracts.

•I have removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history.

•I entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down.

•RECORDS AND REFERENCES: I have at least one conviction for drunk driving in Maine (Texas driving record has been erased and is not available).

•I was AWOL from the National Guard and deserted the military during time of war.

•I refuse to take a drug test or even answer any questions about drug use. (wink,wink)

•All records of my tenure as governor of Texas have been spirited away to my fathers library, sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.

•All records of any SEC investigations into my insider trading or bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.

•All minutes of meetings of any public corporation for which I served on the board are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.

•Any records or minutes from meetings I (or my VP) attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review.


This is what you do to get Time's Person of the year?! :evil:

AMEN!!!!!! anybody out there that thinks bush is so great, all u gotta do is read this...i only wish it was my day to rate posts


Partner coylec


Dec 20, 2004, 12:52 AM
Post #9 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 2024

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I'm quite distrubed that the Bush Administration is attempted to spin the election as support for the war in Iraq. No body's polling numbers suggest that -- its blind, unfounded assertion.

I do believe that Bush is going appropriate company.

Chiang? Both used a political faction to gain power, but them quickly abandoned that group once it was no longer politically expedient. (Chiang abandoned his communist supporters once he gained power in the late 20s)

Hilter? Both are egomaniacal imperialists who cemented his domestic base of power on the demonization of a minority group, while alienating foreign countries with a "take-it-or-leave-it" diplomatic style.

Stalin? Both are egomaniacal imperialists who cemented his domestic base of power through secrecy and intimidation of opposition groups, all the while threatening and bullying foreign powers.

Byrnes? Both oppose extending equal rights to all members of society (Byrnes opposed school integration and called for massive resistance).

I could go on, but I'm tired.

coylec

PS - I vote Curt "Troll of the Year" for having the best trolls on the site, including this one. :D


curt


Dec 20, 2004, 1:14 AM
Post #10 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
PS - I vote Curt "Troll of the Year" for having the best trolls on the site, including this one. :D

Hey, thanks man. Its not that easy you know. 8^)

Curt


Partner coylec


Dec 20, 2004, 1:17 AM
Post #11 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 2024

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
PS - I vote Curt "Troll of the Year" for having the best trolls on the site, including this one. :D

Hey, thanks man. Its not that easy you know. 8^)

Curt

Must say I do appreciate it ... I've been flame free for several months now, because I'm able to excise my online angst through your fantastic trolls. Bravo Curt, keep up the good work. And, if/when we cross paths, remind me to buy ya some good scotch.

coylec


pooks


Dec 20, 2004, 2:11 AM
Post #12 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 22, 2004
Posts: 27

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Time Person of the Year is about the most influential person, not the best person. Look at previous "winners"- Hitler, Stalin, Churchill, Martin Luther King Jr., Richard Nixon...some were good, some bad, some questionable, but all were undeniably influential.


cosmokramer


Dec 20, 2004, 4:51 AM
Post #13 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 1, 2004
Posts: 191

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

If you are a Kerry-humping democrat, it must have felt a little something like this...

http://hometown.aol.com/...5872/images/budd.jpg


jamaica


Dec 20, 2004, 5:16 AM
Post #14 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 22, 2004
Posts: 188

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

quote: grimpiperx

In reply to:
•I attacked and took over 2 countries.

•I spent the U.S. surplus and bankrupted the US Treasury.

•I shattered the record for the biggest annual deficit in history (not easy!).

•I set an economic record for the most personal bankruptcies... etc, etc, etc


Why can't America understand any of this and why did America re-elect him?!?!!!!!!


Partner macherry


Dec 20, 2004, 5:24 AM
Post #15 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 15848

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

The Canadian edition of Time magazine had a different person of the year!

Time names Maher Arar Canadian Newsmaker of the Year

TORONTO (CP) - Syrian-born Canadian Maher Arar has been chosen as Time magazine's Canadian Newsmaker of the Year.
Arar, who was born in Syria but has dual citizenship, was detained in New York in September 2002 on suspicion of involvement in Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida terrorist network.

U.S. authorities then deported the telecommunications engineer to Syria.

Arar, 35, says he was tortured by Syrian officials in a stark prison cell before being released last year. He denies any involvement in terrorism.

Earlier this year, Arar pushed for and got a public inquiry into his case.

"Sure, there were big players like (Conservative Leader) Stephen Harper, who laid down a challenge to (Prime Minister Paul) Martin, and of course the eventually victorious Martin himself," said Time Canada editor Adi Ignatius, referring to the federal election and other candidates for newsmaker honours.

"Ultimately, though, there was one person who we felt symbolized the issues that are likely to be of lasting importance to Canada. That person is Maher Arar."

© The Canadian Press, 2004


Partner costellobr


Dec 20, 2004, 10:23 AM
Post #16 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 265

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Thanks for the list grimpiperx. I'm invited to a Bush Bashing Party in Jan and the list will come in handy for the games.


perozee


Dec 20, 2004, 11:20 AM
Post #17 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 2, 2003
Posts: 268

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Seems jimmy carter was the only prez not to get two nominations.


Partner tradman


Dec 20, 2004, 11:57 AM
Post #18 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Purely as a side-note, it's also interesting that there hasn't been a non-american winner for 10 years.


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 1:50 PM
Post #19 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Thanks for the list grimpiperx. I'm invited to a Bush Bashing Party in Jan and the list will come in handy for the games.

No problem, allways happy to spread the word :righton: Where is this party? :wink:


vertical_reality


Dec 20, 2004, 2:04 PM
Post #20 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
By SAM DOLNICK, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - After winning re-election and "reshaping the rules of politics to fit his 10-gallon-hat leadership style," President George Bush for the second time was chosen as Time magazine's Person of the Year.

The magazine's editors tapped Bush "for sharpening the debate until the choices bled, for reframing reality to match his design, for gambling his fortunes — and ours — on his faith in the power of leadership."

By the looks of it, they didn't choose him for good reasons... kinda like when they chose Hitler.


bumblie


Dec 20, 2004, 2:13 PM
Post #21 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

It certainlyy looks like quite a few people are displeased with this choice.

Doris Day sang it best.


web_slave


Dec 20, 2004, 2:54 PM
Post #22 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2003
Posts: 255

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Purely as a side-note, it's also interesting that there hasn't been a non-american winner for 10 years.

My guess is because it's the u.s. time magazine.
Like it was posted earlier - we have our own time "person of the year" and it sure as hell ain't bush.


bumblie


Dec 20, 2004, 3:37 PM
Post #23 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
My guess is because it's the u.s. time magazine.
Like it was posted earlier - we have our own time "person of the year"

The Canadian edition is limited to Canadians. The selected "Man of The Year", in the US publication, is international in scope.


Partner coylec


Dec 20, 2004, 7:35 PM
Post #24 of 244 (4312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 2024

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Yah, like Baseball is the "World" series.

coylec


bumblie


Dec 20, 2004, 7:48 PM
Post #25 of 244 (4314 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Previous award recipients:

1930- Mahatma Gandhi
1931- Pierre Laval
1935- Haile Selassie
1936- Wallis Simpson
1937- Chiang Kai-Shek and Soong May-ling
1938- Adolf Hitler
1939- Joseph Stalin
1940- Winston Churchill
1942- Joseph Stalin (2nd time)
1949- Winston Churchill (2nd time)
1951- Mohammed Mossadegh
1952- Queen Elizabeth II
1953- Konrad Adenauer
1955- Harlow Curtice
1956- Hungarian Freedom Fighter
1957- Nikita Khrushchev
1958- Charles De Gaulle
1962- Pope John XXIII
1974- King Faisal
1977- Anwar Sadat
1978- Deng Xiaoping
1979- Ayatollah Khomeini
1981- Lech Walesa
1983- Yuri Andropov
1985- Deng Xiaoping (2nd time)
1986- Corazon Aquino
1987- Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev
1988- Endangered Earth ("Planet of the Year")
1989- Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev (2nd time)
1993- Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk, Yasser Arafat, and Yitzhak Rabin
1994- Pope John Paul II


Partner melodicllama


Dec 20, 2004, 7:49 PM
Post #26 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
If you are a Kerry-humping democrat, it must have felt a little something like this...

http://hometown.aol.com/...5872/images/budd.jpg

i would rather be a "kerry-humping democrat" then support the (stastically speaking) worst leader this country has ever known...sure you could be drawn to his charisma or something but it honestly blows my mind as to how you could support his policies, actions, etc.


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 7:56 PM
Post #27 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

And that would be weird too considering he has the charisma of a monkey :wink: :lol:


jpearl


Dec 20, 2004, 7:56 PM
Post #28 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 13, 2003
Posts: 517

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

"I do believe that Bush is going appropriate company.

Hilter? Both are egomaniacal imperialists who cemented his domestic base of power on the demonization of a minority group, while alienating foreign countries with a "take-it-or-leave-it" diplomatic style.

Stalin? Both are egomaniacal imperialists who cemented his domestic base of power through secrecy and intimidation of opposition groups, all the while threatening and bullying foreign powers."


Gee, I don't remember Bush gassing a whole bunch of my ancestors like hitler did, and I don't remember Bush throwing my grandparents into Gulags like Stalin did. Then again, judging from the seething anti-semetism of the "I hate Bush" camp, I'm not suprised by arguments like the one above. Then again, what can you expect from people who made the Nazi swastika and the Communist hammer and sickle oh-so-fashionable at all of those anti-war "peace" rallies.

Anybody know a good P.E.S.T. therapist?


Partner melodicllama


Dec 20, 2004, 8:05 PM
Post #29 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
And that would be weird too considering he has the charisma of a monkey :wink: :lol:

if you look close he greatly resembles a monkey as well


bluto


Dec 20, 2004, 8:11 PM
Post #30 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

It's good to see liberals making historically ignorant and offensive comparisons between Bush and Hitler, and the usual "Bush is a monkey" type statements. Please keep it up for another four years, that way you'll just about guarantee another Republican gets elected in 2008.


vertical_reality


Dec 20, 2004, 8:18 PM
Post #31 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Waaaaaaaaaa! Someone is making fun of my boyfriend.


Partner costellobr


Dec 20, 2004, 8:25 PM
Post #32 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 265

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Thanks for the list grimpiperx. I'm invited to a Bush Bashing Party in Jan and the list will come in handy for the games.

No problem, allways happy to spread the word :righton: Where is this party? :wink:

Greensboro, NC. 2 doors down from my house. this is one of the counties in NC that went for Kerry.


bumblie


Dec 20, 2004, 8:28 PM
Post #33 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Waaaaaaaaaa! Someone is making fun of my boyfriend.

There is some debate as to what is the densest matter in the universe. VR is rapidly gaining on the top spot.


thegreytradster


Dec 20, 2004, 8:28 PM
Post #34 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

http://www.registeredmedia.com/...h/normal_winston.jpg


vertical_reality


Dec 20, 2004, 8:29 PM
Post #35 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Waaaaaaaaaa! Someone is making fun of my boyfriend.

There is some debate as to what is the densest matter in the universe. VR is rapidly gaining on the top spot.

I still have to catch up to you and black holes.


bumblie


Dec 20, 2004, 8:39 PM
Post #36 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

You chasing black holes these days?


vertical_reality


Dec 20, 2004, 8:43 PM
Post #37 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Sorry to dissapoint you but the answer is still no. I guess you don't take rejection very good.


monkey_toes


Dec 20, 2004, 8:46 PM
Post #38 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 19, 2004
Posts: 197

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post


Please don't even consider comparing Bush in the same vein as Winston Churchill. I find that highly offensive.

:evil:

Merry Christmas


bumblie


Dec 20, 2004, 8:47 PM
Post #39 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I don't get your point. Perhaps you could (not to be confused with would) explain it to me. Perhaps, but doubtful.


thegreytradster


Dec 20, 2004, 9:03 PM
Post #40 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Please don't even consider comparing Bush in the same vein as Winston Churchill. I find that highly offensive.

:evil:

Merry Christmas

Merely an inside joke for the resident Churchill expert. You're not him!


curt


Dec 20, 2004, 9:48 PM
Post #41 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post


I like it, although I agree that GWB is no Winston Churchill--not even close.

Curt


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 10:09 PM
Post #42 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
It's good to see liberals making historically ignorant and offensive comparisons between Bush and Hitler, and the usual "Bush is a monkey" type statements. Please keep it up for another four years, that way you'll just about guarantee another Republican gets elected in 2008.


Ignorant eh?

Here is a parallel:

German Nazification
Phase 1
Seizure of Power

1933: January 30
Hitler is appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg
Weimar Republic President Paul von Hindenburg appointed Adolf Hitler Chancellor even though the Nazis were only a small minority in the German government. On his first day as chancellor, Hitler manipulated Hindenburg into dissolving the Reichstag and calling for the new elections he had wanted - to be held on March 5, 1933. President Hindenburg had fallen under Hitler's spell and was signing just about anything Hitler put in front of him. Hitler began immediately to orchestrate the complete takeover of all mechanisms of governance and functions of state, to make Nazi Germany a totalitarian dictatorship.
February 3, 1933
In a speech to the leading army and navy commanders, Hitler revealed his Lebensraum program for the conquest of "living space" for the German people, rearmament, and resistance to the Versailles Treaty. He spoke of the importance of the military and promised not to involve it in domestic political disputes.
American Nazification
Phase 1
Seizure of Power

2000: November
Bush is appointed President by the Supreme Court

Bush is foisted on the American public through a coup d'etat of the Supreme Court after massive election fraud perpetrated by his brother in Florida.
Thousands of voters were illegally disqualified in the 2000 election in the state of Florida, when Jeb Bush and his Secretary of State compiled a false list of felons who would not be allowed to vote.
The Supreme Court was packed with reactionary right-wingers, several of whom had conflicts of interest because of their ties to the Bush family.
Dubya appoints convicted criminals, racists, and corporate-controlled underlings to his cabinet.
January, 2001
Bush pushes his tax cuts for the wealthy through Congress, begins his assaults on the environment, and commands the FBI to stop investigations concerning the Bin Laden family and other suspected terrorist cells.

Phase 2
An Atrocity to Subdue the People
February 27, 1933
The Reichstag Fire

On the night the German Parliament Building--the Reichstag-- burned down, Hitler was at Goebbels's apartment having dinner. They rushed to the scene where they met Göring who was already screaming false charges and making threats against the Communists. At first glance, Hitler described the fire as a beacon from heaven. "You are now witnessing the beginning of a great epoch in German history. . . This fire is the beginning," Hitler told a news reporter at the scene.
While not all historians agree on who actually perpetrated the Reichstag Fire, writers such as Klaus P. Fischer feel that most likely the Nazis were responsible.
A dazed Dutch Communist named Marinus van der Lubbe was found at the scene and charged with arson. He was later found guilty and executed.
On February 28, 1933--the day after the Reichstag fire--President Hindenburg and Chancellor Hitler invoked Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution, which permitted the suspension of civil liberties in a time of national emergency.
A Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of the People and State abrogated the following German constitutional protections:
• Free expression of opinion
• Freedom of the press
• Right of assembly and association
• Right to privacy of postal and electronic communications
• Protection against unlawful searches and seizures
• Individual property rights
• States' right of self-government
A supplemental decree created the SA (Storm Troops) and SS (Special Security) Federal police agencies.
Phase 2
An Atrocity to Subdue
the People
September 11, 2001
The Terrorist Attacks


When the Word Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked, Bush was listening to Florida grade school children read. When informed of the attack by his associates, he continued listening. He then flew to a security bunker in Nebraska before finally returning to the White House.
No military aircraft had been scrambled to intercept the four hijacked planes, though there was plenty of time to do so.
The Bush junta's totally cynical appointment of the war criminal Henry Kissinger to create a coverup for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on American citizens arouses additional suspicion that the Bush administration was complicit in the horror. Under pressure, Kissinger was forced to resign.
Hundreds of suspects were immediately jailed after 9/11, without benefit of habeas corpus or other rights. Some of these suspects have already been found guilty of the crime.
The Bush junta forced the Patriot Act bill through Congress, suspending essential civil liberties, excusing oppression as essential to the "war on terrorism," and maintaining that dissent was treason.
The Patriot Act abrogated the following American constitutional protections:
• Free expression of opinion
• Freedom of the press
• Right of assembly and association
• Right to privacy of postal and electronic communications
• Protection against unlawful searches and seizures
• Individual property rights
• States' right of self-government
Presidential decrees make it possible for military forces to be used to monitor and control the civilian population, in abrogation of the posse comitatus act.

Phase 3
The Leader Destroys Elections and Appoints Himself Dictator

March 24, 1933
The Enabling Act


On March 24, 1933, the Reichstag passed the Law for Terminating the Suffering of People and Nation, also known as the Enabling Law, essentially granting Adolf Hitler dictatorial power. There was no further need for elections because the Fuhrer/Dictator made all the decisions!
Since the Nazis had only been able to gain a 44% plurality in the Reichstag in the March 5, 1933 elections, Hitler looked for another way to establish a full dictatorship.
• Herman Göring--later to become the head of Germany's armed forces--declared that there was no further need for State governments. So over the next few weeks, in each of the legal Weimar states the local Nazi organizations instigated riots and then summarily replaced the elected state government by appointed Nazi Reich Commissioners to quell the disorder.
• The Nazi legislators sponsored the Enabling Act, a bill that gave Hitler dictatorial powers for four years. To make sure the law passed, the Nazis imprisoned Communists and created propaganda campaigns to influence public opinion. Just days before the vote on the bill, the Nazis held a staged ceremony in Potsdam in which Hitler was depicted as a conservative national leader, not the head of a radical party. Hitler promised that the Enabling Act would only benefit the German people.
The moment the bill passed, however, the German democratic constitution was abrogated and Nazi Party rule became absolute. Hitler immediately invoked the new law to rescind the democratic freedoms of the Weimar Republic and to dissolve political parties and organizations.

The Dictator Establishes
Death Camps
March 22, 1933
Dachau slave labor death camp established


The Hitler regime established the first concentration camp about 15 kilometers northwest of Munich, dedicated on March 20 by Heinrich Himmler. It held about 5,000 prisoners, mostly Communists, Social-Democrats, and homosexuals. Bavarian police guarded the prisoners until April 11, when the SS took over. The slave-labor death camps, so hideous in their reality that Germans didn't want to hear about them, became an efficient tool in silencing opponents of the regime. Dachau was a "political camp" and the first Jewish detainees were among the best-known political opponents of the Nazi regime. More than 10,000 Jews from all over Germany were interned there after the Kristallnacht pogrom. When the systematic genocide of Jews began, the Jewish prisoners were deported from Dachau and other camps in the Reich to the extermination camps in the East.
Throughout 1933 and 1934, thousands of Communists, Social Democrats and Jews were arrested in various parts of Germany. There was no secret about these arrests. The German people made no effort to stop Hitler's terrorism. They allowed themselves to be brainwashed by his relentless propaganda and regarded their Fuhrer as making heroic efforts to re-establish order and decency.
On May 2, 1933, Hitler dissolved all the German trade unions and within six months he had destroyed the largest and best-organized workers' movement in the world at that time. This catastrophic defeat of the German workers had the worst possible psychological effect because throughout this entire time there was not even a single symbolic act of resistance. Had there been even an attempt at resisting the Nazi's relentless destruction of human freedoms, it would at least have allowed the workers to feel that they had not gone down without a struggle.
Throughout 1933 and 1934, the SS, Gestapo and police, often assisted by fire brigades and emergency services, regularly sealed off specific German housing estates and combed through them house by house for suspected "enemies of the state." Local SA groups carried out beatings, arbitrary arrests and spontaneous vandalism, creating an atmosphere of terror and helplessness in working class strongholds Germans had believed to be safe. In this way the Nazi goons smashed any semblance of working class solidarity. The Gestapo built up its surveillance apparatus to make mass resistance impossible. So German people felt an ever-present sense of terror and fear, as if they were living in a country occupied by foreign troops.
The Nazi terror continued, unchallenged:
• June 22, 1933: the Social Democrat party, the only opposition party to the Nazis, was banned
• July 7, 1933: the elected Social Democrats were expelled from the government
• July 14 1933: a law was passed making sterilization compulsory for those considered unfit
• July 15, 1933: all political parties were banned except the Nazi party
• July 1933: concentration camps were systematized
• October 1933: the entire press was now under Nazi control
o New laws destroyed editors' and journalists’ independence and expression of personal opinion
o The film industries were taken over one by one
• November, 1933:
o General elections were held for a single-party parliament
o The Nuremberg race laws were established
• January 20, 1934: ‘Regulation of National Labor’ broke the power of all organized labor within German workplaces
• January 30, 1934: the local governments were dissolved without provision for re-election; local commissioners were henceforth appointed by Reich ministers to whom they were beholden
• February 1934: the Upper House of Parliament was dissolved
• May 5, 1934: the German Protestant Church's ‘confessing synod’ made the ‘Barmen Theological Declaration’ against the totalitarian state; later in 1934, the Catholic Bishop Galen of Munster preached against the Nazi attacks on Christianity in a sermon widely disseminated
• June 30, 1934: the ‘Night of the Long Knives' -- hundreds of "enemies of the state" were murdered in cold blood
o The massacre included several prominent non-Nazis, among them, the leader of Catholic action and two army generals
o Among those murdered were socialist revolutionaries within the Nazi party
o People the world over were shocked at the mass bloodshed, but no reaction within Germany or elsewhere challenged the Nazi terror
• August 1934: Hitler became Der Führer as well as Chancellor; a plebiscite of the German people formally ratified his dictatorship
The German people had allowed this reign of terror to seize control of the entire nation without any significant resistance or expression of outrage.
The same thing can happen to any people who do not begin early to resist the attacks on their liberties.

Phase 3
The Leader Destroys Elections and Appoints Himself Dictator

November, 2002
Homeland Security Act


In the 2000 and now again in the midterm 2002 elections, electronic voting has meant that our democratic right to have our votes counted fairly and accurately has been taken from us by the Bush junta.
Since we now suffer under the situation where there is no opposition to the criminal Bush regime--most Democrats having effectively become pawns of the Republicans--then none of the state election frauds will be investigated. We can't be sure that key races such as that of Mondale in Minnesota and Carnahan in Missouri were not the result of massive vote fraud. We can be sure that the Florida gubernatorial race was completely fixed.
This sinister phase 3 of the Nazification of America is best understood by reviewing some of the information that Greg Palast has made available. Palast is the investigative reporter for BBC and the Observer who first exposed the 2000 Florida vote crimes.
94,000 people -- over half of them African American --were on a "scrub list" in Florida, resulting in their being blocked from voting in the 2000 election. Did Florida rectify this mistake before the 2002 election? Fuhgeddaboudit! Those voters as of 2004 have not yet been reinstated in Florida.
Electronic, touch screen voting is the basis for election fraud:
• votes can easily be lost through "software glitches"
• Democratic votes can become Republican votes and no one is the wiser
The "touch" screen computers are made by ES&S, the vendor chosen by Katherine Harris, Florida Secretary of State and current congressperson. The lobbyist who sold that company's system to Jeb and Katherine is Sandy Mortham, founder of Women for Jeb and Harris' predecessor as Secretary of State. Mortham was the person who instigated the scam in 1998 to find black voters who could be disqualified.
ES&S machines, not surprisingly, failed to work in black precincts in 2002. And of course with electronic voting there is no paper ballot back-up.

In the "decisive" 2002 mid-term "elections" the Republicans gained control of all branches of government: executive, legislative, and judicial. Just as in Hitler's Enabling Act, so Bush Jr. forced the Homeland Security bill through Congress which gave him complete dictatorial powers:
• the President is able to make any decision he wishes without judicial or legislative restraint
• the executive branch can now carry on its meetings in secret, without scrutiny from the press or the people
• the "homeland security" agents can now intrude in any part of a citizen's life
• The Cyber Security Enhancement Act slipped into the Homeland Security bill at the last moment:
o allows police to conduct Internet or telephone eavesdropping willy-nilly with no requirement to ask a court's permission first
o demands life sentences for hackers that 'recklessly' endanger lives
o allows Net surveillance to gather telephone numbers, IP addresses, and URLs or e-mail information, where an 'immediate threat to a national security interest' is suspected
o permits ISPs to hand users' records over to law enforcement authorities, overturning current legislation that outlaws such behavior
On November 14, 2002, as the Senate was being pressured to pass a hastily-prepared homeland security bill, Senator Byrd spoke out vehemently against the bill as Bush's grab for dictatorial power--the worst act of tyranny, Byrd said, in the fifty years he's been in Congress.

Secret US Police Concentration Camps
In a revealing admission in June, 1997, the Director of Resource Management for the U.S. Army confirmed the validity of a memorandum relating to the establishment of a civilian inmate labor program under development by the Department of the Army. The document states, "Enclosed for your review and comment is the draft Army regulation on civilian inmate labor utilization" and the procedure to "establish civilian prison camps on installations."
• Amid widespread rumors, the late Congressman Henry Gonzales clarified the question of the existence of civilian detention camps. In an interview, Gonzales stated, "The truth is yes--you do have these stand by provisions, and the plans are here . . . whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism . . . evoke the military and arrest Americans and put them in detention camps."
Pierre Tristam's 11/26/02 editorial in the Daytona Beach News Journal blew the lid off the Homeland Security Department.
"The New Deal was a 'reorganization' or an 'expansion' of government. The creation of the Homeland Security Department is a coup within the government. What Ollie North once did illegally in a White House basement - free-lancing policy with public money and accountability to no one - a $37 billion department with 170,000 employees will now do legally in what is sure to be a high-rise of basements and metaphorical windows on Washington's Bureaucracy Row. Like a Wall Street firm beholden only to its board room, the second-largest government department is now a proprietary arm of the presidency. It operates beyond congressional scrutiny and public accountability, and guarantees secrecy to its own machinations or to those of any private business with which it deals.
"Let's say Kafka Inc. were a company that made surveillance cameras the government was installing at a few thousand intersections. Kafka's products happen to be pathetically faulty, as such devices commonly are. The public would be outraged if it knew. But all Kafka would have to do to keep its products' evaluations from becoming public is submit them to the Department of Homeland Security, where everything is to be kept secret by law. What Kafka does, every other company or hospital or airline or even local sheriff's department can do with any proposal, any budget item, any safety plan made part of the homeland security racket. The department, in other words, is a black hole to the Freedom of Information Act - everything goes in, nothing gets out."
If the torture and murder at American prison camps in Iraq and Cuba don't send chills down your spine, watch out that you're not becoming replicas of the "good Germans" in 1930 who turned a deaf ear--and blind eye--to the Nazi death camps.


In reply to:
"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator," said Adolf Hitler.

"God told me to strike at Al Qa'ida and I struck them. And then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did. With the might of God on our side we will triumph," said George Bush


Partner melodicllama


Dec 20, 2004, 10:10 PM
Post #43 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
It's good to see liberals making historically ignorant and offensive comparisons between Bush and Hitler, and the usual "Bush is a monkey" type statements. Please keep it up for another four years, that way you'll just about guarantee another Republican gets elected in 2008.

classic...liberals bring up valid points about Bush's ineptitude, and all conservatives can do is bash the liberals


bluto


Dec 20, 2004, 10:12 PM
Post #44 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

[quote="grimpiperx]
Ignorant eh?
Yes, and an entertainer of dumbass conspiracy theories, way to go.


curt


Dec 20, 2004, 10:22 PM
Post #45 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

This thread is now exceeding even my wildest expectations.

Curt


bluto


Dec 20, 2004, 10:24 PM
Post #46 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
This thread is now exceeding even my wildest expectations.

Curt

I'm doing my part :lol:


Partner melodicllama


Dec 20, 2004, 10:29 PM
Post #47 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Yes, and an entertainer of dumbass conspiracy theories, way to go.

factual information=conspiracy theory? :? :? :? where'd u come up with that load of steaming horse crap?? grimpiperx's post is valid(and awesome) and ur tiny brain was so overwhelmed by the barrage of unyielding truth that all you could do was senselessly bash the post with completely false and unsupported accusations...bravo


bluto


Dec 20, 2004, 10:37 PM
Post #48 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Yes, and an entertainer of dumbass conspiracy theories, way to go.

factual information=conspiracy theory? :? :? :? where'd u come up with that load of steaming horse crap?? grimpiperx's post is valid(and awesome) and ur tiny brain was so overwhelmed by the barrage of unyielding truth that all you could do was senselessly bash the post with completely false and unsupported accusations...bravo

There's nothing factual, truthful or "awesome" about suggesting that Bush orchestrated the 9-11 attacks in order to seize new levels of power. If you believe more than two sentences of that "awesome" post I'd suggest you look into getting on some anti-paranoia medication.


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 10:42 PM
Post #49 of 244 (3839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
This thread is now exceeding even my wildest expectations.

Curt

I'm doing my part :lol:


Yar, as am I :)

Seriously, Bluto, whether or not Bush is or is not becoming a dictator that plans to take over the world is a theory. But the information within the post is fact not theory, there is a actual difference. Do you have anything for Bush that is Truth and Facts? :o not just Jingoism and Smearing?


monkey_toes


Dec 20, 2004, 10:49 PM
Post #50 of 244 (3837 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 19, 2004
Posts: 197

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Please don't even consider comparing Bush in the same vein as Winston Churchill. I find that highly offensive.

:evil:

Merry Christmas

Merely an inside joke for the resident Churchill expert. You're not him!

Nothing personal but I don't give a rats ass - it is offensive. Especially if you are like me ENGLISH!


Partner melodicllama


Dec 20, 2004, 10:49 PM
Post #51 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Yes, and an entertainer of dumbass conspiracy theories, way to go.

factual information=conspiracy theory? :? :? :? where'd u come up with that load of steaming horse crap?? grimpiperx's post is valid(and awesome) and ur tiny brain was so overwhelmed by the barrage of unyielding truth that all you could do was senselessly bash the post with completely false and unsupported accusations...bravo

There's nothing factual, truthful or "awesome" about suggesting that Bush orchestrated the 9-11 attacks in order to seize new levels of power. If you believe more than two sentences of that "awesome" post I'd suggest you look into getting on some anti-paranoia medication.

well excuse ME for not being blind to the truth


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 10:52 PM
Post #52 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Yes, and an entertainer of dumbass conspiracy theories, way to go.

factual information=conspiracy theory? :? :? :? where'd u come up with that load of steaming horse crap?? grimpiperx's post is valid(and awesome) and ur tiny brain was so overwhelmed by the barrage of unyielding truth that all you could do was senselessly bash the post with completely false and unsupported accusations...bravo

There's nothing factual, truthful or "awesome" about suggesting that Bush orchestrated the 9-11 attacks in order to seize new levels of power. If you believe more than two sentences of that "awesome" post I'd suggest you look into getting on some anti-paranoia medication.


It suggested that he did nothing to stop them and clearly gained power from the fear. It never said he orchestrated them......you call us paranoid :roll:


bluto


Dec 20, 2004, 10:56 PM
Post #53 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
This thread is now exceeding even my wildest expectations.

Curt

I'm doing my part :lol:


Yar, as am I :)

Seriously, Bluto, whether or not Bush is or is not becoming a dictator that plans to take over the world is a theory. But the information within the post is fact not theory, there is a actual difference. Do you have anything for Bush that is Truth and Facts? :o not just Jingoism and Smearing?

There's plenty in that post that is not fact. The point of my first post in this thread is that the type of rhtetoric contained in your "cut and paste" is inflammatory, ignorant, and hurts the liberal cause. If you truly want to further liberal causes and left wing issues you and many others are going about it in entirely the wrong way.


caughtinside


Dec 20, 2004, 11:12 PM
Post #54 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Truth is the basis of the best trolls. Curt really brought em out of the woodwork with this one! Bravo!


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 11:12 PM
Post #55 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I simply found it silly that you said
In reply to:
historically ignorant and offensive comparisons between Bush and Hitler
. When there is plenty to back it up. I do not plan on "promoting my cause" on RC.com. I think we can all agree thats not a great idea. I find it annoying that you still say it is ignorant, with out any thing to back up your own statements.


bluto


Dec 20, 2004, 11:24 PM
Post #56 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
I simply found it silly that you said
In reply to:
historically ignorant and offensive comparisons between Bush and Hitler
. When there is plenty to back it up. I do not plan on "promoting my cause" on RC.com. I think we can all agree thats not a great idea. I find it annoying that you still say it is ignorant, with out any thing to back up your own statements.

It's obvious you don't understand the magnitude of what happened in Europe during the second world war, if you did, you would see how ignorant and offensive the comparison is. It's also obvious that you don't understand the difference between facts, and the suggestions, speculations, assertions etc. that your "cut and paste" is based on.


caughtinside


Dec 20, 2004, 11:30 PM
Post #57 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

But Bluto, it's so much easier to start with the conclusion you want, and then selectively pick 'facts' to support it! :lol:


thegreytradster


Dec 20, 2004, 11:33 PM
Post #58 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Please don't even consider comparing Bush in the same vein as Winston Churchill. I find that highly offensive.

:evil:

Merry Christmas

Merely an inside joke for the resident Churchill expert. You're not him!

Nothing personal but I don't give a rats ass - it is offensive. Especially if you are like me ENGLISH!

Not often you can troll both sides of the Atlantic with one cast :lol:


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 11:33 PM
Post #59 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
It's also obvious that you don't understand the difference between facts, and the suggestions, speculations, assertions etc.


Care to explain? :lol: Come on Bluto actaully say something instead of just bashing my posts. Explain your accusations.....


bluto


Dec 20, 2004, 11:37 PM
Post #60 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
But Bluto, it's so much easier to start with the conclusion you want, and then selectively pick 'facts' to support it! :lol:

It's so much fun to stroll through the orchard and cherry pick.

There seems to be a direct corelation between one's side being out of power, and the willingness to engage in ignorant conspiracy theories. During the Clinton years it was the right wing extremists with all the talk of black helicopters and the UN imposed "one world government". Now it's the lefts turn, and they are making quite a showing with all the Bush=Hitler nonsense.


bobd1953


Dec 20, 2004, 11:41 PM
Post #61 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator," said Adolf Hitler.

"God told me to strike at Al Qa'ida and I struck them. And then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did. With the might of God on our side we will triumph," said George Bush

Seems like they have one thing in common, killing and all in the name of God.


curt


Dec 20, 2004, 11:56 PM
Post #62 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Heh, I'm even reeling in the heavyweight lunkers now. 8^)

Curt


grimpiperx


Dec 20, 2004, 11:59 PM
Post #63 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
There seems to be a direct corelation between one's side being out of power, and the willingness to engage in ignorant conspiracy theories. During the Clinton years it was the right wing extremists with all the talk of black helicopters and the UN imposed "one world government". Now it's the lefts turn, and they are making quite a showing with all the Bush=Hitler nonsense.


I agree that there will allways be naysayers to the people in power, but there is some truth and there is some BS. I would say there probaly is some truth in the increase in power in the UN that Clinton supported more so than Bush has. I think BlackHelicopter stuff is BS. I think there are some frightning similarities to Hitlers rise and strangle hold on power and Bush's. As I stated earlier though I even do not believe that Bush planned the 9/11 attacks. Although a tad off topic you know the phrase "No one died when Clinton lied" ? This is an important point this type of shit surrounding Clinton was about sex and a real-estate deal. The ones surrounding Bush are worth Billions of dollars and killing the people of our counrty. Facts like the fact that our President lied about WMD's which is becoming more and more indisputable. Whith Clinton not much really happend I do not think it was right of him to cheat on Hillary or make dirty real-estate deals, but compared to the "real-estate" Haliburton is getting it is nothing.

My 100th post! Yay!


cosmokramer


Dec 21, 2004, 12:15 AM
Post #64 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 1, 2004
Posts: 191

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
And that would be weird too considering he has the charisma of a monkey :wink: :lol:

if you look close he greatly resembles a monkey as well

LOL

http://politicalhumor.about.com/...hics/bush_monkey.jpg
http://politicalhumor.about.com/...hics/bush_simian.jpg
http://politicalhumor.about.com/...phics/bush_snarl.jpg
http://www.aquilaarts.com/bushmonkey.jpg


abouttopeel


Dec 21, 2004, 12:25 AM
Post #65 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 28, 2004
Posts: 190

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

"Get your paws off me you damn dirty ape!"

Too funny!


bobd1953


Dec 21, 2004, 12:36 AM
Post #66 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Those pictures kinda disprove the creationist point of view.


Partner melodicllama


Dec 21, 2004, 12:51 AM
Post #67 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Those pictures kinda disprove the creationist point of view.

bush is religious...so he himself is living proof that he is wrong? thats beautiful


irockclimbtoo


Dec 21, 2004, 12:54 AM
Post #68 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2004
Posts: 309

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ab


Partner melodicllama


Dec 21, 2004, 12:57 AM
Post #69 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

me and james are involved in politics...


irockclimbtoo


Dec 21, 2004, 12:57 AM
Post #70 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2004
Posts: 309

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ab


irockclimbtoo


Dec 21, 2004, 1:00 AM
Post #71 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2004
Posts: 309

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ab


grimpiperx


Dec 21, 2004, 1:02 AM
Post #72 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

My topiccc............My topic!...its meellting......meeeeellttting! :cry:
Where is Bluto to restore the serious arguement we were having?! ::humph:: Yea yea Curt I know its your topic but I was having fun with Bluto.


irockclimbtoo


Dec 21, 2004, 1:06 AM
Post #73 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2004
Posts: 309

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

ab


danooguy


Dec 21, 2004, 1:32 AM
Post #74 of 244 (3846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 31, 2002
Posts: 3659

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Comparison number one is the funniest.


climbsomething


Dec 21, 2004, 2:52 AM
Post #75 of 244 (3848 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Bluto, you're being trolled by tag-team 16-year-olds. Or trolls claiming to be kids. Either way, it doesn't offer much dignity ;)


Partner melodicllama


Dec 21, 2004, 3:47 AM
Post #76 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

because heaven forbid a 16 year old could make an insightful comment or argue a point of view successfully :x


tempestwind


Dec 21, 2004, 3:48 AM
Post #77 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 23, 2004
Posts: 133

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
"The election was about the use of American influence," Bush said.


The election was about fear!!! :x

Exactly!


grimpiperx


Dec 21, 2004, 4:25 AM
Post #78 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Bluto, you're being trolled by tag-team 16-year-olds. Or trolls claiming to be kids. Either way, it doesn't offer much dignity ;)

:lol: I actaully find that funny, and I am one of the teens(turn 17 in 40 mins!) your talking about! But yea come on Bluto lets continue. I can post in 2nd period as well :lol: BTW climbsomething where does it actaully say we are teens?


curt


Dec 21, 2004, 4:29 AM
Post #79 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
My topiccc............My topic!...its meellting......meeeeellttting! :cry:
Where is Bluto to restore the serious arguement we were having?! ::humph:: Yea yea Curt I know its your topic but I was having fun with Bluto.

Hey, have at it. I just start these things by lighting the fuse--and then run away. :lol:

Curt


Partner coylec


Dec 21, 2004, 5:09 AM
Post #80 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 2024

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
My topiccc............My topic!...its meellting......meeeeellttting! :cry:
Where is Bluto to restore the serious arguement we were having?! ::humph:: Yea yea Curt I know its your topic but I was having fun with Bluto.

Hey, have at it. I just start these things by lighting the fuse--and then run away. :lol:

Curt

I'm just in awe of you. Seriously.

More logs for the fire! Time magazine's commercials don't show the 2004 Person of the Year ... they show the 2003 "Person of the Year" = the American Soldier. Is this a advertising scheme to appeal to the less divisive "patriotism" or evidence of a liberal media bias?

coylec


grimpiperx


Dec 21, 2004, 5:32 AM
Post #81 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
My topiccc............My topic!...its meellting......meeeeellttting! :cry:
Where is Bluto to restore the serious arguement we were having?! ::humph:: Yea yea Curt I know its your topic but I was having fun with Bluto.

Hey, have at it. I just start these things by lighting the fuse--and then run away. :lol:

Curt

I'm just in awe of you. Seriously.

More logs for the fire! Time magazine's commercials don't show the 2004 Person of the Year ... they show the 2003 "Person of the Year" = the American Soldier. Is this a advertising scheme to appeal to the less divisive "patriotism" or evidence of a liberal media bias?

coylec


In awe of Curt? or unlikely :oops: my brilliant arguement :lol: Its an obvious liberal media biased, and Im oblivously liberal, so there, case closed. Now what hapend to all the posts that bash mine? I'll break out my "tag-team" partner MelodicLlama if need be :twisted: :lol:


bumblie


Dec 21, 2004, 1:16 PM
Post #82 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Eventually, the truth comes out and the latest batch of leftwing zealots will quietly depart with their tails between their legs. Anyone seen prufrock or treesail lately?

Nice work Curt. Truly impressive.


yanqui


Dec 21, 2004, 4:24 PM
Post #83 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 1559

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004:

http://www.topplebush.com/...r/bush_timecover.jpg


pinktricam


Dec 21, 2004, 4:45 PM
Post #84 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
"The election was about the use of American influence," Bush said.


The election was about fear!!! :x

Exactly!
Nah...I have it on good authority that it was a morality thingie :!:


Partner tradman


Dec 21, 2004, 5:06 PM
Post #85 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Hang on, I've got a better idea.

http://www.digitalface.co.uk/curt.jpg

Is that better?

:wink:


curt


Dec 21, 2004, 5:10 PM
Post #86 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

It might be, if there was a picture there.

Curt


Partner tradman


Dec 21, 2004, 5:30 PM
Post #87 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Ummmm.... (rummage rummage).... is that it now?


curt


Dec 21, 2004, 5:36 PM
Post #88 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Ummmm.... (rummage rummage).... is that it now?

Hahahahahahaha--hysterical. Nice one Trad. Hahahaha.

Curt


Partner melodicllama


Dec 21, 2004, 7:59 PM
Post #89 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Eventually, the truth comes out and the latest batch of leftwing zealots will quietly depart with their tails between their legs.

even though all we have done in this thread is bring truths to light, and all you have done is bash either us or our posts? looks to me like conservatives have more reason to fear the truth under this administration...if bush's crimes ever came out we wudnt hav a republican president for centuries!!


bumblie


Dec 21, 2004, 8:15 PM
Post #90 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

That lengthy bit of propaganda back on page page three kind of set the tone of this discussion.

You probably think it's all accurate and true.

On a side note - your screen name looks like a dyslexic combination of melanoma and chlamydia.


vertical_reality


Dec 21, 2004, 8:25 PM
Post #91 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
That lengthy bit of propaganda back on page page three kind of set the tone of this discussion.

You probably think it's all accurate and true.

On a side note - your screen name looks like a dyslexic combination of melanoma and chlamydia.

Yet you proved him right.


bumblie


Dec 21, 2004, 8:38 PM
Post #92 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

How so?

Is calling BS on such nonsense bashing or merely bringing truth to light?


vertical_reality


Dec 21, 2004, 8:43 PM
Post #93 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
even though all we have done in this thread is bring truths to light, and all you have done is bash either us or our posts?


In reply to:
On a side note - your screen name looks like a dyslexic combination of melanoma and chlamydia.


dlintz


Dec 21, 2004, 8:48 PM
Post #94 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2002
Posts: 1982

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

This thread is a hoot!! Remember people, it's Time magazine we're talking about. :boring:

d.


bumblie


Dec 21, 2004, 8:48 PM
Post #95 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
even though all we have done in this thread is bring truths to light

This is complete BS.

What part of "This is complete BS" don't you get?


bumblie


Dec 21, 2004, 8:50 PM
Post #96 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
This thread is a hoot!! Remember people, it's Time magazine we're talking about. :boring:

d.

As opposed to American Spectator's Man of the Year or Mother Jones' Human of the Year?


Partner melodicllama


Dec 21, 2004, 9:08 PM
Post #97 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
That lengthy bit of propaganda back on page page three kind of set the tone of this discussion.

You probably think it's all accurate and true.

On a side note - your screen name looks like a dyslexic combination of melanoma and chlamydia.

Yet you proved him right.

bravo vertical!! its incredible...i say all conservatives do in this forum is bash us...and as a defense mechanism he turns around and bashes me!! hey lets hear some solid arguments justifying your support of bush.........................its hard isnt it?


bumblie


Dec 21, 2004, 9:25 PM
Post #98 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

When lefties get called for telling a bunch of lies, they say it's bashing. :roll:

I missed where this thread was about providing a solid argument justifying support for Bush. Maybe I'm unobservant or maybe.... just maybe.... you're making stuff up. How out of character. :roll:


Partner melodicllama


Dec 21, 2004, 9:39 PM
Post #99 of 244 (3785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

thats funny cuz i missed where this thread was about calling something lies without having any proof of your accusation...you call it a lie because you're ignorant, not because it's false information.


grimpiperx


Dec 21, 2004, 9:50 PM
Post #100 of 244 (3783 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
When lefties get called for telling a bunch of lies, they say it's bashing.

I missed where this thread was about providing a solid argument justifying support for Bush. Maybe I'm unobservant or maybe.... just maybe.... you're making stuff up. How out of character.


You're just unobservent


In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
This thread is now exceeding even my wildest expectations.

Curt

I'm doing my part :lol:


Yar, as am I :)

Seriously, Bluto, whether or not Bush is or is not becoming a dictator that plans to take over the world is a theory. But the information within the post is fact not theory, there is a actual difference. Do you have anything for Bush that is Truth and Facts? :o not just Jingoism and Smearing?


Never really got a response........ I know your not Bluto but its same problem. I simply posted something to defend the fact that a comparison bewtween Bush and Hitler was not ignorant, then I just got a bunch of Shitt saying that my post was ignorant with NO actual arguement of their own.


jbell2355


Dec 22, 2004, 2:24 AM
Post #101 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 23, 2004
Posts: 207

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Time made a good choice for person of the year. Bush was overwhelmingly re-elected to a second term as President of our great country. He is leading an unpopular war, fighting terrorism, helping to improve the economy that Clinton destroyed and is constantly in the spotlight for all of these reasons. He has an interesting life story. Really, who else would have been a candidate?


danooguy


Dec 22, 2004, 3:21 AM
Post #102 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 31, 2002
Posts: 3659

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I was going to nominate curt for Community Forum Man Of The Year, then I considered Trad, then I read this and the choice was clear:

In reply to:
Time made a good choice for person of the year. Bush was overwhelmingly re-elected to a second term as President of our great country. He is leading an unpopular war, fighting terrorism, helping to improve the economy that Clinton destroyed and is constantly in the spotlight for all of these reasons. He has an interesting life story. Really, who else would have been a candidate?

Very good._________________


But I also liked this from Trad:

In reply to:
Ummmm.... (rummage rummage).... is that it now?
(Don't know why but it made me laugh and I needed a laugh today :D .)


Partner melodicllama


Dec 22, 2004, 3:36 AM
Post #103 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Time made a good choice for person of the year. Bush was overwhelmingly re-elected to a second term as President of our great country. He is leading an unpopular war, fighting terrorism, helping to improve the economy that Clinton destroyed and is constantly in the spotlight for all of these reasons. He has an interesting life story. Really, who else would have been a candidate?

hmm...what to correct first...:
-the election was not overwhelming; it once again came down to one state, and the vote in that state had less than a 5% difference between the candidates. The candidates had a final difference of about 30 electoral votes out of a possible 538.

-Leading an unpopular war does not make you a good person, it makes you an idiot. He has made the international opinion of this country plummet unlike any other president. he has no doubt sparked MORE terrorism from the numerous arab countries that now dispise us.

-Key economic figures increased under clinton's administration; Bush, thanks in a large part to his pet war, has collapsed the economy with such alarming efficiency not seen since the great depression. Clinton actually managed to decrease the national debt; Bush has, not considering inflation, added more to it than any president in history.


shank


Dec 22, 2004, 3:37 AM
Post #104 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 14, 2002
Posts: 541

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Who the fuck cares?
We are stuck with who we are stuck with so it doesn't really matter anymore.

Who the fuck cares what people in Canada think?

Who the fuck cares who Time magazine names as the man of the year?

GQ named Sharma one of the “Amazing Bodies of the Year”, there that should get your feeble minds off the election that is over and you can't do a damn thing about anymore.

Dumbasses


grimpiperx


Dec 22, 2004, 3:41 AM
Post #105 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Time made a good choice for person of the year. Bush was overwhelmingly re-elected to a second term as President of our great country. He is leading an unpopular war, fighting terrorism, helping to improve the economy that Clinton destroyed and is constantly in the spotlight for all of these reasons. He has an interesting life story. Really, who else would have been a candidate?


First, only 59 million out of the country's 300 million voted; out of them, Bush won by only 3 million, i.e. 1 percent of the population, harldy "overwhelming." :roll:

In the fight against terrorism, which he COULD have led with the overwhelming support of the international community after 9/11, he let Osama bin Laden get away and withdrew 20,000 soldiers from Afghanistan to go into Iraq, which had no relationship to 9/11 and NO weapons of mass destruction, the lie that was used to justify the invasion.

In the process, more than 1,000 American soldiers have died and the official count of Iraqi dead is about 16,000. He has made U.S. citizens hated throughout the world, created a new generation of Muslim's who would give their lives against us, and made it unsafe for us to travel in about a third of the world.

After years of fiscal deficit under the Republicans, Clinton managed to create a fiscal surplus, and spur tremendous growth and employment (remember the '90's?). But Bush spent nearly $200 billion on Iraq alone, destroyed the surplus and the value of the dollar (it is almost in a free fall against all currencies of developed countries) and allmost all of our states are bankrupt.

Although two million workers lost jobs in Bush's first two years, he has cut unemployment benefits by more than any other president. There hasn't been greater income inequality in the past 100 years than is being created under his administration. And our children are behind most other developed countries in science and math.

Yeah, he is the man who got us into the 2004 mess, it's right that it should be named his year. :x

Have anything to say?? :evil:


Partner melodicllama


Dec 22, 2004, 3:49 AM
Post #106 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

YES!! how can you (conservatives) argue using false information? clinton is the only modern president to help the economy! :roll: how can we argue intelligently against such idiocy?


grimpiperx


Dec 22, 2004, 3:50 AM
Post #107 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Who the f--- cares?

People who are not sheep.


Partner melodicllama


Dec 22, 2004, 3:52 AM
Post #108 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

or people whos IQ is less than their age :roll:


curt


Dec 22, 2004, 3:55 AM
Post #109 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Time made a good choice for person of the year. Bush was overwhelmingly re-elected to a second term as President of our great country. He is leading an unpopular war, fighting terrorism, helping to improve the economy that Clinton destroyed and is constantly in the spotlight for all of these reasons. He has an interesting life story. Really, who else would have been a candidate?


First, only 59 million out of the country's 300 million voted; out of them, Bush won by only 3 million, i.e. 1 percent of the population, harldy "overwhelming." :roll:

If, as according to CNN, 60,600,000 people voted for George Bush and 57,300,000 voted for Kerry (both rounded to the nearest 100,000) how is it exactly that you claim only 59,000,000 people voted? I'm confused.

Curt


myrmidon


Dec 22, 2004, 4:03 AM
Post #110 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 10, 2004
Posts: 82

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

To all those flumoxed and flustuered here is a little secret:

It is really not a meaningful award. In fact, it does not even include a subscription.


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 5:03 AM
Post #111 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
To all those flumoxed and flustuered here is a little secret:

It is really not a meaningful award. In fact, it does not even include a subscription.

The best response so far...and by a 16 year old.


col


Dec 22, 2004, 5:13 AM
Post #112 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 232

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

what, no subsrciption?? I will no longer aspire to being time magazines man of the year. :(


jbell2355


Dec 22, 2004, 12:42 PM
Post #113 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 23, 2004
Posts: 207

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

You're kidding, right melodicllama? Not overwhelming?

Here is a map showing each and every precinct in the 2004 election. Red means Bush won, Kerry won blue:

http://hannity.com/...usa_election_map.jpg

Here it is by state:

http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/...n/election04/cbs.jpg

If you can't admit that this is overwhelming, you're in serious denial. It didn't "come down to one state", millions more people voted for Bush than Kerry. It was nowhere near close! America has spoken!

I don't have time to address the other inaccuracies you spewed, but I had to respond to this.


Partner tradman


Dec 22, 2004, 1:04 PM
Post #114 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

jbell2355, there's a big difference between population and area.

The maps you posted certainly make it look like a landslide victory for red, but bear in mind that it's people who vote, not land, so the land area each candidate won isn't relevant.

It's a nice idea and they're nice maps, but you've been fooled I'm afraid.


Partner melodicllama


Dec 22, 2004, 1:07 PM
Post #115 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

the whole reason we dont do it by county is that some counties have far more people than others. Although in your map there are far more red counties, the number of residents in those counties is comprable to the number of residents in the blue counties. more people live in california than in Utah, Colorado, Nevada, Nebraska, the Dakotas, Wyoming and Montana combined...If we broke California down into 12 Bush-sized states, kerry would win the election "overwhelmingly" according to your logic


jbell2355


Dec 22, 2004, 1:27 PM
Post #116 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 23, 2004
Posts: 207

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I have not been fooled. I believe that the maps make quite a statement, though they do not PROVE a landslide victory.

If the maps were colored by the number of people who voted for each candidate, there would be more red than blue because Bush got millions more votes than Kerry.


bluto


Dec 22, 2004, 1:37 PM
Post #117 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

No matter how you slice it, land area, popular vote, electoral vote, Bush won.
Democrats/Liberals should accept this and focus on how to win the next election, rather than wailing and moaning about "Jesusland" and red state rednecks, which only further alienates the voters they will need if they hope to ever win a national election again.


Partner tradman


Dec 22, 2004, 1:37 PM
Post #118 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

You're quite right of course. Here's how the cartogram looks when adjusted for actual number of votes:

http://www-personal.umich.edu/...statecartredblue.png

As you can see it's almost 50-50, as you'd expect from the election result.


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 1:39 PM
Post #119 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
the whole reason we dont do it by county is that some counties have far more people than others. Although in your map there are far more red counties, the number of residents in those counties is comprable to the number of residents in the blue counties. more people live in california than in Utah, Colorado, Nevada, Nebraska, the Dakotas, Wyoming and Montana combined...If we broke California down into 12 Bush-sized states, kerry would win the election "overwhelmingly" according to your logic

Where do you get your information? Perhaps you should learn the basics of presidential elections. Electoral votes are based on each states number of U.S. Representatives (which are based on population), plus two. DC gets three votes. There is no "whole reason we don't do it by county"! They are (and have always been) irrelevant to the process.

You're notion that breaking California into 12 states would give Kerry the election is pure conjecture. It assumes Kerry would win all twelve states. A simple look at the country by county breakdown paints a different picture.


jbell2355


Dec 22, 2004, 1:41 PM
Post #120 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 23, 2004
Posts: 207

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Right on, Bumblie!


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 1:48 PM
Post #121 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Speaking of lies. Here are a few. The sad thing is I think grimpiper believes these misconceptions are fact.

In reply to:
he let Osama bin Laden get away...
He has made U.S. citizens hated throughout the world...
made it unsafe for us to travel in about a third of the world.

Clinton managed to create a fiscal surplus, and spur tremendous growth and employment (remember the '90's?).

There hasn't been greater income inequality in the past 100 years than is being created under his administration.


vertical_reality


Dec 22, 2004, 2:04 PM
Post #122 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
he let Osama bin Laden get away...

Fact

In reply to:
He has made U.S. citizens hated throughout the world...

Misconception, everyone hated US citizens long before Bush.

In reply to:
made it unsafe for us to travel in about a third of the world.

MIsconception, it never was too safe.

In reply to:
Clinton managed to create a fiscal surplus, and spur tremendous growth and employment (remember the '90's?).

There hasn't been greater income inequality in the past 100 years than is being created under his administration.

I have no idea.


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 2:06 PM
Post #123 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Hey grimpiperx,

You asked for a challenge to your facts. Everything below is either unproven, a misrepresentation or a lie. The vast majority are complete lies.

Instead of doing cut and pastes from your run of the mill wehatedubya.com site, maybe you should strive to learn the facts.

In reply to:
Bush is foisted on the American public through a coup d'etat of the Supreme Court after massive election fraud perpetrated by his brother in Florida.
Thousands of voters were illegally disqualified in the 2000 election in the state of Florida...The Supreme Court was packed with reactionary right-wingers, several of whom had conflicts of interest because of their ties to the Bush family.
Dubya appoints convicted criminals, racists to his cabinet.
January, 2001
Bush pushes his tax cuts for the wealthy through Congress, and commands the FBI to stop investigations concerning the Bin Laden family and other suspected terrorist cells.


No military aircraft had been scrambled to intercept the four hijacked planes, though there was plenty of time to do so.
The Bush junta's totally cynical appointment of the war criminal Henry Kissinger to create a coverup for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on American citizens arouses additional suspicion that the Bush administration was complicit in the horror.
The Bush junta forced the Patriot Act bill through Congress, suspending essential civil liberties, excusing oppression as essential to the "war on terrorism," and maintaining that dissent was treason.
The Patriot Act abrogated the following American constitutional protections:
• Free expression of opinion
• Freedom of the press
• Right of assembly and association
• States' right of self-government
Presidential decrees make it possible for military forces to be used to monitor and control the civilian population, in abrogation of the posse comitatus act.

In the 2000 and now again in the midterm 2002 elections, electronic voting has meant that our democratic right to have our votes counted fairly and accurately has been taken from us by the Bush junta.
Since we now suffer under the situation where there is no opposition to the criminal Bush regime--most Democrats having effectively become pawns of the Republicans--then none of the state election frauds will be investigated. We can't be sure that key races such as that of Mondale in Minnesota and Carnahan in Missouri were not the result of massive vote fraud. We can be sure that the Florida gubernatorial race was completely fixed.
94,000 people -- over half of them African American --were on a "scrub list" in Florida, resulting in their being blocked from voting in the 2000 election. Did Florida rectify this mistake before the 2002 election? Fuhgeddaboudit! Those voters as of 2004 have not yet been reinstated in Florida.
Electronic, touch screen voting is the basis for election fraud:
• votes can easily be lost through "software glitches"
• Democratic votes can become Republican votes and no one is the wiser

Just as in Hitler's Enabling Act, so Bush Jr. forced the Homeland Security bill through Congress which gave him complete dictatorial powers:

The President is able to make any decision he wishes without judicial or legislative restraint

Demands life sentences for hackers that 'recklessly' endanger lives

Secret US Police Concentration Camps

The creation of the Homeland Security Department is a coup within the government. What Ollie North once did illegally in a White House basement - free-lancing policy with public money and accountability to no one - a $37 billion department with 170,000 employees will now do legally in what is sure to be a high-rise of basements and metaphorical windows on Washington's Bureaucracy Row. Like a Wall Street firm beholden only to its board room, the second-largest government department is now a proprietary arm of the presidency. It operates beyond congressional scrutiny and public accountability, and guarantees secrecy to its own machinations or to those of any private business with which it deals.
"Let's say Kafka Inc. were a company that made surveillance cameras the government was installing at a few thousand intersections. Kafka's products happen to be pathetically faulty, as such devices commonly are. The public would be outraged if it knew. But all Kafka would have to do to keep its products' evaluations from becoming public is submit them to the Department of Homeland Security, where everything is to be kept secret by law. What Kafka does, every other company or hospital or airline or even local sheriff's department can do with any proposal, any budget item, any safety plan made part of the homeland security racket. The department, in other words, is a black hole to the Freedom of Information Act - everything goes in, nothing gets out."
If the torture and murder at American prison camps in Iraq and Cuba don't send chills down your spine, watch out that you're not becoming replicas of the "good Germans" in 1930 who turned a deaf ear--and blind eye--to the Nazi death camps.


In reply to:
"God told me to strike at Al Qa'ida and I struck them. And then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did. With the might of God on our side we will triumph," said George Bush


bluto


Dec 22, 2004, 3:06 PM
Post #124 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
he let Osama bin Laden get away...

Fact

How does anyone equate invading Afghanistan with letting Bin Laden "get away" ? Should we have nuked the place ? At what point are we making an honest effort to apprehend him ? The line of reasoning that we let him get away is truly mind boggling.


vertical_reality


Dec 22, 2004, 3:18 PM
Post #125 of 244 (3875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
he let Osama bin Laden get away...

Fact

How does anyone equate invading Afghanistan with letting Bin Laden "get away" ? Should we have nuked the place ? At what point are we making an honest effort to apprehend him ? The line of reasoning that we let him get away is truly mind boggling.

It has nothing to do with Afghanistan or Iraq, it's been over 3 years since 9/11 and they still don't know where he is. He got away.


bluto


Dec 22, 2004, 3:20 PM
Post #126 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
he let Osama bin Laden get away


In reply to:
He got away

These are two entirely different statements einstein.


vertical_reality


Dec 22, 2004, 3:24 PM
Post #127 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Hey grimpiperx,

You asked for a challenge to your facts. Everything below is either unproven, a misrepresentation or a lie. The vast majority are complete lies.

Instead of doing cut and pastes from your run of the mill wehatedubya.com site, maybe you should strive to learn the facts.

Instead of just saying that they are all lies, maybe you should strive to prove your assertions.


vertical_reality


Dec 22, 2004, 3:26 PM
Post #128 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
he let Osama bin Laden get away


In reply to:
He got away

These are two entirely different statements einstein.

Did Bush capture Bin Laden?


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 3:54 PM
Post #129 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Hey grimpiperx,

You asked for a challenge to your facts. Everything below is either unproven, a misrepresentation or a lie. The vast majority are complete lies.

Instead of doing cut and pastes from your run of the mill wehatedubya.com site, maybe you should strive to learn the facts.

Instead of just saying that they are all lies, maybe you should strive to prove your assertions.

Consider the multitude of lies posted, I'm not willing to put forth the effort to disprove each one. If grim shows up and wants to discuss the first four or five lies, I'd be happy to examine them one at a time.

On my first read of that lengthy cut and paste I quit after reading about that war criminal Kissinger.


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 3:56 PM
Post #130 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
he let Osama bin Laden get away


In reply to:
He got away

These are two entirely different statements einstein.

Did Bush capture Bin Laden?

No. Wouldn't his capture be a prerequisite to lettinghim getting away?

Edited to clarify my point.


vertical_reality


Dec 22, 2004, 4:04 PM
Post #131 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:

No. Wouldn't his capture be a prerequisite to him getting away?

Nice logic there Dumblie. :roll:


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 4:06 PM
Post #132 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Sorry you're incapable of seeing it's simplicity.


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 4:08 PM
Post #133 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

How is it flawed?


vertical_reality


Dec 22, 2004, 4:12 PM
Post #134 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

If a bank robber is never caught, did he get away?


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 4:32 PM
Post #135 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

The more important question, with respect to the "Bush let him get away" assertion, is did the guards let the robber get away.

Remember Eric Rudolph? Did the FBI let him get away or did he elude authorities for two years?


vertical_reality


Dec 22, 2004, 4:42 PM
Post #136 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
The more important question, with respect to the "Bush let him get away" assertion, is did the guards let the robber get away.

Yes, the guards let him get away. Therefore his capture was NOT a prerequisite.


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 5:21 PM
Post #137 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Bumblie-I can see you not wasting your time on lies but could you comments on these issues.

1. The deficit. The largest and fastest growing in the history of the US. The US is borrowing over a billion dollars to pay for loss revenues. (Taxes)
2. The war in Iraq. mis-led, mis-quided and in most peoples eyes a failure by the commander-in chief.
3.The man at the head of the 9/11 attack (Bin-Laden) is still free.
4. The man who had nothing to do with 9/11 is in jail.
5. There is nothing wrong with Social Security, in fact SS is solvent till the year 2050.
6. Over 200 billion dollars spend and over 1,000 American Soliders dead in war with no end in sight.
7. The war has cause about a 1/4 of the deflicit. The other 3/4 is cause by loss of revenue (taxes). Bush wants to make his tax cuts permanent sending this country into a continue downward spiral.
8. Over 80 -100 million American are without health care benefits.
9. Americans have an all-time-high credit debt while personal saving are at a all-time low.
10. America's public schools are in shambles. English, math and science scores are at all-time-low.

Let's start with these.


girlyclimber83


Dec 22, 2004, 5:25 PM
Post #138 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 4, 2004
Posts: 143

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I think I should be man of the year next year, it would make just as much since as Bush being man of the year.


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 5:34 PM
Post #139 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Bob,

I agree with almost all of your points. Many of them are tied to how Bush is serving as President. I'm not too pleased with him either. His policies on immigration and the environment definitely tick me off.

I jumped in this pissing match because the constant barrage of faulty assertions that get tossed at him on a daily basis is sooooo annoying.

There's so many valid reasons to go after Bush. I can't figure out why so many of his detractors prefer BS emotional half-truths. :roll: :roll: :roll:


bluto


Dec 22, 2004, 5:40 PM
Post #140 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Bumblie-I can see you not wasting your time on lies but could you comments on these issues.

1. The deficit. The largest and fastest growing in the history of the US. The US is borrowing over a billion dollars to pay for loss revenues. (Taxes)
2. The war in Iraq. mis-led, mis-quided and in most peoples eyes a failure by the commander-in chief.
3.The man at the head of the 9/11 attack (Bin-Laden) is still free.
4. The man who had nothing to do with 9/11 is in jail.
5. There is nothing wrong with Social Security, in fact SS is solvent till the year 2050.
6. Over 200 billion dollars spend and over 1,000 American Soliders dead in war with no end in sight.
7. The war has cause about a 1/4 of the deflicit. The other 3/4 is cause by loss of revenue (taxes). Bush wants to make his tax cuts permanent sending this country into a continue downward spiral.
8. Over 80 -100 million American are without health care benefits.
9. Americans have an all-time-high credit debt while personal saving are at a all-time low.
10. America's public schools are in shambles. English, math and science scores are at all-time-low.

Let's start with these.

The problem with is list is that with the exception of the War in Iraq, Congress bears just as much or more reponsibility for the problems as does Bush. Bush certainly has his flaws, but I am not sure why our legislative branch doesn't seem to be held equally accountable by critics of our current situation.

Your wrong on social security. there is a problem, it's a pyramid scheme that will collapse if left alone.


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 6:17 PM
Post #141 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Your wrong on social security. there is a problem, it's a pyramid scheme that will collapse if left alone.

Prove it!

Also what ever to the republican "Contract for America" and term-limits for elected-officials??????


bluto


Dec 22, 2004, 6:20 PM
Post #142 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2002
Posts: 1525

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Your wrong on social security. there is a problem, it's a pyramid scheme that will collapse if left alone.

Prove it!

There isn't anything to prove, you said as much in saying that it is only solvent until 2050. That may seem like a long time to you, but there are people paying in now that won't be retiring until after 2050.


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 6:33 PM
Post #143 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
There isn't anything to prove, you said as much in saying that it is only solvent until 2050. That may seem like a long time to you, but there are people paying in now that won't be retiring until after 2050.

It's call revenue. Bush need to stop taking money out of SS and programs that are solvent and he need to increase revenue (taxes). He is stealing money from future generations.

Any business will fail if goods (money) continues to roll out (war, taxes cuts) and revenue (money) continues to decline! Our trade deficit is at an all time high and costing us close to a billion dollar a day. Trade revenue are down. Services are down. We have to pay to use public lands that we have already paid for so on and so on.

The dollars is at an all time low against most currency.

If any other country operated like this they would fall flat on their face and be bankrupt...it's just a matter of time.

Do you get it????


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 6:40 PM
Post #144 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Pay attention class.

In reply to:
Social Security benefits will exceed projected payroll tax collections in 2013. This annual deficit will explode quickly thereafter, climbing from $49 billion in 2015 to $684 billion in 2030.

The total unfunded liability of Social Security, adjusted for inflation, is now $17.9 trillion --four times greater than the national debt.

Because surplus payroll taxes have been spent on other government
programs, the Trust Fund contains nothing but IOUs. To make good on those IOUs, politicians in the future will have to raise taxes or issue debt.

Even if these IOUs are redeemed, the Trust Fund will go bankrupt in 2032. This is 4 years earlier than projected only five years ago and 16 years earlier than projected ten years ago.

In order to keep the system solvent when the Trust Fund runs dry in 2032, payroll tax rates would need to increase by one-third or benefits would have to be cut by 25 percent.

Social Security's crisis is driven by demographics. Today, there are 3.4 workers for every beneficiary. The Trust Fund report predicts that, because of longer life spans and lower birth rates, there will be only 2 workers for every beneficiary by 2030. As recently as 1960, there were more than 5 workers per beneficiary.

This situation is not Bush's faulty. The blame lies with the US Congress.


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 6:46 PM
Post #145 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
This situation is not Bush's faulty. The blame lies with the US Congress.

Wrong! His taxes cuts and his decision to go war is to blame for the current situation.

Also...and just who has been running congress for the last 12 years??


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 6:52 PM
Post #146 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
This situation is not Bush's faulty. The blame lies with the US Congress.

Wrong! His taxes cuts and his decision to go war is to blame for the current situation.

Do you actually think this problem with Social Security just recently cropped up? Would you like to read some stories from the 80s, where the writers voiced similar concerns?


jumpingrock


Dec 22, 2004, 6:53 PM
Post #147 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 5692

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
This situation is not Bush's faulty. The blame lies with the US Congress.

Wrong! His taxes cuts and his decision to go war is to blame for the current situation.

Also...and just who has been running congress for the last 12 years??

In addition, who has the power to fix it and what is he doing about it?


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 6:59 PM
Post #148 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I think that's what the current national discussion is about.


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 7:03 PM
Post #149 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In addition, who has the power to fix it and what is he doing about it?

The American people by voting him (Bush) and those assholes (Congress) out!

And look what we did. We voted him (Bush) back in and voted more republicans (Congress) back in.


jumpingrock


Dec 22, 2004, 7:04 PM
Post #150 of 244 (4334 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 5692

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In addition, who has the power to fix it and what is he doing about it?

The American people by voting these assholes out!

Well it's quite obvious in that case that the American people don't really care about this.


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 7:06 PM
Post #151 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In addition, who has the power to fix it and what is he doing about it?

The American people by voting these assholes out!

I assume you're done with falsely trying to pin the S.S. problems on Bush.


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 7:13 PM
Post #152 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
I assume you're done with falsely trying to pin the S.S. problems on Bush.

You don't get it do you. His current policies are what's going to sink SS.

He want to take money out of SS. A non-partisan study has already said that SS in not in trouble and it is one of the more successful gov. programs in ti's current state.

WHY Change IT????


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 7:28 PM
Post #153 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

They (the Congress) have been taking money out of Social Security for over 20 years. I don't approve of the practice, but getting pissed at Bush for continuing the practice is just silly.

Go back and read my "pay attention class" post on the previous page.


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 7:31 PM
Post #154 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
it is one of the more successful gov. programs in it's current state.

Is this before or after we address the fact that most of it's assets are IOUs from the federal government?


Partner coylec


Dec 22, 2004, 7:31 PM
Post #155 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 2024

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
You're quite right of course. Here's how the cartogram looks when adjusted for actual number of votes:

http://www-personal.umich.edu/...statecartredblue.png

As you can see it's almost 50-50, as you'd expect from the election result.

thanks Trad. Plus, you aren't getting your maps from Hannity.

coylec


hugepedro


Dec 22, 2004, 7:44 PM
Post #156 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
They (the Congress) have been taking money out of Social Security for over 20 years. I don't approve of the practice, but getting pissed at Bush for continuing the practice is just silly.

Go back and read my "pay attention class" post on the previous page.

Bumblie,
While Bush didn't create a S.S. problem, he certainly torpedoed a possible solution.

The projected revenue surpluses built up during the Clinton years could easily have solved the problem had Bush not busted the budget with his tax cuts.


hugepedro


Dec 22, 2004, 7:47 PM
Post #157 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
p.s. george bush reminds me of a fat ugly black girl that wears to much eye liner

Emphasis mine.

Just wondering what's up with the racial reference there, irockclimbtoo?

Not to mention the annoying lack of commas.


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 7:53 PM
Post #158 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
The projected revenue surpluses built up during the Clinton years could easily have solved the problem had Bush not busted the budget with his tax cuts.

My point which Bumblie can't seem to grasp!!!! Now I wish he would address my other points.


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 7:59 PM
Post #159 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Bumblie,
While Bush didn't create a S.S. problem, he certainly torpedoed a possible solution.

The projected revenue surpluses built up during the Clinton years could easily have solved the problem had Bush not busted the budget with his tax cuts.

The projected surpluses anticipated at the end Clinton's term were never realized.


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 8:36 PM
Post #160 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
The projected surpluses anticipated at the end Clinton's term were never realized.

Prove it and prove that Bush's current policies are not busting SS in the future!


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 8:51 PM
Post #161 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
The projected surpluses anticipated at the end Clinton's term were never realized.

Prove it and prove that Bush's current policies are not busting SS in the future!

http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm

The problems with SS have been ongoing for a long time. Bush's policies may be making the problem worse, but they are no means the cause. Forest for the trees, baby.

I look forward to you ignoring this topic and going on to rant about something else. :lol:


bobd1953


Dec 22, 2004, 8:58 PM
Post #162 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
I look forward to you ignoring this topic and going on to rant about something else.

No ranting on my part. And can you ever answer a question directly?

That link proves nothing except my point. We are going deeper in debt.

It say nothing about the state of SS. Another point you can't seem to grasp. 8^)


bumblie


Dec 22, 2004, 9:16 PM
Post #163 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
No ranting on my part. And can you ever answer a question directly?
That link proves nothing except my point. We are going deeper in debt.

You asked me to prove "The projected surpluses anticipated at the end Clinton's term were never realized. " That link proves it.

Now you're saying you were making a different point. Oh my. Silly me. You remind me of ex, who frequently got pissed when I responded to what she said instead of "what she meant".

As far as SS goes. I've stated my case and provided support, while you've just continued with the "It's all Bush's fault, it's all his fault" whinefest.

Maybe you could produce some proof the Bush is responsible for SS problems. And please use a credible source. Liberal thinktanks are okay, but opinion pieces from bushsux.com just don't cut it.


bobd1953


Dec 23, 2004, 12:09 AM
Post #164 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Now you're saying you were making a different point. Oh my. Silly me. You remind me of ex, who frequently got pissed when I responded to what she said instead of "what she meant".

As far as SS goes. I've stated my case and provided support, while you've just continued with the "It's all Bush's fault, it's all his fault" whinefest.

Maybe you could produce some proof the Bush is responsible for SS problems. And please use a credible source. Liberal thinktanks are okay, but opinion pieces from bushsux.com just don't cut it.

You are thick headed and it easy to understand why your wife is now your ex! :D

Listen again and read slowly..

Do you or don't agree that Bush's current policies will hinder the available funds for SS. This is not a rant on Bush, just a simple and easy question.

Most experts believe that SS is solvent (for the next 35 years as of today) and is one of the most successful programs in US government history. True or false.

There are far bigger fish to fry at this time (War, deficit, education, health care, jobs, loss of tax revenue etc). True or false.

You have 50-50 chance of getting two of these questions right.

Peace out


col


Dec 23, 2004, 1:23 AM
Post #165 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 232

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

On a different note, the electoral college system stikes me as a just plain wacky way of picking a president. Maybe it could work well, but then again maybe not. If i understant correctly, (and maybe i don't), some states give all there votes to the candidate who got the most votes in that state. seems that nationally the number of electoral votes required to become president is only related second hand to the number of people who voted for you. wacky i say.

and what the hell is with a term like "electoral vote" anyway. Surely any "vote" in an "election" is one of them to, only adding to confusion.


And from a waaaay early, bush hasn't nessesarily made everyone in the world hate US citizens individually. He has made the world had them as a people.

I figured if everyone was ranting why shouldn't i


dlintz


Dec 23, 2004, 4:35 AM
Post #166 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2002
Posts: 1982

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
This thread is a hoot!! Remember people, it's Time magazine we're talking about. :boring:

d.

As opposed to American Spectator's Man of the Year or Mother Jones' Human of the Year?

Equally :boring:

I think Time magazine is drivel, mostly because it tries too hard to be a little of everything. To me it's a news magazine equivalent of Reader's Digest.

d.


roadside_will


Dec 23, 2004, 8:33 AM
Post #167 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 12

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

It is interesting to me that people want to talk about the invasion and "take over" of two countries. Then talk about going into Iraq without the support of the UN. Well guess what I am in Iraq right now. I am an infantryman here. Yeah, bush sucks when it comes to the environment. Keep in mind he also has been the most easily pursuaded president in recent year by programs like Earth Justice. But as a climber I couldn't care less about the other things he has done. I am here and I know this country is way better off now than if we hadn't have invaded. Mostly everyone here cheers for us as we drive down the street, still it has been nearly two full years of occupation. As for taking over this country that is like saying you local police department runs your country. We are cops over here that is it. Mostly everything that happens that is big is done by iraqis in support of a free country. I say Time is out until they put important people like Yvon Chouniard as the man of the year. After all he one of the the richest dirtbags I know.


Partner tradman


Dec 23, 2004, 8:46 AM
Post #168 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
I am here and I know this country is way better off now than if we hadn't have invaded.

Were you in Iraq before the invasion?


bumblie


Dec 23, 2004, 1:17 PM
Post #169 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
You are thick headed and it easy to understand why your wife is now your ex! :D
My wife is still my wife. She's my first wife. Your response may shed light on a key part of your dimwittedness, in the online discussions. You base your opinions on faulty assumptions.

In reply to:
Do you or don't agree that Bush's current policies will hinder the available funds for SS. This is not a rant on Bush, just a simple and easy question.
Yes :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

BTW Is it the norm, where you live, to end questions with a period?

In reply to:
Most experts believe that SS is solvent (for the next 35 years as of today) and is one of the most successful programs in US government history. True or false.
False and False. Do two negatives make a positive, therefore making my final answer true? Earlier in the thread you stated solvency for another 45/46 years. Why the ten year reduction? Where do you get your information that SS is so successful? By successful, do you mean just not as screwed up as other programs, like medicare?

I previously quoted the following. Do you understand the significance of these facts?
In reply to:
The total unfunded liability of Social Security, adjusted for inflation, is now $17.9 trillion --four times greater than the national debt.

Because surplus payroll taxes have been spent on other government
programs, the Trust Fund contains nothing but IOUs. To make good on those IOUs, politicians in the future will have to raise taxes or issue debt.

Even if these IOUs are redeemed, the Trust Fund will go bankrupt in 2032. This is 4 years earlier than projected only five years ago and 16 years earlier than projected ten years ago.


In reply to:
There are far bigger fish to fry at this time (War, deficit, education, health care, jobs, loss of tax revenue etc). True or false.
True

In reply to:
You have 50-50 chance of getting two of these questions right.
Which question didn't offer a 50-50 chance?

I answered (for the most part) your questions and posed seven for you. The ball is in your court. A reasonably intelligent person would infer that I'm challenging you to answer my questions.


bobd1953


Dec 23, 2004, 6:02 PM
Post #170 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

You are thick headed and it easy to understand why your wife is now your ex!

My wife is still my wife. She's my first wife. Your response may shed light on a key part of your dimwittedness, in the online discussions. You base your opinions on faulty assumptions.

You say ex and refer to that person as she. How dimwitted of me.

Congrats to you, my wife and I just hit the 30 year mark.
Quote:
Do you or don't agree that Bush's current policies will hinder the available funds for SS. This is not a rant on Bush, just a simple and easy question.

Yes

Smart man you are!

BTW Is it the norm, where you live, to end questions with a period?

No, but this is the internet. If you really want to be critical of my writing style, please free feel to buy one of the fifteen books that I have had published.


Quote:
Most experts believe that SS is solvent (for the next 35 years as of today) and is one of the most successful programs in US government history. True or false.

False and False. Do two negatives make a positive, therefore making my final answer true? Earlier in the thread you stated solvency for another 45/46 years. Why the ten year reduction? Where do you get your information that SS is so successful? By successful, do you mean just not as screwed up as other programs, like medicare?

Yes, compared to medicare, welfare, education funding and so on... SS is a huge success.

I previously quoted the following. Do you understand the significance of these facts?Quote:

The total unfunded liability of Social Security, adjusted for inflation, is now $17.9 trillion --four times greater than the national debt.

Because surplus payroll taxes have been spent on other government
programs, the Trust Fund contains nothing but IOUs. To make good on those IOUs, politicians in the future will have to raise taxes or issue debt.

Even if these IOUs are redeemed, the Trust Fund will go bankrupt in 2032. This is 4 years earlier than projected only five years ago and 16 years earlier than projected ten years ago.

Wrong.

Quote:
There are far bigger fish to fry at this time (War, deficit, education, health care, jobs, loss of tax revenue etc). True or false.

True

Smart man. You are catching on.
Quote:

You have 50-50 chance of getting two of these questions right.

Which question didn't offer a 50-50 chance?

The first one. I thought you would cut and paste your anwser.

I answered (for the most part) your questions and posed seven for you. The ball is in your court. A reasonably intelligent person would infer that I'm challenging you to answer my questions.
Hope this make your day.


bumblie


Dec 23, 2004, 6:32 PM
Post #171 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
You say ex and refer to that person as she. How dimwitted of me.
True

In reply to:
Congrats to you, my wife and I just hit the 30 year mark.
Irrelevant.

In reply to:
Do you or don't agree that Bush's current policies will hinder the available funds for SS. This is not a rant on Bush, just a simple and easy question.

Yes

Smart man you are!
I guess you missed that I didn't give a definitive answer. :lol: :lol: :lol:

In reply to:
Earlier in the thread you stated solvency for another 45/46 years. Why the ten year reduction?
Still waiting. :roll:

In reply to:
Where do you get your information that SS is so successful?
Still waiting :roll:

In reply to:
By successful, do you mean just not as screwed up as other programs, like medicare?

Yes, compared to medicare, welfare, education funding and so on... SS is a huge success.
So, less messed up means successful to you? :roll: Kind of like being the smartest kid on the short bus.

In reply to:
I previously quoted the following. Do you understand the significance of these facts?Quote:

The total unfunded liability of Social Security, adjusted for inflation, is now $17.9 trillion --four times greater than the national debt.

Because surplus payroll taxes have been spent on other government
programs, the Trust Fund contains nothing but IOUs. To make good on those IOUs, politicians in the future will have to raise taxes or issue debt.

Even if these IOUs are redeemed, the Trust Fund will go bankrupt in 2032. This is 4 years earlier than projected only five years ago and 16 years earlier than projected ten years ago.

Wrong.

Prove it!!! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

In reply to:
Which question didn't offer a 50-50 chance?

The first one. I thought you would cut and paste your anwser.
You question offered only two options. How is this not a 50-50 proposition? what kind of cut and paste answer did you have in mind?

I notice you conveniently avoided a number of my questions.


leinosaur


Dec 23, 2004, 7:26 PM
Post #172 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 690

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

can't resist . . .
http://www.whitehouse.org/.../tn-lookit-poppy.jpg
http://www.whitehouse.org/...mages/tn-freedom.jpg
http://www.whitehouse.org/...s/tn_dockmonkeys.jpg
http://www.whitehouse.org/...mages/tn_beerrun.jpg
http://www.whitehouse.org/...ges/tn_be_afraid.jpg
http://www.whitehouse.org/...es/tn_youre_next.jpg


dlintz


Dec 23, 2004, 7:33 PM
Post #173 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2002
Posts: 1982

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Leino-

LMAO

d.


grimpiperx


Dec 27, 2004, 9:18 PM
Post #174 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Hey grimpiperx,

You asked for a challenge to your facts. Everything below is either unproven, a misrepresentation or a lie. The vast majority are complete lies.

Instead of doing cut and pastes from your run of the mill wehatedubya.com site, maybe you should strive to learn the facts.


Yea, sorry for leaving but I decided you people were helpless when somebody said something about Clinton ruining the economy :? I mean good god people........


bumblie


Dec 28, 2004, 1:04 PM
Post #175 of 244 (3913 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I catch your drift. It's right up there with "Bush stole the 2000 election". :lol: :lol: :lol:


grimpiperx


Dec 29, 2004, 2:29 AM
Post #176 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
I catch your drift. It's right up there with "Bush stole the 2000 election". :lol: :lol: :lol:


Kind of......for the most part the Supreme Court stole the 2000 election. :P Can you at least agree with the fact that some funny shit went down in Florida in 2000?


curt


Dec 29, 2004, 2:50 AM
Post #177 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
I catch your drift. It's right up there with "Bush stole the 2000 election". :lol: :lol: :lol:


Kind of......for the most part the Supreme Court stole the 2000 election. :P Can you at least agree with the fact that some funny s--- went down in Florida in 2000?

Perhaps the "funniest" thing is that it was the Democrats who threw the Florida vote count into the court system--and who then cried foul, when the end result was not what they were looking for.

Curt


grimpiperx


Dec 29, 2004, 3:22 AM
Post #178 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Duh??, why would the republicans cry foul? They were benefiting, not the democrats.


Partner melodicllama


Dec 29, 2004, 3:43 AM
Post #179 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

if i were running and thousands upon thousands of my votes got thrown out, effectively costing me the election and plunging the nation into an 8-year dark age, i wud be crying foul too

and just when i thought this thread had died :roll:


grimpiperx


Dec 29, 2004, 3:52 AM
Post #180 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
if i were running and thousands upon thousands of my votes got thrown out, effectively costing me the election and plunging the nation into an 8-year dark age, i wud be crying foul too

and just when i thought this thread had died :roll:

No this thread will never die, I tried to put in a final word explaining why I stopped posting, but then Bumblie or soemone made a "smart" remark, so I guess it continues. "Dark Ages" is actually a great term because one of the main reasons the European Dark Ages were reffered to as the dark ages was the lack of written information from the time. Yea, yea I know there were other reasons that dont apply but that is one of them. But given the crap shape our country is in this is deffintly a dark age, not the history books will say that because it would be so very unpatriotic to speak bad of our president, because you know its not like our country was founded on dissent or anything :roll:


Partner melodicllama


Dec 29, 2004, 3:58 AM
Post #181 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

a compliment from his holiness!! i grovel at your feet o master, for you and your infinite wisdom are truly an avatar of the almighty llama :wink:


curt


Dec 29, 2004, 4:04 AM
Post #182 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Duh??, why would the republicans cry foul? They were benefiting, not the democrats.

You missed my point. Why would the Democrats throw the election into the court system, if they were not prepared to accept the ultimate ruling of the court system. Not too smart, are they?

Curt


Partner melodicllama


Dec 29, 2004, 4:07 AM
Post #183 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

curt!! tell me your not a staunch conservative and you're just playing devil's advocate...


grimpiperx


Dec 29, 2004, 4:19 AM
Post #184 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Duh??, why would the republicans cry foul? They were benefiting, not the democrats.

You missed my point. Why would the Democrats throw the election into the court system, if they were not prepared to accept the ultimate ruling of the court system. Not too smart, are they?

Curt

Oh, come one Curt use your brain. If they had not challenged it there would be no way in hell that Gore would win, if they threw it into the court system then at least there would be a small chance of victory instead of none. I beleive Curt is republican from forums pre 11-02.


grimpiperx


Dec 29, 2004, 4:21 AM
Post #185 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
a compliment from his holiness!! i grovel at your feet o master, for you and your infinite wisdom are truly an avatar of the almighty llama :wink:


Ah, yes the holy flaming sword of Sarcasm. The Llama's followers weapon of choice.


Partner melodicllama


Dec 29, 2004, 5:06 AM
Post #186 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
I beleive Curt is republican from forums pre 11-02

:cry: :cry: that hurts real deep man...

In reply to:
Ah, yes the holy flaming sword of Sarcasm. The Llama's followers weapon of choice.

and what a glorious weapon it is


curt


Dec 29, 2004, 5:10 AM
Post #187 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Duh??, why would the republicans cry foul? They were benefiting, not the democrats.

You missed my point. Why would the Democrats throw the election into the court system, if they were not prepared to accept the ultimate ruling of the court system. Not too smart, are they?

Curt

Oh, come one Curt use your brain. If they had not challenged it there would be no way in hell that Gore would win, if they threw it into the court system then at least there would be a small chance of victory instead of none. I beleive Curt is republican from forums pre 11-02.

No shit I am a Republican. I'm not a GWB supporter, though. My point is simple and classic--beware of what you ask for, because you just may get it. Also, from your simplistic comments above, one can conclude that the Democrats knew they lost the election, but threw it into the courts because there was a "small chance" their hare-brained appeal would fly. Still not too smart, IMO.

Curt


Partner melodicllama


Dec 29, 2004, 5:18 AM
Post #188 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Duh??, why would the republicans cry foul? They were benefiting, not the democrats.

You missed my point. Why would the Democrats throw the election into the court system, if they were not prepared to accept the ultimate ruling of the court system. Not too smart, are they?

Curt

Oh, come one Curt use your brain. If they had not challenged it there would be no way in hell that Gore would win, if they threw it into the court system then at least there would be a small chance of victory instead of none. I beleive Curt is republican from forums pre 11-02.

No s--- I am a Republican. I'm not a GWB supporter, though. My point is simple and classic--beware of what you ask for, because you just may get it. Also, from your simplistic comments above, one can conclude that the Democrats knew they lost the election, but threw it into the courts because there was a "small chance" their hare-brained appeal would fly. Still not too smart, IMO.

Curt

what makes it hare-brained, exactly? by later counts of the "lost" votes, gore should have won the state. so were they wrong to appeal? seems to me that it was the right thing to do, and it wud hav worked if the courts hadnt been busy giving W head :?


reno


Dec 29, 2004, 5:21 AM
Post #189 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
But given the crap shape our country is in this is deffintly a dark age

Indeed. Perhaps one of the most telling signs of our country's woeful status is our collective lack of spelling ability.

"deffintly"??

:wtf:


Partner melodicllama


Dec 29, 2004, 5:28 AM
Post #190 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

*sigh* if only that was the country's only problem...although this one is also a direct result of our president and his bovine intelligence level


grimpiperx


Dec 29, 2004, 5:28 AM
Post #191 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
But given the crap shape our country is in this is deffintly a dark age

Indeed. Perhaps one of the most telling signs of our country's woeful status is our collective lack of spelling ability.

"deffintly"??

:wtf:


So you have never made a spelling error?


curt


Dec 29, 2004, 5:30 AM
Post #192 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Duh??, why would the republicans cry foul? They were benefiting, not the democrats.

You missed my point. Why would the Democrats throw the election into the court system, if they were not prepared to accept the ultimate ruling of the court system. Not too smart, are they?

Curt

Oh, come one Curt use your brain. If they had not challenged it there would be no way in hell that Gore would win, if they threw it into the court system then at least there would be a small chance of victory instead of none. I beleive Curt is republican from forums pre 11-02.

No s--- I am a Republican. I'm not a GWB supporter, though. My point is simple and classic--beware of what you ask for, because you just may get it. Also, from your simplistic comments above, one can conclude that the Democrats knew they lost the election, but threw it into the courts because there was a "small chance" their hare-brained appeal would fly. Still not too smart, IMO.

Curt

what makes it hare-brained, exactly? by later counts of the "lost" votes, gore should have won the state. so were they wrong to appeal? seems to me that it was the right thing to do, and it wud hav worked if the courts hadnt been busy giving W head :?

What is your source for that information, Michael Moore? No credible "later count" that I am aware of has ever indicated that Gore factually won Florida--and that includes The New York Times and other sources that are generally regarded as liberal leaning.

Curt


reno


Dec 29, 2004, 5:43 AM
Post #193 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
But given the crap shape our country is in this is deffintly a dark age

Indeed. Perhaps one of the most telling signs of our country's woeful status is our collective lack of spelling ability.

"deffintly"??

:wtf:


So you have never made a spelling error?

A spelling error is one thing. But totally missing two letters, while including one that doesn't belong is far beyond a misplaced "e."

FWIW, it's "Definitely."

But no... I don't think I've made any spelling errors anytime recently. I try hard to make sure what I type is correct. Part of my anal-retentiveness, I suppose.

(Did you know that "anal retentive" is two words?)


bumblie


Dec 29, 2004, 1:47 PM
Post #194 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
No this thread will never die, I tried to put in a final word explaining why I stopped posting, but then Bumblie or soemone made a "smart" remark

This thread was back on page three or four when you revived it. No one had touched it in over three days. Funny how you think I'm the one who got it going again, when you're the one who effectively brought it back from the dead. After reading your take on the Florida 2000 election, it's apparent that such flawed thinking is pretty normal for you.

Which recounts gave Gore the victory?

Where there any criminal charges filed, following the left leaning U.S. Commission on Civil Rights' investigation of the 2000 election?

How exactly are we living in the "Dark Ages"? See if you can actually come up with something in your own words.


nearly_there


Dec 29, 2004, 1:57 PM
Post #195 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 8, 2003
Posts: 190

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

hey there bumblie my amigo!

on another tangent... have you been following the oil prices of late? i am quite certain now that the pre US election blip was due to speculation (as mentioned in my last post on the matter) and have seen others sources say the same thing.....

interesting times...


bumblie


Dec 29, 2004, 2:04 PM
Post #196 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I think George Soros was manipulating the markets, in an effort to create the appearance of an energy crisis, to have one more reason to oppose Bush/Cheney. :wink:

Looks like he ran out of buying power a week early. :lol:


Partner bill


Dec 29, 2004, 2:45 PM
Post #197 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 4, 2004
Posts: 1061

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
hey there bumblie my amigo!

on another tangent... have you been following the oil prices of late? i am quite certain now that the pre US election blip was due to speculation (as mentioned in my last post on the matter) and have seen others sources say the same thing.....

interesting times...

It's funny to think back to just before the election when everyone was confidently putting out theories about how we had arrived at Hubberts peak, and there was no going back etc. etc., blah blah. Or how the Iraq war was singlehandedly responsible for the spike in global oil prices. So much for all of that nonsense.


nearly_there


Dec 29, 2004, 3:48 PM
Post #198 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 8, 2003
Posts: 190

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Bill - read my previous post (sorry to be rude) - Peak oil is an issue, oil wont go on forever, some day it has to run out and the law of economics says that as supply decreases and demand remains (or increases as we see China and India moving up a gear) the same that the price will rise...


as is confidence over supply (see iraq war)... if you are not confident in the supply....


Partner bill


Dec 29, 2004, 4:21 PM
Post #199 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 4, 2004
Posts: 1061

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Bill - read my previous post (sorry to be rude) - Peak oil is an issue, oil wont go on forever, some day it has to run out and the law of economics says that as supply decreases and demand remains (or increases as we see China and India moving up a gear) the same that the price will rise...


as is confidence over supply (see iraq war)... if you are not confident in the supply....

I understand that oil won't go on forever, and that peak oil will become an issue at some point, I just don't think it is now, and I certainly don't think peak oil had anything to do with the speculative run up in crude prices prior to the US election. It's foolish to talk about peak oil when they are still vast areas of undeveloped petroleum reserves, such as in the Russian arctic.


nearly_there


Dec 29, 2004, 4:48 PM
Post #200 of 244 (3943 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 8, 2003
Posts: 190

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

yes you are correct, peak oil will be a "longterm" influencing factor in price and specualtion will be "short-term"...

the problems will also come when it takes more energy to extract the oil, than will be gained from its use (hope that makes sense)

the only way is up baby... the price aint ever coming down


Partner melodicllama


Dec 29, 2004, 5:34 PM
Post #201 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

as grimpiperx had mentioned, it is similar to the dark ages because of the lack of written information. this administration has been very secretive, one example being the mysterious dissapearance of all of W's military records. and as much as you want to believe i got those words out of a newspaper...sorry, nope.


bumblie


Dec 29, 2004, 5:50 PM
Post #202 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
this administration has been very secretive, one example being the mysterious dissapearance of all of W's military records.
Maybe you should ask Dan Rather to investigate this. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Partner bill


Dec 29, 2004, 5:53 PM
Post #203 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 4, 2004
Posts: 1061

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
as grimpiperx had mentioned, it is similar to the dark ages because of the lack of written information. this administration has been very secretive, one example being the mysterious dissapearance of all of W's military records. and as much as you want to believe i got those words out of a newspaper...sorry, nope.

It's a complete lie to state that "all of W's military records mysteriously disappeared". Bush actually released more information regarding his miltary record than Kerry chose to.


bumblie


Dec 29, 2004, 6:02 PM
Post #204 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

And those "mysteriously" missing records were lost during Clinton's presidency.
In reply to:
According to Pentagon officials, the payroll records of large numbers of service members were ruined in 1996 and 1997 in a project that attempted to salvage brittle microfilm reels.

Do you kids have an accurate grasp on anything?


Partner melodicllama


Dec 29, 2004, 6:11 PM
Post #205 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Bush actually released more information regarding his miltary record than Kerry chose to.

false.

In reply to:
Do you kids have an accurate grasp on anything?

certainly not by what you consider accurate, but unfortunately what you consider accurate and what is truly accurate are different. i am not immune either; such is the nature of political opinionation. and to use my age against me is just stupid; i know more about politics than many adults.


bumblie


Dec 29, 2004, 6:18 PM
Post #206 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Bush actually released more information regarding his miltary record than Kerry chose to.

false.

Do you have anything to back this up? Bush signed off on the government forms allowing ALL of his military records to be released. Kerry (successfully) dodged numerous attempts by investigators to get the same forms signed, frequently giving blatantly dishonest rationales for his reluctance.


bumblie


Dec 29, 2004, 6:21 PM
Post #207 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
certainly not by what you consider accurate, but unfortunately what you consider accurate and what is truly accurate are different.

By accurate I mean a solid understanding of the relevant FACTS of a given story. You seem to have one or two facts with a whole lot of idealogical spin.


Partner bill


Dec 29, 2004, 6:32 PM
Post #208 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 4, 2004
Posts: 1061

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Bush actually released more information regarding his miltary record than Kerry chose to.

false.

False ? .....because you said so ? :lol:

Bush signed a standard form 180 to release all of his records, Kerry refused to, that's historical fact.

You flat out lied up above when you stated that "all of W's records mysteriously disappeared", let's talk about that. :wink:


Partner melodicllama


Dec 29, 2004, 7:13 PM
Post #209 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Do you have anything to back this up? Bush signed off on the government forms allowing ALL of his military records to be released. Kerry (successfully) dodged numerous attempts by investigators to get the same forms signed, frequently giving blatantly dishonest rationales for his reluctance.

do you have anything to back this up?

In reply to:
You flat out lied up above when you stated that "all of W's records mysteriously disappeared", let's talk about that.

ok ok so it was a slight exaggeration. let's just say "some"... :wink:


bumblie


Dec 29, 2004, 7:25 PM
Post #210 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Did any of his records "mysteriously" disappear? If so, which ones?


bumblie


Dec 29, 2004, 7:35 PM
Post #211 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Here's an excerpt from Sept. 16, 2004 Please note the offhanded manner in which Kerry addresses the undisclosed medical records. These were the same records people had been asking about since May.

In reply to:
The U.S. Navy released documents Wednesday contradicting claims by Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry that all of his available military records have been released.

The Navy, responding to a Freedom of Information Act request from the legal watchdog group Judicial Watch, also referred interested parties to Kerry's campaign web site for government military documents.

Navy Personnel Command FOIA Officer Dave German wrote in an e-mail to Judicial Watch that the Navy "withheld thirty-one pages of documents from the responsive military personnel service records as we were not provided a release authorization."

A "release authorization" would have to come from Kerry filling out and signing a Standard Form 180, something he has yet to do. A Standard Form 180 would authorize the complete release of all his military records. Judicial Watch filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests in August to obtain Kerry's military records.

The official U.S. Navy response was received by Judicial Watch on Wednesday, the same day that Kerry told syndicated radio and MSNBC TV host Don Imus that "We've posted my military records that they sent to me, or were posted on my website. You can go to my website, and all my -- you know, the documents are there."

When Imus pressed Kerry as to whether all of his documents were in fact included on the campaign website, Kerry responded, "To the best of my knowledge. I think some of the medical stuff may still be out there. We're trying to get it.


grimpiperx


Dec 29, 2004, 9:57 PM
Post #212 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
as grimpiperx had mentioned, it is similar to the dark ages because of the lack of written information. this administration has been very secretive, one example being the mysterious dissapearance of all of W's military records. and as much as you want to believe i got those words out of a newspaper...sorry, nope.

It's a complete lie to state that "all of W's military records mysteriously disappeared". Bush actually released more information regarding his miltary record than Kerry chose to.

This was under extreme pressure, a key word being "released" he was not originally all that open with them. There was speculation as to his service so then he released some records to try to show that he was valiantly defending the country. Any way he's not as bad as Cheney he dodged the draft 4 seperate times or something.


Partner bill


Dec 29, 2004, 10:03 PM
Post #213 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 4, 2004
Posts: 1061

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
as grimpiperx had mentioned, it is similar to the dark ages because of the lack of written information. this administration has been very secretive, one example being the mysterious dissapearance of all of W's military records. and as much as you want to believe i got those words out of a newspaper...sorry, nope.

It's a complete lie to state that "all of W's military records mysteriously disappeared". Bush actually released more information regarding his miltary record than Kerry chose to.

This was under extreme pressure, a key word being "released" he was not originally all that open with them. There was speculation as to his service so then he released some records to try to show that he was valiantly defending the country. Any way he's not as bad as Cheney he dodged the draft 4 seperate times or something.

What you just wrote does nothing to alter the fact that your partner in crime lied in his post.


thegreytradster


Dec 29, 2004, 10:09 PM
Post #214 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
[quote="bill"This was under extreme pressure, a key word being "released" he was not originally all that open with them. There was speculation as to his service so then he released some records to try to show that he was valiantly defending the country. Any way he's not as bad as Cheney he dodged the draft 4 seperate times or something.

Please clarify what the "extreme pressure" was ? I seem to remember that Bush signed a form 180 early on at the first suggestion of controversy. Kerry never did.

Cheney didn't "dodge" the draft, he was exempt from it. Anyone in the same curcumstance had the same exemption. Ask some of your college professors, (when and if you finally get there) how they got out of the draft. That exemption led to a whole generation of profesional students including the ones that now decry others use of the same exemption.

Can you define hippocracy?


mother_sheep


Dec 29, 2004, 10:24 PM
Post #215 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 18, 2002
Posts: 3984

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm moving to Canada.

Can we carpool?


grimpiperx


Dec 29, 2004, 10:53 PM
Post #216 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
[quote="bill"This was under extreme pressure, a key word being "released" he was not originally all that open with them. There was speculation as to his service so then he released some records to try to show that he was valiantly defending the country. Any way he's not as bad as Cheney he dodged the draft 4 seperate times or something.

Please clarify what the "extreme pressure" was ? I seem to remember that Bush signed a form 180 early on at the first suggestion of controversy. Kerry never did.

Cheney didn't "dodge" the draft, he was exempt from it. Anyone in the same curcumstance had the same exemption. Ask some of your college professors, (when and if you finally get there) how they got out of the draft. That exemption led to a whole generation of profesional students including the ones that now decry others use of the same exemption.

Can you define hippocracy?


:lol: :lol:No I cant define "hippocracy" I looked but I cant seem to find it in the dictionary. Is it a government based on hippos?

To dodge the draft the first time in September 1959 he enters Yale, he then flunks out of Yale. Then to get his first Student deferment he enters Casper College in Wyoming. While in Wyoming he renews his deferment 3 times. Then when Johnson doubled the number of Draftees in 1965 he married his college girlfriend. When the U.S. governement said it would start drafting married men without children, nine months and two days later, Cheney's first child was born( :lol: ). Cheney then got his fifth draft deferment.


curt


Dec 29, 2004, 11:55 PM
Post #217 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
[quote="bill"This was under extreme pressure, a key word being "released" he was not originally all that open with them. There was speculation as to his service so then he released some records to try to show that he was valiantly defending the country. Any way he's not as bad as Cheney he dodged the draft 4 seperate times or something.

Please clarify what the "extreme pressure" was ? I seem to remember that Bush signed a form 180 early on at the first suggestion of controversy. Kerry never did.

Cheney didn't "dodge" the draft, he was exempt from it. Anyone in the same curcumstance had the same exemption. Ask some of your college professors, (when and if you finally get there) how they got out of the draft. That exemption led to a whole generation of profesional students including the ones that now decry others use of the same exemption.

Can you define hippocracy?


:lol: :lol:No I cant define "hippocracy" I looked but I cant seem to find it in the dictionary. Is it a government based on hippos?

To dodge the draft the first time in September 1959 he enters Yale, he then flunks out of Yale. Then to get his first Student deferment he enters Casper College in Wyoming. While in Wyoming he renews his deferment 3 times. Then when Johnson doubled the number of Draftees in 1965 he married his college girlfriend. When the U.S. governement said it would start drafting married men without children, nine months and two days later, Cheney's first child was born( :lol: ). Cheney then got his fifth draft deferment.

Cheney sounds just like Bill Clinton then, as far as Vietnam war deferments go--same school even, Yale. Was Clinton similarly wrong to avoid the war by using the same war-avoidance tactics that Cheney did?

Curt


grimpiperx


Dec 30, 2004, 12:12 AM
Post #218 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Yar, but Clinton got into Oxford and didn't flunk out :P . Also there is the deally with Cheney's daughter which is timed kinda funny. But yes I did a search and it does seem that Clinton wasnt exactly rushing off to war, but at least he was in Europe doing things, instead of flunking out of stuff.

P.S. Cheney hates Puppies

P.P.S. Clinton wasnt a communist


Partner melodicllama


Dec 30, 2004, 12:26 AM
Post #219 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
What you just wrote does nothing to alter the fact that your partner in crime lied in his post.

well for one thing it clarified what my uneducated self was trying to say...


bumblie


Dec 30, 2004, 9:18 PM
Post #220 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Yar, but Clinton got into Oxford and didn't flunk out :P . Also there is the deally with Cheney's daughter which is timed kinda funny. But yes I did a search and it does seem that Clinton wasnt exactly rushing off to war, but at least he was in Europe doing things, instead of flunking out of stuff.

It's impressive how you can consider Cheney's completely above board deferments to be worse than Clinton's the sleazy, backstabbing, doubledealing tactics used to dodge the draft.

Kids :roll:


Partner melodicllama


Dec 30, 2004, 11:20 PM
Post #221 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
kids :roll:

morons :roll:

in what way is clinton sleazy, backstabbing, or doubledealing?


grimpiperx


Dec 31, 2004, 12:58 AM
Post #222 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Yar, but Clinton got into Oxford and didn't flunk out :P . Also there is the deally with Cheney's daughter which is timed kinda funny. But yes I did a search and it does seem that Clinton wasnt exactly rushing off to war, but at least he was in Europe doing things, instead of flunking out of stuff.

It's impressive how you can consider Cheney's completely above board deferments to be worse than Clinton's the sleazy, backstabbing, doubledealing tactics used to dodge the draft.

Kids :roll:


Yar, please explain why Clinton was worse than Cheney. Cheney flunked out of Yale and impregnated his wife as soon as he realized he might be drafted even though he was married. Even you must have noticed something when you posted that; you said a whole lot of stuff without even giving an incorrect reason for why you said it. I mean jeebus, I might as well say that Cheney eats babies. :roll:


curt


Dec 31, 2004, 1:43 AM
Post #223 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Yar, but Clinton got into Oxford and didn't flunk out :P . Also there is the deally with Cheney's daughter which is timed kinda funny. But yes I did a search and it does seem that Clinton wasnt exactly rushing off to war, but at least he was in Europe doing things, instead of flunking out of stuff.

It's impressive how you can consider Cheney's completely above board deferments to be worse than Clinton's the sleazy, backstabbing, doubledealing tactics used to dodge the draft.

Kids :roll:


Yar, please explain why Clinton was worse than Cheney. Cheney flunked out of Yale and impregnated his wife as soon as he realized he might be drafted even though he was married. Even you must have noticed something when you posted that; you said a whole lot of stuff without even giving an incorrect reason for why you said it. I mean jeebus, I might as well say that Cheney eats babies. :roll:

So, you are supposed to give incorrect reasons for saying things? Hahahaha.

Curt


bumblie


Dec 31, 2004, 3:43 PM
Post #224 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

It seems you're under some silly delusion that obtaining draft deferments was somehow unseemly and the equivalent of being a draft dodger. Apparently, you are failing to get a contextual understanding of recent history. The use of draft deferments in the Vietnam War was completely above board and legitimate. There was little (if any) derision associated with gaining defements.

Those using dishonest or illegal means to avoid the draft were considered the "draft dodgers".

Cheney obtained deferments in a perfectly acceptable manner. It's funny how people assume Cheney got his wife pregnant mere days after learning that becoming a father was his only remaining loophole. Newsflash kiddo, it rarely happens this way. :wink: Even if that was the case, there's nothing wrong with doing so. BTW You keep saying Cheney flunked out of Yale. Do you have any proof of this? Or is it merely conjecture?

Here's a little tidbit I doubt you know: John Kerry enlisted only after his request for a deferment was turned down. A common practice was to enlist in the reserves as an officer, to avoid being drafted as a grunt. He enlisted in the Naval Reserves.

About Clinton:
From Snopes
In reply to:
That Bill Clinton went to great lengths to avoid the Vietnam-era draft, that he used political connections to obtain special favors, and that he made promises and commitments which he later failed to honor, are all beyond dispute......

Although what he did may not have been against the law, Clinton's broken promises and contradictory statements about his efforts to avoid the draft were prime examples of the kind of self-serving doublespeak that later earned him the sobriquet "Slick Willie." As Maraniss concluded in his Clinton biography, First in His Class:

"It was just a fluke," Clinton would say decades later, when first asked how he had made it through this period without serving in the military. But of course it was not a fluke. A fluke is a wholly accidental stroke of good luck. What happened to Clinton during that fateful year did not happen by accident. He fretted and planned every move, he got help from others when needed, he resorted to some deception or manipulation when necessary, and he was ultimately lucky.


bobd1953


Dec 31, 2004, 11:03 PM
Post #225 of 244 (4111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Cheney obtained deferments in a perfectly acceptable manner. It's funny how people assume Cheney got his wife pregnant mere days after learning that becoming a father was his only remaining loophole. Newsflash kiddo, it rarely happens this way. Even if that was the case, there's nothing wrong with doing so. BTW You keep saying Cheney flunked out of Yale. Do you have any proof of this? Or is it merely conjecture?

Here's a little tidbit I doubt you know: John Kerry enlisted only after his request for a deferment was turned down. A common practice was to enlist in the reserves as an officer, to avoid being drafted as a grunt. He enlisted in the Naval Reserves.

The fact of the matter is: Niether Cheney or Bush spend any time fighting or dodging bullets during the Vietnam war or any other war. Kerry did.


thegreytradster


Dec 31, 2004, 11:20 PM
Post #226 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Uh! Kerry lost.

I beleve his obvious self aggrandizement (thats spray for you two kids) of his proported exploits in Viet Nam had something to do with it.

Why is this still an issue?


bobd1953


Jan 1, 2005, 12:19 AM
Post #227 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Uh! Kerry lost.

Wrong! America and the rest of the world lost.


Partner melodicllama


Jan 1, 2005, 12:33 AM
Post #228 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
I beleve his obvious self aggrandizement (thats spray for you two kids)

well well...looks like SOMEbody got a thesaurus for christmas :roll:


bumblie


Jan 3, 2005, 1:04 PM
Post #229 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
The fact of the matter is: Niether Cheney or Bush spend any time fighting or dodging bullets during the Vietnam war or any other war. Kerry did.

Apparently, Kerry wasn't smart enough to avoid active service. :roll:


Partner melodicllama


Jan 3, 2005, 8:02 PM
Post #230 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
The fact of the matter is: Niether Cheney or Bush spend any time fighting or dodging bullets during the Vietnam war or any other war. Kerry did.

Apparently, Kerry wasn't smart enough to avoid active service. :roll:

so bush and cheney get awarded for their cowardice by getting to be president?

American People:"well bush was better at being a wuss so i'll vote for him"

somehow i dont think thats how it is


bumblie


Jan 3, 2005, 8:10 PM
Post #231 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
The fact of the matter is: Niether Cheney or Bush spend any time fighting or dodging bullets during the Vietnam war or any other war. Kerry did.

Apparently, Kerry wasn't smart enough to avoid active service. :roll:

so bush and cheney get awarded for their cowardice by getting to be president?

American People:"well bush was better at being a wuss so i'll vote for him"

somehow i dont think thats how it is

It must be pretty scary viewing the world through welder's goggles.


Partner melodicllama


Jan 3, 2005, 8:22 PM
Post #232 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
The fact of the matter is: Niether Cheney or Bush spend any time fighting or dodging bullets during the Vietnam war or any other war. Kerry did.

Apparently, Kerry wasn't smart enough to avoid active service. :roll:

so bush and cheney get awarded for their cowardice by getting to be president?

American People:"well bush was better at being a wuss so i'll vote for him"

somehow i dont think thats how it is


It must be pretty scary viewing the world through welder's goggles.

thats your comeback? you're slipping. you want to explain your point of view or just be surly?


bumblie


Jan 3, 2005, 8:48 PM
Post #233 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Our interactions in this thread have consisted of you posting incredibly obtuse points, followed by me showing proof of this idiocy.

It's gotten quite old.


Partner melodicllama


Jan 3, 2005, 9:10 PM
Post #234 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Our interactions in this thread have consisted of you posting incredibly obtuse points, followed by me showing proof of this idiocy.

It's gotten quite old.

opinionation is a funny thing. i see it the same way, but vice versa obviously. want to declare the thread dead and move on before we burn any more bridges? im tired of it too.


bumblie


Jan 3, 2005, 9:23 PM
Post #235 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
opinionation

That's the second time you've used that word. Is it a real word?

Opinions vary... facts are facts. Most people get the distinction.


wildtrail


Jan 3, 2005, 9:32 PM
Post #236 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 11063

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
By SAM DOLNICK, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - After winning re-election and "reshaping the rules of politics to fit his 10-gallon-hat leadership style," President George Bush for the second time was chosen as Time magazine's Person of the Year.

The magazine's editors tapped Bush "for sharpening the debate until the choices bled, for reframing reality to match his design, for gambling his fortunes — and ours — on his faith in the power of leadership."

Time's 2004 Person of the Year package, on newsstands Monday, includes an Oval Office interview with Bush, an interview with his father, former President George H. W. Bush, and a profile of Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove.

In an interview with the magazine, Bush attributed his victory over Democratic candidate John Kerry to his foreign policy and the wars he began in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"The election was about the use of American influence," Bush said.

After a grueling campaign, Bush remains a polarizing figure in America and around the world, and that's part of the reason he earned the magazine's honor, said Managing Editor Jim Kelly.

"Many, many Americans deeply wish he had not won," Kelly said in a telephone interview. "And yet he did." ............

Discuss.

Curt

No, no Curt. I should read:

In reply to:
By SAM DOLNICK, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - After winning re-election and "reshaping the rules of politics to fit his 10-gallon-hat leadership style," President George Bush for the second time was chosen as Time magazine's Person of the Year.

The magazine's editors tapped Bush "for sharpening the debate until the choices bled, for reframing reality to match his design, for gambling his fortunes — and ours — on his faith in the power of leadership."

Time's 2004 Person of the Year package, on newsstands Monday, includes an Oval Office interview with Bush, an interview with his father, former President George H. W. Bush, and a profile of Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove.

In an interview with the magazine, Bush attributed his victory over Democratic candidate John Kerry to his foreign policy and the wars he began in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"The election was about the use of American influence," Bush said.

After a grueling campaign, Bush remains a polarizing figure in America and around the world, and that's part of the reason he earned the magazine's honor, said Managing Editor Jim Kelly.

"Many, many Americans deeply wish he had not won," Kelly said in a telephone interview. "And yet he did." ............

Disgusted.

Steve

:wink:


Partner melodicllama


Jan 3, 2005, 10:10 PM
Post #237 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Opinions vary... facts are facts. Most people get the distinction.

there were plenty of valid facts presented by left-leaning individuals. you dismissed them as false because you didnt agree with them. who's wearing the welder's goggles?

In reply to:
That's the second time you've used that word. Is it a real word?

good lord no. it is my personal derivation of opinionated. havent you ever made up words? :roll:


bumblie


Jan 4, 2005, 1:04 PM
Post #238 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Opinions vary... facts are facts. Most people get the distinction.

there were plenty of valid facts presented by left-leaning individuals. you dismissed them as false because you didnt agree with them. who's wearing the welder's goggles?

For example.... :roll:




BTW People can have opposite viewpoints regarding the same facts. Your deficiency lies in a consistently poor grasp of the facts.


Partner melodicllama


Jan 4, 2005, 7:42 PM
Post #239 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Opinions vary... facts are facts. Most people get the distinction.

there were plenty of valid facts presented by left-leaning individuals. you dismissed them as false because you didnt agree with them. who's wearing the welder's goggles?

For example.... :roll:




BTW People can have opposite viewpoints regarding the same facts. Your deficiency lies in a consistently poor grasp of the facts.

but who are you to say this?


bumblie


Jan 4, 2005, 7:52 PM
Post #240 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

The thing about talking in circles is that you never move forward.

Kids :roll:


Partner melodicllama


Jan 4, 2005, 7:56 PM
Post #241 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 239

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
The thing about talking in circles is that you never move forward.

Kids :roll:

it takes 2 to tango.

so how many times can you use the age argument before it gets old? what are you at now, 3?

ive had enough of this thread. you might well be the most right leaning person i know. there is no using logic on you. it bounces off your jingoist armor.


bumblie


Jan 4, 2005, 8:12 PM
Post #242 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Go back and reread this thread. For every point you've challenged me on, I've shown proof to support my points. You, on the other hand, have provided none... well one... that stuff about the Dark Ages. Your explanation was a bit of a stretch, but I let it go because you were staying on subject. For the most part, you just reply with irrelevant tangents, while never actually addressing the question put before you.


grimpiperx


Jan 4, 2005, 11:15 PM
Post #243 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 30, 2004
Posts: 330

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Yar, but Clinton got into Oxford and didn't flunk out :P . Also there is the deally with Cheney's daughter which is timed kinda funny. But yes I did a search and it does seem that Clinton wasnt exactly rushing off to war, but at least he was in Europe doing things, instead of flunking out of stuff.

It's impressive how you can consider Cheney's completely above board deferments to be worse than Clinton's the sleazy, backstabbing, doubledealing tactics used to dodge the draft.

Kids :roll:

Dude you still never explained this???? I mean he was a God-damned Fulbright Scholar, it doesn't get a whole lot more honorable than that. I mean how can you say you supported your arguements with that post sitting there? Good grief :?


bumblie


Jan 5, 2005, 1:51 PM
Post #244 of 244 (3635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629

Re: Time Magazine's Man Of The Year for 2004 [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Are you somehow implying that because Clinton was a Fullbright Scholar (I'll take your word on this), that his sleazy, backstabbing tactics for avoiding the draft (of which I provided a lengthy explanation) are somehow above reproach?

One doesn't excuse the other.


Forums : Community : Campground

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook