H'WOOD MORONS

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Common sense really. Don't go criticizing the place that feeds you.. No one is saying people like him shouldn't be able to say, "i don't agree with this or that" but when you absolutely hate a place the best thing to do is move to a place which has similar views..

Actually it seems like a lot of people seem to be unable to distinguish one from the other - and people who express some quite inoccuous opinions end up being lumped in with some sort of unofficial liberal movement, which is quite divorced from reality.

I can say with some conviction that "my hometown" (in britain) is a $hithole. And why not - I lived there for enough years to form the opinion that it has very little going for it, and of course there are those who live there who would likely vehemently disagree. They can do so, and perhaps their experiences were different to mine. Ultimately however, I don't 'owe' it or them anything whatsoever. Why should I modify my views to fit theirs?

Liberals seem to feel their opinions and views gives them the right! to ruin it and insult any body else who does not agree with them.. Hmm come to think of it much like terrorists.. No wonder they have so much sympathy for those poor innocent terrorists..

Does this even merit a response I wonder, considering that the idea is rooted in a fallacy. Sympathy in this context doesn't appear to match the dictionary definition - Saying that the problems in the middle east are not indistinguishable from decades worth of bad foreign policy, is hardly showing sympathy towards terrorists - as suggesting that America does not exist in a political vaccuum and that its decisions, and the decisions of the imperial powers predating it have a direct impact on other countries in the developing world.

Unless of course, if you want to suggest that selling arms to Saddam Hussein, funding the Afghan Mujahadeen and ousting the Iranian president in favour of the Shah were actually good ideas. Real stinkers, IMO.

[pedroh 21]

Could someone PLEASE explain to me how criticism is different from bashing to you?????????

Common sense really. Don't go criticizing the place that feeds you.. No one is saying people like him shouldn't be able to say, "i don't agree with this or that" but when you absolutely hate a place the best thing to do is move to a place which has similar views..

Liberals seem to feel their opinions and views gives them the right! to ruin it and insult any body else who does not agree with them.. Hmm come to think of it much like terrorists.. No wonder they have so much sympathy for those poor innocent terrorists..

In the words of melo - spot on!

Um, you guys seem to have an idea of America as a static, unchanging place. What about when people didn't like, say, slavery? They were criticizing AMERICA, not an American policy, and should have moved somewhere else? Please don't tell me that common sense should tell me otherwise, because your logic certainly doesn't.

same with segregationism... same with mccarthy's crazy shitzorz..

[Heracles 417]

I don't understand what you're saying. Liberals feel they have the right to ruin what? America?

pretty much.. I by no means stereotype all liberals but there are a lot of bad apples in the group that are stuffing the US up for it's fellow citizens..

Do people realize that in the US, thanks to groups like the ACLU, authorities would have had an almost impossible task of capturing similar bombers to those in the UK because the authorities would pretty much have had to hand out flyers in a neighbourhood advising them that they suspect them of terror activities and will need to tap their phone lines ..Then after all of that the alcu would come to the rescue and probably mention that under amendment bla bla bla written in 1787 it's unlawful and sue..

Hopefully the NYT doesn't get their hands on a similar investigation to the terrorists in the UK, prior to any arrests, because they would probably publish the details of the investigation in their paper. Then only to turn around and claim that the George w admin failed to prevent terrorist.. It just seems to be a vicious cycle in the US of the liberals playing a dirty game of 'I'll do anything to screw George W and the republicans', instead of being united on the security of their F'''n lives...

[pedroh 21]

I don't understand what you're saying. Liberals feel they have the right to ruin what? America?

pretty much.. I by no means stereotype all liberals but there are a lot of bad apples in the group that are stuffing the US up for it's fellow citizens..

Do people realize that in the US, thanks to groups like the ACLU, authorities would have had an almost impossible task of capturing similar bombers to those in the UK because the authorities would pretty much have had to hand out flyers in a neighbourhood advising them that they suspect them of terror activities and will need to tap their phone lines ..Then after all of that the alcu would come to the rescue and probably mention that under amendment bla bla bla written in 1787 it's unlawful and sue..

Hopefully the NYT doesn't get their hands on a similar investigation to the terrorists in the UK, prior to any arrests, because they would probably publish the details of the investigation in their paper. Then only to turn around and claim that the George w admin failed to prevent terrorist.. It just seems to be a vicious cycle in the US of the liberals playing a dirty game of 'I'll do anything to screw George W and the republicans', instead of being united on the security of their F'''n lives...

yeah but unlike you, there are non-partisans that don't find funny at all for the government to tap their phone lines withouth a warrant.. non-partisans who still like their civil liberties and don't plan on giving them up just because some guy says if you don't you're being unamerican..

[Heracles 417]

yeah but unlike you, there are non-partisans that don't find funny at all for the government to tap their phone lines withouth a warrant.. non-partisans who still like their civil liberties and don't plan on giving them up just because some guy says if you don't you're being unamerican..

Nothing to do with non-partisans.. when i hear people complain about their privacy it's like no offense but no one really gives a ###### about what most people are saying...

I ask you this question, which country has a lower crime rate and a better living standard, Australia or the US?

Edited August 15, 2006 by Infidel

[Jenn! 918]

It just seems to be a vicious cycle in the US of the liberals playing a dirty game of 'I'll do anything to screw George W and the republicans', instead of being united on the security of their F'''n lives...

So you think that liberals' opinions on national security are formed solely by the desire to spite GW and Republicans??

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

But there's no proof whatsoever that people are influenced by those views to any significant degree.

People have been using similar BS excuses for a while now, especially when it comes to stuff like the 'negative' influence of RAP, gang banging music and shoot up the neighbourhood video games.. Kids and others are 'clearly' sub-consciously influenced by the stuff they watch and what they listen too..

I'll bet $10,000 bucks that if research was conducted with a group of families one would clearly see the affect of these negative influences. That is, if the families were split into two and the first group was isolated from the rubbish that comes out of hollywood, modern day music videos etc while the other group continued to be exposed to all the ####### like rap, horror films etc. I bet one would notice that the non-exposed group would experience much less crime amongst themselves, as well as have less broken families and the general attitude of people would be more civilized & respectful, especially the kids..

i am personally wondering when will this insanity stop in the US.. When will people realize that a constitution written 300 + years ago needs to be modified to reflect and apply to modern day times..

A little perspective needs to be applied here. Why is what a movie star says any more of an influence than anything the government says. Plenty of people bought into the anti-Kerry flip-flop smear campaign, despite the fact that Kerry (while far from an ideal candidate) had not done anything significantly different to any other career politician.

People are 'influenced' by a whole range of factors and to massively different degrees. Clearly not everyone who plays video games or listens to ganster rap turns into a drug dealer or the Columbine Killers - because it dismisses the idea that can sift this information and actually think for themselves.

[Heracles 417]

So you think that liberals' opinions on national security are formed solely by the desire to spite GW and Republicans??

Yes. Hard left liberals will do anything to oust Georgie. That guy who is an idiot yet apparently also a genius capable of thinking up a grand 9/11 conspiracy..

[pedroh 21]

yeah but unlike you, there are non-partisans that don't find funny at all for the government to tap their phone lines withouth a warrant.. non-partisans who still like their civil liberties and don't plan on giving them up just because some guy says if you don't you're being unamerican..

Nothing to do with non-partisans.. when i hear people complain about their privacy it's like no offense but no one really gives a ###### about what most people are saying...

I ask you this question, which country has a lower crime rate and a better living standard, Australia or the US?

well, i do give a ####### about my privacy, and as the other citizens.. have a right to protest, because that's a clear violation of civil rights and privacy.. which is illegal in every situation.. if we call America a democratic country that respects its citizens rights

[one...two...tree 2,762]

i dont get it .. they act on TV or in movies and they think they know everything. i say drop them in the middle of Lebannon and see who protects them there and let them say "we shouldnt use violence to fight terrorism" lol what a joke.

Who says they "think they know everything"?

I was just about to ask the same question.

I'm also still waiting for an answer to who decides who can say what and why should actors (librarians/professors/teachers) not speak their mind in public if talk radio hosts and politicians do? How and when do you judge if someone is qualified?

I think erekose hit the nail on the head when he pointed out that saying they should shut up rather than directly responding to their criticism is very weak, yet it seems that attitude is share by a number of Americans. As you mentioned before, we can't have a democracy without true discourse.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't understand what you're saying. Liberals feel they have the right to ruin what? America?

pretty much.. I by no means stereotype all liberals but there are a lot of bad apples in the group that are stuffing the US up for it's fellow citizens..

Do people realize that in the US, thanks to groups like the ACLU, authorities would have had an almost impossible task of capturing similar bombers to those in the UK because the authorities would pretty much have had to hand out flyers in a neighbourhood advising them that they suspect them of terror activities and will need to tap their phone lines ..Then after all of that the alcu would come to the rescue and probably mention that under amendment bla bla bla written in 1787 it's unlawful and sue..

Hopefully the NYT doesn't get their hands on a similar investigation to the terrorists in the UK, prior to any arrests, because they would probably publish the details of the investigation in their paper. Then only to turn around and claim that the George w admin failed to prevent terrorist.. It just seems to be a vicious cycle in the US of the liberals playing a dirty game of 'I'll do anything to screw George W and the republicans', instead of being united on the security of their F'''n lives...

So what's the point - that civil liberties (the result of several thousand years of western civilisation) are to be thrown away for the hell of it?

At which point then does balancing the need to provide effective national security with protecting the cherished freedoms of its citizens lead to a society where a person can be landed in jail for not having carrying his ID?

I'm not ignorant of the threat - but it seems to me that rushing to give away all of our freedoms to the government, with the barest modicum of debate, forethought or safeguard is simply ridiculous - but not inconsistent with current political climate. Straussian philosophy at its best.

[pedroh 21]

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."

P. Henry

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

Does that mean that even though I don't like the homosexual lifestyle, I'm envious of that too? Secretly I'm YEARNING to be gay?

[Heracles 417]

pretty much.. I by no means stereotype all liberals but there are a lot of bad apples in the group that are stuffing the US up for it's fellow citizens..

Do people realize that in the US, thanks to groups like the ACLU, authorities would have had an almost impossible task of capturing similar bombers to those in the UK because the authorities would pretty much have had to hand out flyers in a neighbourhood advising them that they suspect them of terror activities and will need to tap their phone lines ..Then after all of that the alcu would come to the rescue and probably mention that under amendment bla bla bla written in 1787 it's unlawful and sue..

Hopefully the NYT doesn't get their hands on a similar investigation to the terrorists in the UK, prior to any arrests, because they would probably publish the details of the investigation in their paper. Then only to turn around and claim that the George w admin failed to prevent terrorist.. It just seems to be a vicious cycle in the US of the liberals playing a dirty game of 'I'll do anything to screw George W and the republicans', instead of being united on the security of their F'''n lives...

So what's the point - that civil liberties (the result of several thousand years of western civilisation) are to be thrown away for the hell of it?

At which point then does balancing the need to provide effective national security with protecting the cherished freedoms of its citizens lead to a society where a person can be landed in jail for not having carrying his ID?

I'm not ignorant of the threat - but it seems to me that rushing to give away all of our freedoms to the government, with the barest modicum of debate, forethought or safeguard is simply ridiculous - but not inconsistent with current political climate. Straussian philosophy at its best.

It's that sort of attitude that has kept crime rates high in the US. The attitude were criminals have the same rights, if not more, than victims. Were Gang bangers and organised crime, let alone terrorists, can hide

under BS amendments and laws created at a time when the present issues simply did not exist let alone have been foreseeable..

Dont you think that if previous generations, especially the founders of this nation, were brought to the future to see what has become of this nation and how the amendments are now being misused and interpreted literally in-order to suite a persons or particular groups agenda would be disgusted..

i highly doubt the founding forefathers interpreted freedom of speech as allowing idiots to trash the nation with songs like "i don't want to be an American idiot"..

Edited August 15, 2006 by Infidel

[Heracles 417]

So what's the point - that civil liberties (the result of several thousand years of western civilisation) are to be thrown away for the hell of it?

People are becoming more and more primitive by the day.. Just look at h'wood were peoples lives are obsessed with looks and sex. Or how criminals and gangs are becoming more and more vicious.. Or how the number of self-centered people in the US are growing, which ironically are in the blue states....

PS Whatever progress was made by the western civilization in the US peaked in the 60's and has since been on a downward spiral towards being lost and completely forgotten.. Just watch a few shows on MTV and one will see teens saying, "you are a loser if your a geek or your not hot..". Their whole pupose in life is to be cool or be hot...

Edited August 15, 2006 by Infidel