'Who are we Kidding' [anti-neocon]

'Who are we Kidding' [anti-neocon]

Post just about everything that isn't directly related to Spring here!

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
mother
Posts: 379
Joined: 04 May 2005, 05:43

'Who are we Kidding' [anti-neocon]

Post by mother »

Something I just got in an email... For the US-Americans in here...
  • Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

    Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

    A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multinational corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

    The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

    If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

    Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

    HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

    Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

    A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

    Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

    The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's cocaine conviction is none of our business.

    Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness, and you need our prayers for your recovery.

    You support states' rights, which mean Attorney General Gonzalez can tell states what local voter initiatives they have the right to adopt.

    What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80s is irrelevant.
User avatar
Decimator
Posts: 1118
Joined: 24 Jul 2005, 04:15

Post by Decimator »

Global warming really is junk science.
Kixxe
Posts: 1547
Joined: 14 May 2005, 10:02

Post by Kixxe »

Decimator wrote:Global warming really is junk science.

Junk science as in we alredy know everything there is to know about the subject or as in we don't care about the posibole effects in can have on the climate and wildlife?



and yes, thats a pretty funny... or, entertaining.
User avatar
mother
Posts: 379
Joined: 04 May 2005, 05:43

Post by mother »

Kixxe wrote:
Decimator wrote:Global warming really is junk science.

Junk science as in we alredy know everything there is to know about the subject or as in we don't care about the posibole effects in can have on the climate and wildlife?
Junk Science as in "we have no idea wtf is really going on, and anyone who claims that there is serious proof one way or the other is full of poopy" ;)

I found it entertaining, I didn't say I agreed with everything in it.

OTOH creationism/ID isn't even junk science... It's anti-science :|
User avatar
FizWizz
Posts: 1998
Joined: 17 Aug 2005, 11:42

Post by FizWizz »

Thank you for the funny E-mail bit, Mother. I know a couple of people who'll really be tickled to read it :-) (and a couple who'll be really pissed! bwahahaha :twisted: )
User avatar
Zoombie
Posts: 6149
Joined: 15 Mar 2005, 07:08

Post by Zoombie »

Hillarious...

And about sex:

"Its natural. Get over it"

About war:

"Its natural. Get over it"
User avatar
Felix the Cat
Posts: 2383
Joined: 15 Jun 2005, 17:30

Post by Felix the Cat »

Zoombie wrote:Hillarious...

And about sex:

"Its natural. Get over it"
Nuh-uh!

Sex Ed 101, as experienced by yours truly in the 8th grade... a guy comes in and shows a video on puberty, then tells us:

"Premarital sex can lead to diseases such as pregnancy and AIDS."

We need to eliminate diseases like pregnancy and AIDS by not letting people have sex! If we let people have sex, then we will have to require that it is sex without pleasure on the woman's part with the sole objective of producing a child. And only if necessary. Other forms of sex are unBiblical, and in a theocracy like ours, things that are unBiblical must be outlawed.
User avatar
Zoombie
Posts: 6149
Joined: 15 Mar 2005, 07:08

Post by Zoombie »

Ah ha! i knew it was a joke when refenceing a theocracy, when America is a democracy...that has 75 or so percent of its population being christian!

BUT BUT BUT! I hasten to add that a large number of the people in america can be smart AND chirstain! The two things aren't mutualy exsclusive!
User avatar
Das Bruce
Posts: 3544
Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 06:16

Post by Das Bruce »

No, but the louder they are the dumber they tend to be.
User avatar
mother
Posts: 379
Joined: 04 May 2005, 05:43

Post by mother »

Das Bruce wrote:No, but the louder they are the dumber they tend to be.
SHUT UP!!!
THATS JUST STUPID!


:wink:
User avatar
SwiftSpear
Classic Community Lead
Posts: 7287
Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29

Post by SwiftSpear »

mmm, conservitive hypocracy.

This is why I giggle at people when they get self rightous and serious. Maby you think you're above it because you're leftist... ehehehe...

People are so rediculous.
el_muchacho
Posts: 201
Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 01:06

Post by el_muchacho »

mother wrote: I found it entertaining, I didn't say I agreed with everything in it.

OTOH creationism/ID isn't even junk science... It's anti-science :|
Yup, "science" as taught by religious fanatics. Nothing to do with science.
It reminds me a law that was passed in one american state, - can't remember which -, where it was decided that for the sake of simplicity, Pi = 4. :lol:
This was, it was easier to square the circle, I guess.
User avatar
Das Bruce
Posts: 3544
Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 06:16

Post by Das Bruce »

I think it would be 3, since thats what its valued at in some bible.
User avatar
BvDorp
Posts: 439
Joined: 14 Oct 2005, 12:09

Post by BvDorp »

Das Bruce wrote:I think it would be 3, since thats what its valued at in some bible.
that's quite bull actually :)
User avatar
Das Bruce
Posts: 3544
Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 06:16

Post by Das Bruce »

Oh yes the idea of it being a whole number is, but the actual value of pi is alot closer to 3 than 4, which leads me to think it would be more likely approximated to 3.
User avatar
BvDorp
Posts: 439
Joined: 14 Oct 2005, 12:09

Post by BvDorp »

Das Bruce wrote:Oh yes the idea of it being a whole number is,[obvious, cut]
The idea is? :D explain!
User avatar
Das Bruce
Posts: 3544
Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 06:16

Post by Das Bruce »

BvDorp wrote:...quite bull actually :)
Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic Discussion”