Bush's Speech

[starlifter]

<br />posted September 11, 2001 09:09 PM <br /> Yes. You forgot to say "and elected by almost half the American people".<br /> <hr></blockquote>

Well, let's recall Mr. 43%, the great traitor Bill Clinton.

Were it not for the skullduggery of the many nefarious elements of the radical elements in the Democratic Party, the race would not have been close... Gore would have gone down in flames by a large margin.

I truly thank God that we have a decent Christian man like Bush Jr. in office. I shudder to think what depths a self-confessed New Ager like Al Gore would cause the US to sink. And when the evil Red Chinese are able to fully utilize the missile technology that Clinton and Gore gave them about 4 years ago, America and the world will be within range of Chinese ballistic nuclear missiles for the first time. Already, the residents of Hawaii and parts of Alaska have Gore to thank for coming within range of the recently improved evil Red Chinese missiles.

And though this is not the right time for recriminations (yet), let's not forget that the reason America is facing the current crisis is because Clinton and Gore mishandled (or refused to handle) almost every terrorist attack in the 1990's.

 

[Dogberry_Old]

Starlifter... get a grip !! What we need in this country is a brand new political paradigm. Not just the recycled garbage from years gone bye. I am going to be doing a essay To those who would sow hatred & division.. at the current affairs forum at .. too many teenie boppers here to have much of a reasonable discussion about anything. I think you have managed to be a central character to keep in mind in the content of this essay.

There are going to be a lot on both the left & the right that are going to use this to advance their same tried old agendas.. you are an example of the later with your SDI theology. This is not the Clinton Era nor is it the Reagan Era.. romantic, nostalgic attempts to revive either will end up being farcicial. Not needed under the present circumstances..agreed ?

I could say a lot more about some the the recent stuff you have written .. but I will hold my fire. I will say that if if you the racially loaded term "Evil Red Chinese" anymore .. you deserve a permanent vacation from this site.

Dog

 

[starlifter]

<br />by Dogberry:

...<br /> I will say that if you the racially loaded term "Evil Red Chinese"<br />...<br /> <hr></blockquote>

As you and I have discussed several months ago, the term "evil Red Chinese" is not racial in the slightest. To review:

1. "evil" ... the government of Red China is an abomination to mankind, and is in objective fact that they are indeed evil personified, and evil that stalks the earth. Among other things, they are developing the capability as rapidly as they can to be able to launch nuclear and biological weapons against mainland America. Thanks to the personal efforts of Bill Clinton and Al Gore, the evil Red Chinese now have the capability to reach Hawaii and parts of Alaska with their newly improved missiles. If you can think of a reason why the Chinese need to be able to Nuke America, especially considering they have never ever had this capability until Clinton and Gore helped them about 5 years ago, then explain it to the American public. There is no reason from where I sit, so I'm not interested in hearing some supposedly politically correct dogma attempting to sugar coat them.

2. "Red" ... This distinguishes the Red Chinese leaders and government and political system from the general Chinese population. Perhaps you see no diffrence between a Nazi and a German, or a Fascist and an Italian, or the Red Chinese and Chinese. But whether you do or not, there is a distinction and it is not racial.

3. "Chinese" ... self-explanatory.

 

[allan]

"Allan, you didn't vote for Nader, did you?"

I voted for Harry Browne (Libertarian). Although I (and libertarians in general) agree with Nader and the Greens on two major things: end the facilitation of corporate control of government (although we'd approach this at a different angle), and end the moronic "War on Drugs". As for environmental issues, libertarians tend to be divided, but in general we view pollution as an assault on people and property and would try to formulate an effective policy against it (I personally favor use of the civil courts--but "stalling tactics" need to be eliminated there). We could also have other, cleaner sources of energy at hand today if the government could not be "bought" by oil interests (and under a constitutional government, NO ONE could buy it because the law will be the law with no exceptions to be "bought")....

But if McCain had won that nomination, I would have voted republican for the first time in a presidential race (I used to be a democrat). I liked his ideas of campaign finance reform, but the big thing for me was his character--the man speaks his mind. Honesty is a lost virtue in American politics unfortunately....

 

[Dogberry_Old]

Starlifter,

Evil Red Chinese = Yellow Peril = Savage Redskin = Slant-eyed Gooks = ( yes even ) Middle Eastern Terrorists

Terms that are more ascriptive than descriptive...bah !! I am not going to waste anymore time on the likes of you.. your mind is set too deeply in cement.. circa the year 1952. You just want others to share your hates & obsessions.

Good Luck to you .. Sir.

Dog

[ September 17, 2001: Message edited by: Dogberry ]</p>

 

[starlifter]

<br />posted September 17, 2001 04:09 PM <br />Starlifter,

Evil Red Chinese = Yellow Peril = Savage Redskin = Slant-eyed Gooks = ( yes even ) Middle Eastern Terrorists

Terms that are more ascriptive than descriptive...bah !! I am not going to waste anymore time on the likes of you.. your mind is set too deeply in cement.. circa the year 1952. You just want others to share your hates & obsessions. <br /> <hr></blockquote>

Dogberry, it is interesting to note that the only place I ever seem to see such actual drivel is from you, when you're trying to put that stuff on others. You're often fixated with the '50's in your replies, and I don't know (or care) why.

"hates" "obsessions" "yellow peril", jeeze dude... you're quite melodramatic, and if I may put some college classes to use, I'd say you seem to be projecting certain lines of your own thought on others.

You're more than welcome to differ on political opinions from me or others, and you may even contribute to the evil Red Chinese communist party (how's that for a '50's reference to make you happy <img src="icon12.gif" border="0"> ). I don't care, and in fact, am not offended no matter what your personal persuasion is. Myself (and others in the Military) will still help keep America free and open for you to express your (sometime bizarre) views.

But your attmepts to add words, thoughts, and "hate" phrases to the posts of others is laughable. Please look inward and examine your own motivations for such things.

So I will state it again... the Red Chinese (not all Chinese, or even all mainland Chinese... but RED Chinese) are manifestly evil and an abomination to humanity and indeed, all mankind. The Chinese people (not RED Chinese, but all Chinese) would be far better served to have a government free of oppression, and a democratic government fully integrated in spirit, law, action, and deed with the Free Nations of the Earth.

So there you have it... the "evil Red Chinese" is unequivocally not a racist term, but a distinction between Good and evil (note the capitalization in this reference).

 

[VoodooAce]

Was going to ask if, in any of his speeches, Dubya had mentioned the $43 Million that he gave the Taliban in May, but Ashoka beat me to it.

Kind of hard to defend that one, but it is nothing new in the US. We've backed despotic dictators just so long as they're fighting Commies. In the name of democracy, as laughable as that is.

Now, in May, Dubya gave $43 million of what he says is mine and yours, to a cruel, despotic, fundamentalisticly terrorist state! Where are all the dubya backers on this one? Can't wait to see how this is rationalized.

If Billy had done it, that's all we'd here about from the hypocrites, er, Republicans. Deny that.

[ September 17, 2001: Message edited by: VoodooAce ]</p>

 

[allan]

"Kind of hard to defend that one, but it is nothing new in the US. We've backed despotic dictators just so long as they're fighting Commies."

It wasn't given to them for that reason (they're not fighting China), but to fight opium trafficking (which they may or may not have done). Which is just another example how the "War on Drugs" can cut our nose to spite our face....

So in fighting a victimless "crime", we aided a REAL crime with MANY victims. Unfortunately I don't see this being discussed in the coming months--but we need to end this silly obsession with what some people choose to put in their bodies....

[ September 17, 2001: Message edited by: allan ]</p>