If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SFGate)   McCain on the vice presidency: "I spent a number of years in a North Vietnamese prison camp in the dark and (was) fed scraps, and I don't know why I would want to do that all over again"   (sfgate.com) divider line 206
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

13090 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Jul 2004 at 2:03 AM (10 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



206 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2004-07-22 12:23:56 PM
skikvt

th us institue for science and security on claims (now proved laughably unfounded) that saddam was tring to buy uranium 'By themselves, these attempted procurements are not evidence that Iraq is in possession of, or close to possessing, nuclear weapons. They do not provide evidence that Iraq has an operating centrifuge plant or when such a plant could be operational.'
 
2004-07-22 12:27:19 PM
MysticSavage,

On a National scale the write in isn't effective. It is really hard to get the sheep to go one way as it is let alone getting them to take the time to write something out.  And because of the electoral collage it wouldn't work either. The collage doesn't have to vote the way of the people, we all saw that in 2000.

It does work on a local level sometimes though. Look at Jello Biafra when he ran for Mayor of San Francisco.
 
2004-07-22 12:28:24 PM
skikvt

hell, why bother with security services when you have the internet to tell you about saddams wmd:

In evidence to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee yesterday, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw claimed that when the Prime Minister had authorised publication of the document, he believed that its contents had come through "the normal [security] channels".

Charles Kennedy (3rd part leader):

"The Foreign Secretary said yesterday that when the February dossier was approved for publication by the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister himself had assumed that its contents had come through the normal channels.

"Can the Prime Minister confirm that at that point when he authorised the publication of that dossier he wasn't aware then that, in fact, sections of it had been lifted off the internet from a student thesis?"
 
2004-07-22 12:29:16 PM
Wouldn't Condi disarm the liberals almost completely?

Are you kidding?

Her head looks like a freakin' mushroom. One stomp from Super Mario and it would be all over.

/1UP
 
2004-07-22 12:30:42 PM
WTF is a Neo-comm? I'm assuming it's the hard right's rejoinder to the use of "Neocon" as an epithet, although it looks more like a typo - shall I assume it stands for "Neo-communist?" Seems kind of childish and ridiculous of the Right Wing at large to call everyone left of centre a commie when they normally call you "New Conservatives", but then again, American politics has never been anything but childish mud-slinging, power-struggling and name-calling.

Keep going, I won't interfere. I'm just gonna move to Norway when the next Civil War breaks out. I've said it before and I'll say it again - until you as a nation learn to stop treating the "other half" of the population as your sworn enemies, America will always be a social and political wreck. You won't have a country left if you keep trying to rip it apart from inside.
 
2004-07-22 12:33:13 PM
skikvt

i'm not interested in whether you respect my intellect, you were claiming that if mccain had won, you felt the war would still have been fought. i'm saying not only is that not so, imo, but if it were, tactics wouldn't have been "different", and if you don't like the short and sweet plummy rummy, let's say they would have been led by a distinguished military commander and not some preening politicain looking to complete a damned arrogant and foolish battle plan to bolster his public image to the maximum
 
2004-07-22 12:34:03 PM
Oh and here is the 2000 results before the flames start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000#Introduction_and _summary_results
 
2004-07-22 12:37:39 PM
skikvt and i apologise for breaking the replies up like this, but it seemed a good idea at the time - yeah i know what you're thinking, wooah there george, but no, it is not he!

the problem with the prison scandal is that it showed an undisciplined, disrespectful military. we know that some high profile politicains and military were disappeared into third party countries where interrogation could get going without worries, that was always going to happen, and i think it's disgusting. but the prison scandal appears to have just been a random round-up and then humiliation, torture and death

absolutely unacceptable and the buck stops with this administration
 
2004-07-22 12:38:34 PM
GobyWan,

Vancouver is looking good to me right now.
 
2004-07-22 12:41:04 PM
skikvt

It wouldn;t have mattered who was President on 9/11. It had been planned years ahead of time, and would have been nearly impossible to prevent, given our complacency and lack of good human intelligence.

rubbish

only if every other president and administration was as incompetent as this one

old information, when the fbi have just got one of the hijackers? no. holiday time when you've just got in and want to kick back despite a national emergency on the cards? no

the buck must stop, there must be accountability
 
2004-07-22 12:50:22 PM
GobyWan: You are correct. It is a childish made-up word and is a reaction to the term "neoconservative." Evidently, many are now embarrassed by the neocons, and have invented this term as a tool of propaganda. As has been pointed out repeatedly, "neoconservative" is a term describing a certain school of political thought and was (until Iraq turned out to be a total fark-up) a proud self-description of those who adhere to this school. Here is the background on "neocon:"

http://www.fact-index.com/n/ne/neoconservatism__united_states_.html

There is no background on "neocomm" because it is a meaningless perjorative. It is meaningless because it does not describe any school of thought, but is applied to anyone who criticizes the current administration, for whatever reason and from whatever perspective. It is a smear, and nothing more. It was probably invented by Rush or some other such jackass propagandist.

Consider the source.
 
2004-07-22 12:57:18 PM
canyoneer

1. It is not a made up word. Xhhxhly is a made up word.
2. You can guess what it means and it scares you. Here's an actual link.
3. Enjoy your crow. Bwahahahahahahahaha!

Taking On The Neo-Coms
 
2004-07-22 12:58:16 PM
"The president and vice president enjoy a very close working relationship, perhaps the closest in history," McCain said.

Yeah, I'd say Cheney having his hand that far up Bush's ass counts as a "close working relationship."

/Obligatory "Bush puppet" joke
 
2004-07-22 12:58:45 PM
canyoneer

how highly do you rate the chances of mccain saying he would never take the vp job for another month, before cheney has to step down for health reasons, and mccain, against his real wishes, definitely wasn't planned, etc, etc, steps up to the plate?
 
2004-07-22 12:59:23 PM
It seems appropriate, therefore, to call the unreconstructed hard-liners, "neo-communists" --a term that accurately identifies their negative assaults on American capitalism and their anti-American "internationalist" agendas. It may be objected that the term "neo-communist" does not describe a group, which itself identifies with the term, but then neither does "neo-conservative." There is, for example, no current movement calling itself "neo-conservative," nor do the individuals so designated refer to their own ideas as "neo-conservative." "Neo-conservative" is, in fact, a label that was imposed by the left on a group of former Democrats, loosely grouped around Senator "Scoop" Jackson who left the party fold at the end of the Seventies to join and support the Reagan Administration. It was accepted out of necessity for a while, because the left so dominates the political culture that resisting it was futile. But it is no longer used by neo-conservatives because, as Norman Podhoretz long ago observed, "neo-conservatism" is indistinguishable from conservatism itself. No "neo-conservative" that I am aware of has challenged Podhoretzs conclusion. Yet others insist on describing conservatives particularly those whom they regard as "hard-line" conservatives -- with this label. If the "neo" shoe can be made to fit conservatives, why not the hard-line left?
 
2004-07-22 01:02:36 PM
Flipper the Dolphin

what exactly are you taking these "neo-coms/ neocoms/ neo-comms/ neocomms/" on at. is it war? if it is, can we expect another miserable failure?

do you stand there with other freepers dodging pretzels and shouting bring 'em on?
 
2004-07-22 01:04:16 PM
21-7-b

Leaving aside penis jokes, could you please, please, PLEASE, "preview before post".

Thanks in advance.
 
2004-07-22 01:05:19 PM
For those of you interested in Bush administration documents (small niche, to be sure), here's a good link - www.outragedmoderates.org (opens new browser)

My favorite: Cheney's energy task force's document "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts," dated March 5, 2001.
 
2004-07-22 01:05:39 PM
Flipper the Dolphin

the day you filter the self-serving bs out of your posts will be the day i filter the typos out of mine
 
2004-07-22 01:07:11 PM
oops, sorry that link doesn't open a new browser. Hmm.
 
2004-07-22 01:09:43 PM
21-7-b

I was actually going to answer any questions you had, but I see you are just going for insults again.

Today you've posted twice in my direction and they've been so error filled I wasn't able to follow your thought process.

So I'll leave this discussion with something aimed at your apparent intellectual level:

NAO-COMS SUK B/C TH3Y HAET MARICA1!!1! LOL 21-7-B CANT TYPE WIT A shiat!!111 OMG ADIOS!1111 OMG WTF LOL
 
2004-07-22 01:11:48 PM
Flipper the Dolphin

bye
 
2004-07-22 01:11:58 PM
Flipper the Dolphin: Actually, the persons described in the article you link call themselves, and have been known as, the "New Left" for years and years. Clearly, the term "neocommunist" is a new, invented term and is a reaction to the frequent references to neoconservatives.

Listen, Flipper, use the term if you like. I don't give a shiat, frankly. Most of the persons referenced in this article are, in fact, communists or socialists. I don't think they've ever really tried to hide the fact. But I see people using this term indiscriminately. For example, many would probably call Justin Raimondo a "neocomm" simply because he opposes the war (from a libertarian/traditional conservative perspective).

Which brings to mind another reactionary, newly-minted term much in use these days: "Paleoconservative." This, too, is perjorative and non-descriptive, because it is supposed to create the feeling of obsolecence, and was never in use before people like Raimondo and Buchanan made some hay criticizing the neocons.

This is all just semantics, however, and yelp out neocomm! to your heart's content. I don't care.

21-7-b: Like all politicians, McCain is interested in power and self-aggrandizement. If offered the job, I am sure he would jump at it, with much tearing of the hair and bleatings about reluctant service to the party. He would have to maintian his false-front: "maverick," "reformer," and "public servant."

Pbbbbbbt.

Egotistical, extreme right-wing, Christian Fundamentalist power-junkie is more like it.
 
2004-07-22 01:14:54 PM
I've morphed neo-con into neo-colon to describe those who insist on using made-up words as tools to divide our nation.

neo-colon n.
Where all the neo-crap collects before a neo-movement gets tossed out of neo-Washington.

Bush '04-Portfolio before Nation!
(Go big on insurance cos, defense contractors and petroleum)
 
2004-07-22 01:17:54 PM
canyoneer

yup, and they're going to need to pull something out of the bag, if not osama, then i think it has to be mccain for cheney. i can't believe that the gop aren't aware that the man is seen as nothing but a liability, but like Inaditch said, it's hard to know just how much bush does need his hand held. wooo maybe they'll whack dubya!
 
2004-07-22 01:25:22 PM
McCain - one of the few Republicans I actually can respect.

He amuses me.
 
2004-07-22 01:28:10 PM
21-7-b: Don't forget that Bush is reportedly trying to play the Pooty-Poot card. Stratfor says Putin is negotiating the deployment of 40,000 Russian troops (two mechanized, and one airborne, units) to Iraq this Fall. Not only would that be a political coup, but it would free-up a lot of Americans to go beating the bushes for Osama in Waziristan.

Of course, the quid-pro-quo might be steep indeed, and one wonders about getting too chummy with the autocratic KGB Man in the Kremlin. But hey, there's an election to win!

All of this puts me in mind of something in the article Flipper linked: the renewed growth of membership in Communist parties around the world. Don't these extremist right-wing Americans get it? Their policies are driving lots of people back to communism, just like killing Iraqis makes more islamic fundies. Duh.

Cause and effect, and all that. Maybe it is all in line with the NEOCON belief in "noble lies" and "creative destruction."
 
2004-07-22 01:43:13 PM
canyoneer -

"Maybe it is all in line with the NEOCON belief in "noble lies" and "creative destruction."

I think it has something to do with this... but I haven't quite figured it out yet...

"Son of man, set your face toward Gog of the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, and prophecy against him, and say, 'Thus says the Lord God, "Behold, I am against you, O Gog, prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal. And I will turn you about, and put hooks into your jaws, and I will bring you out, and all your army, horses and horsemen, all of them splendidly attired, a great company with buckler and shield, all of them wielding swords; Persia, Ethiopia, and Put with them, all of them with shield and helmet; Gomer with all its troops; Beth-togarmah from the remote parts of the north with all its troops, many peoples with you." Ezekiel 38:2-6
 
2004-07-22 01:43:50 PM
Ok so I have a question. What the hell is a freeper? I person who likes free pers?

I'm going to just start making stuff up like retromonopleist, and nonreproclimitorties, and hobos.
 
2004-07-22 01:46:03 PM
McCain in 2008.
Such convictions! Such standards!
 
2004-07-22 01:46:47 PM
'I' should read 'A'
 
2004-07-22 01:48:20 PM
Flipper the Dolphin

Neocon is used, today, to describe republicans who are more concerned with the religious/moral conservative agenda than the small federal government and state rights agenda. A conservative republican is supposed to lower taxes by reducing pork in the federal budget, by getting rid of extraneous programs. Bush lowered taxes by giving large rebates to the rich, and then expanded the federal government and fought a bad war. (bad implimentation, I agree with the removal of Sadam) How can you call Bush a good conservative republican, or even Reagan, when both gave us huge defecits and Clinton gave us a surplus?

I'll admit that some liberals use neocon as a perjorative just as you use neocom (based on the article you linked). How can you honestly say that the current administration is not similar to communism when you consider the moral agenda it supports (abstinence only education, restriction of reproductive rights, federal ban on gay marriage, war on drugs, blatant violation of consitutional rights to due process and protection from illegal search/seizure)? Before you respond, I am aware that the PATRIOT Act was supported by the vast majority of Congress. Unfortunately, NOBODY, even read it to know what they were supporting. The Congressional representatives that now oppose it are not indecisive wafflers, they just failed to do their job and learn what it said before voting to support it. Somehow, because I oppose those restrictions on my personal life and violations of my rights, I'm somehow a communist? Seems to me I want the government to protect my property rights and maintain a military force to protect me from harm, but otherwise stay out of my life. How is that communist?
 
2004-07-22 01:48:52 PM
canyoneer

i had no idea. on the one hand it's positive because at least, hopefully, they will not be raw recruits and it builds russia into the global community a bit more, on the other hand we've seen how putin treats people who back opposition parties; and are the muslim world going to go off the deep end and see it as a further intrusion, by russia again, into their world. lastly how are russia going to pay for it?

sounds like it can be spun into an ace up dubya's sleeve though if they ignore the downside

thanks
 
2004-07-22 01:49:48 PM
eabod: Could be. I have read enough from the nutjobs to wonder if they really are hell-bent on summoning Jesus.

And you've just gotta love any army that calls itself "Gomer."

There we go ! A new term for Bush and Friends: Neogomers!
 
2004-07-22 01:56:27 PM
21-7-b: I, for one, would not see it as positive in any way. It would simply widen the war and put the USA in league with a sly, KGB thug. This is where everybody has it wrong: We don't need more help in Iraq, we need to get out.

All of this rot about the supposed disaster that would happen if we left reminds me of the "domino theory" used to buffalo people back during the Vietnam War.
 
2004-07-22 01:58:40 PM
niroth

there's a website called freerepublic. it's just a right wing propaganda portal. a lot of people who post many right wing cartoons, quotes or rhetoric on fark just cull it from there by the truckload and dump it here

it's a cheap tactic and doesn't work, the mods seem to take away html if the posters keep it up

freerepublic isn't a discussion forum, it is a right wing love in, it's really sad, people actually just use it to keep posting bush will win, kerry is a flip flopper, etc, all in agreement, day after day - i don't know what they get out of doing that?

it is useful because you can see where the fark right wing radicals are going to go next at the same time they are told!
 
2004-07-22 02:05:11 PM
canyoneer

i don't know whether the russian army has got over its morale problems of a couple of years ago or if they understand that a peace keeping role does not mean a full out war until other voices cannot be heard. maybe we're heading toward a coalition of killing rather than willing. 40,000 troops sounds a lot, but i don't think it'll be enough, especially if the us are planning on pulling some out. nowhere near actually
 
2004-07-22 02:06:58 PM
21-7-b

Aaahhhhh ok got it.
 
2004-07-22 02:11:28 PM
21-7-b: It is just a rumor from Stratfor.com, and isn't necessarily true. The Russians are having the very devil of a time with their own koran-thumping, captive-beheading kooks in Chechnya and Ingushetia and Ossetia right now. But it would be a coup for Bush, at least in the short-run.

What did Mark Twain say?

"I'll trade an old nag for a wild mustang to get me out of danger, and then worry about how to get off the mustang later."

Or something like that.

The Russians ahve long-standing ties to many in the Iraqi Army and (ex) Iraqi government. Who knows? Maybe the Arabs would prefer them to Americans.
 
2004-07-22 02:35:45 PM
"I spent a number of years in a North Vietnamese prison camp in the dark and (was) fed scraps"

hahahahaha ha ha ha hah hahahhaa!!!!! aaaaahhhhh.... *wipes tear*

what, there's more?
 
2004-07-22 03:32:02 PM
The problem is that McCain, whom I admire, does not like Bush & Cheney, but he's a very loyal Republican. He won't switch sides.
 
rka
2004-07-22 04:27:02 PM

Neo-con is used to describe 'republicans who are more concerned with the religious/moral conservative agenda'? Maybe in some addle-brained lefties mind when they're looking for the worst thing they can call their opponent on fark, but not in the the real world. The agenda of the neoconservative movement can be summarized as 'Keeping America as a Global Leader'. It's a foreign policy movement.

With all of the writing that the Project for the New American Century website (the neocon home) has, it's damn near criminally stupid to be mistaken in what they stand for. You may find their beliefs stupid, and wrong...but for love of all that is holy, don't go around saying they have a 'religious agenda'. That's just ignorant. Have you read "Of Paradise and Power"? Does that strike you as a religious agenda? Have you read the Statement of Principles? Any overt religious overtones there? The closest you can come is a reference to 'moral clarity'.

 
2004-07-22 04:33:22 PM
It won't be McCain.

The hero of 9-11, Rudy Giuliani, will be brought in when Cheney's health takes a sudden turn for the worse.
Imagine the wild scene in NYC.
Madison Avenue's & Hollywood's best have the script for this campaign at the printer's as we speak.
That sets the stage for him to face-off with Hillary since he wussed-out the last time he had a shot at her, but was trailing in the polls.
 
2004-07-22 04:35:37 PM
Funniest republican ever.

One of his interviews on the daily show was downright hilarious.

Based on personality I'd almost vote for the guy... except Bush would still be on the ticket, so nevermind
 
2004-07-22 05:49:58 PM
rka

Wait just a second, you're saying that you don't think that the neo-cons have a religious agenda based off of the PNAC website? While PNAC may be one of the main supporters (or even the main trough of members), PNAC does not sum up the opinions of a neo-con. Take the following example. The Villiage Voice writes an article about the email that no one was ever supposed to see. W. actually consulted with radical dooms-day religious nuts about the middle east and other topics of interest. Or how about this story in the Yurica Report about how the radical christian elements have taken control of the right wing? There's plenty more where those came from.

Of course the right wing has a religious agenda. They preach the anti-homosexual, anti-abortion, anti-wall of separation rhetoric every single day. What is surprising is that you (on the basis of the PNAC website) have decided that the neo-cons take some laissez faire stance on the subject of religion. That is simply not true.

The PNAC website... HA! Like they would actually tell you if they had a religious agenda (or any other agenda for that matter). Sheesh.

FBM
 
2004-07-22 06:06:09 PM
It seems appropriate, therefore, to call the unreconstructed hard-liners, "neo-communists" --a term that accurately identifies their negative assaults on American capitalism and their anti-American "internationalist" agendas. It may be objected that the term "neo-communist" does not describe a group, which itself identifies with the term, but then neither does "neo-conservative." There is, for example, no current movement calling itself "neo-conservative," nor do the individuals so designated refer to their own ideas as "neo-conservative." "Neo-conservative" is, in fact, a label that was imposed by the left on a group of former Democrats, loosely grouped around Senator "Scoop" Jackson who left the party fold at the end of the Seventies to join and support the Reagan Administration. It was accepted out of necessity for a while, because the left so dominates the political culture that resisting it was futile. But it is no longer used by neo-conservatives because, as Norman Podhoretz long ago observed, "neo-conservatism" is indistinguishable from conservatism itself. No "neo-conservative" that I am aware of has challenged Podhoretzs conclusion. Yet others insist on describing conservatives particularly those whom they regard as "hard-line" conservatives -- with this label. If the "neo" shoe can be made to fit conservatives, why not the hard-line left?

Taking On The Neo-Coms

Awesome link Flipper.
I guess those who keep saying it is a made-up word will have to suck up another one.

/Every word was new at one time. Get over it.
 
2004-07-22 06:08:06 PM
NAO-COMS SUK B/C TH3Y HAET MARICA1!!1! LOL 21-7-B CANT TYPE WIT A shiat!!111 OMG ADIOS!1111 OMG WTF LOL

Kerrykabob? Is that you?
 
2004-07-22 06:26:11 PM

"Why does John McCain hate America?"

Why is it that when someone criticizes the status-quo or disagrees with our national leaders, they suddenly are classed as "America Haters"?


People who continually brand honest and free dissent as hating America show little appitude for being American themselves.


At times the founding fathers must wonder if they created a country of morons.


 
2004-07-22 06:32:26 PM
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet...

But McCain will never stand beside Goerge Snatch on the ticket, ever. Just ask yourself, would you go into business with a man who said, or was complicite with others saying, horrible shiaty things about you while you were bucking for the same job?
 
2004-07-22 06:39:07 PM
The Saint of Killers, how dare you insult me like that!

PS. U R A GAY FAGOT!111111111111
 
Displayed 50 of 206 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report