FARK.com: (6946959) In one day, the GOP managed to set back the party's position on women back to the 1950s. Good luck getting out of this PR nightmare

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.

		In one day, the GOP managed to set back the party's position on women back to the 1950s. Good luck getting out of this PR nightmare (2012.talkingpointsmemo.com)		397
		More: Fail, GOP, O'Neill, Too Far, Bayer, Emily, Democrat Party, nightmares, Foster Friess

• • •

9666 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Feb 2012 at 1:58 AM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/6946959

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

397 Comments (+0 »)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

AmorousRedDragon		2012-02-17 09:13:22 AM

unexplained bacon: randomjsa: The hearing Thursday had nothing to do with contraception

wrong.

keep throwing that turd it's bound to stick eventually.

/I admit I enjoy watching the religious right outing themselves for the backward jackasses they truly are.

Considering the decision in question, from the beginning, had nothing to do with churches, it's going to be hard to spin it like they are trying so hard to do. And even with this being true, Obama went even further and made it so that funding that originated from religious sources would have no requirement to cover contraceptives, and they STILL want to spin it as "infringing on religious liberty"

this is just too good.

keylock71		2012-02-17 09:13:51 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: That bayer aspirin line, appropriate or not, is hilarious.

Yeah... My grandfather used to use it.

'Course, he wasn't dumping millions of dollars into the campaign chest of a regressive fundamentalist asshole, either.

That's kind of the part that makes it less amusing.

wedun		2012-02-17 09:14:39 AM

Alphax: Well, it was the Spanish-American war that made us one of the World Powers, and gave us captured territories for the first time, I think. Like the Philippines.

Oops sorry I forgot about South America and the Phillipines.

006deluxe		2012-02-17 09:17:04 AM

A Dark Evil Omen: Liberal_With_a_Gun: Dave "Megadeth" Mustaine's candidate, ladies and gentlemen!

/always was a Metallica fan myself
//until Hetfield comes out for Newt or somesuch

Guh. The sad thing is, Megadeth is basically my favorite band. I guess there was a reason I never got around to buying Endgame.

/Slight Threadjack

Endgame is actually really good. Chris Broderick plays his ass off. I've only had Thirteen playing in the background at work, but just from what I can actually recall it doesn't have as many "Holy Shiat" moments that Endgame does. From what I can gather he was doing a halfway decent job of keeping his whole born-again thing out of the spotlight but the Santorum endorsement kind of ruined that now, didn't it?

/End Threadjack

SisterMaryElephant		2012-02-17 09:18:56 AM

I think they just want more blow jobs.

SurfaceTension		2012-02-17 09:20:03 AM

wedun: blorpenster: [home.insightbb.com image 640x311]

THE GOP PARTY

THE MSM MEDIA

THE DVD DISC PLAYER

THE DOD DEPARTMENT

THE USA of AMERICA

THE EU UNION

THE ATM MACHINE

/and I don't mean Sasha Grey

Zerochance		2012-02-17 09:21:06 AM

006deluxe: A Dark Evil Omen: Liberal_With_a_Gun: Dave "Megadeth" Mustaine's candidate, ladies and gentlemen!

/always was a Metallica fan myself
//until Hetfield comes out for Newt or somesuch

Guh. The sad thing is, Megadeth is basically my favorite band. I guess there was a reason I never got around to buying Endgame.

/Slight Threadjack

Endgame is actually really good. Chris Broderick plays his ass off. I've only had Thirteen playing in the background at work, but just from what I can actually recall it doesn't have as many "Holy Shiat" moments that Endgame does. From what I can gather he was doing a halfway decent job of keeping his whole born-again thing out of the spotlight but the Santorum endorsement kind of ruined that now, didn't it?

/End Threadjack

Re-opening threadjack

Endgame is fantastic. Chris Broderick is an absolute beast of a shredder. The ridiculous shiat he plays makes me laugh out loud.

Th1rt3een is not bad, but I highly recommend Endgame.

theknuckler_33		2012-02-17 09:21:39 AM

she said. "I think most of us know you can keep your knees together and still, um, do it."

media.giantbomb.com

SurfaceTension		2012-02-17 09:22:34 AM

The Why Not Guy: When the Susan G. Komen / Planned Parenthood story broke a few weeks ago, I'll admit I was surprised to find out how much support there is in America for easy access to birth control. I expected that support from the Left; seeing it from the Middle and even parts of the Right was a very pleasant surprise.

Apparently Republicans don't learn lessons from things that happened 2 weeks ago.

Really, they probably viewed it as more evidence that America has "lost its way" and "needs salvation" more than ever before, and by God they're the ones to bring it back through the courage of their convictions and steadfastness in the face of all that is Evil. Or something..

BeesNuts		2012-02-17 09:22:52 AM

what_now: Nadie_AZ: what_now: A month ago, Mitt Romney made it seem like a national conversation on birth control was absurd, because no one would ever deny a woman the right to contraception. He actually chastised the moderator for bringing up such a ludicrous topic.

One. Month. Ago.

Pfffft. The guy is changing his mind and stance to keep up with the hurricane he's caught up in. Ultimately no one will trust anything he says.

yeah, not the point. The point is, A MONTH AGO, it was absurd to imagine a conversation about access to birth control, but we are HAVING THAT CONVERSATION RIGHT NOW!!!

No. We're not having a conversation about access to birth control. That would be more rational than what we're actually doing.

Which is talking about how all women are painted trollops whose only purpose in life is to get stuffed by as many men as they can. Often at once! And how this gender specific reality is only augmented by these methods of mitigating God's ordained punishment for the sinful nature of womenfolk.

Have you seen a priest lately, young lady?

LeoffDaGrate		2012-02-17 09:24:20 AM

randomjsa: And TPM gets in line with the rest of the liberal media sources to tell absolute bald faced lies.

The hearing Thursday had nothing to do with contraception. TPM knows it, liberals know it, Obama knows it, and the rest of the media knows it, but that isn't stopping them from pretending otherwise in this continued effort to mislead people who aren't paying attention. Now we know why that stupid question about 'whether or not states should have the right to ban contraception' question kept getting asked in spite of the fact that the person it was being asked to kept saying 'Why are you even asking this? Nobody is going to do that. Nobody is talking about doing that.'

Was that part of a setup in what was going to become the new "If you don't vote for Kerry, Bush will draft you!" issue? A fake, non-issue, that isn't going to happen... A fake, non-issue that counts on peoples ignorance to scare them in to voting a certain way.The hearing Thursday concerned one thing and one thing only: Did Obama overstep his constitutional authority with the things he did last week? That's what it was about. Nothing else. I know you'd like to keep pretending it had something to do with contraception, but it didn't.

But I can see why liberals need to make this about a fake issue that they have to lie about because they certainly can't make this election about Obama if they want to have a chance in hell of winning it.

How very telling that you can neither tell us what you believe the hearing was actually about, OR that you don't supply us with a list of people or groups that support your belief.

vernonFL		2012-02-17 09:24:56 AM

1950s? More like 1650s.

www.alcorngallery.com

unexplained bacon		2012-02-17 09:25:02 AM

AmorousRedDragon: unexplained bacon: randomjsa: The hearing Thursday had nothing to do with contraception

wrong.

keep throwing that turd it's bound to stick eventually.

/I admit I enjoy watching the religious right outing themselves for the backward jackasses they truly are.

Considering the decision in question, from the beginning, had nothing to do with churches, it's going to be hard to spin it like they are trying so hard to do. And even with this being true, Obama went even further and made it so that funding that originated from religious sources would have no requirement to cover contraceptives, and they STILL want to spin it as "infringing on religious liberty"

this is just too good.

it's not flying with anyone but "the base" (wonder how you'd say "the base" in arabic?)

/gee, I just hate watching the GOP go down like this.

Antimatter		2012-02-17 09:27:39 AM

trotsky: Felgraf: I swear to god, it feels like Obama just did this:

[fc00.deviantart.net image 640x1079]

But instead he said "Everyone should have access to birth control through their insurance."

You know, it's not hard to see this. He hasn't said a damn thing and has very happily let the GOP eat themselves alive, with the Conservative media having a farking conniption (Hannity's "Women's Health Panel" of old men and male Priests), the stupid hearing with old men, and the Primary idiots, with Frothy making a foole of himself.

I think Obama is the ur-Troll.

Obama is a master of knowing when not to say something or when not to do something. Conservatives can't stand this, as their ideology demands comment and action on every single issue, regardless of it's merit.

Debeo Summa Credo		2012-02-17 09:28:29 AM

Alphax: wedun: Nadie_AZ: What they want is a return to 1900- before women had the right to vote, the American empire was young and upstart

US didn't start doing "Empire" stuff till after WWII

Well, it was the Spanish-American war that made us one of the World Powers, and gave us captured territories for the first time, I think. Like the Philippines.

Seriously. After WWII is when we started getting out of the empire game.

Philip Francis Queeg		2012-02-17 09:29:17 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Alphax: wedun: Nadie_AZ: What they want is a return to 1900- before women had the right to vote, the American empire was young and upstart

US didn't start doing "Empire" stuff till after WWII

Well, it was the Spanish-American war that made us one of the World Powers, and gave us captured territories for the first time, I think. Like the Philippines.

Seriously. After WWII is when we started getting out of the empire game.

Iraq would like a word.

RedT		2012-02-17 09:32:21 AM

Pocket Ninja: The Santorum campaign has already defused the contraception issue. Move on, people.

Contraception is not the issue. While we all know that the need for contraception merely represents the failure of morality and proper social upbringing, the real societal problems go far beyond the specter of loose women and a "boys will be boys" attitude. Contraception leads to a false sense of security, a willingness to embrace the taboo and dance with the devil in the pale moonlight. It leads to a foolish willingness to engage in free-wheeling sex, but what sex naturally does is lead to pregnancy. Pregnancy , in turn, leads to responsibility, and when you add women unwilling to accept that responsibility -- an unwillingness already demonstrated amply by her desire for contraception -- it leads to rape. And rape leads to even bigger problems. Consider Virginia, where the State legislature's recent willingness to stand up to the travesty that is abortion by requiring transvaginal ultrasounds has led to ridiculous accusations of state sponsored rape. Suddenly, a simple request that these women view the life growing in their uterus somehow represents a secondary "rape," merely because the medical procedure requires the insertion of a scientific instrument into her vagina. Of course, the reality is that the use of this device requires only a single insertion and slight manipulation of the device, and no rape worth mentioning involves only a single insertion. The sex act itself involves numerous insertions in order for the male to achieve ejaculation, and any reasonable definition of "rape," which involves the sex act being perpetrated upon a woman who believes at the moment that she is unwilling to have sex, must therefore require repeated, numerous insertions. Furthermore, since the woman receiving this procedure have already been allegedly "raped," there is no further trauma being inflicted upon her because her virginity has already been irreparably damaged. Were this procedure t ...

+10
/farking brilliant example of Poe's Law

Antimatter		2012-02-17 09:33:14 AM

RedT		2012-02-17 09:39:06 AM

Warlordtrooper: Don't forget that in Virginia the state GOP just passed a law that mandates a woman be subjected to rape before an abortion. And yes, based on the definition of rape, that is not an exaggeration either.

www.bluephantom.com

stoli n coke		2012-02-17 09:45:29 AM

BeesNuts: what_now: Nadie_AZ: what_now: A month ago, Mitt Romney made it seem like a national conversation on birth control was absurd, because no one would ever deny a woman the right to contraception. He actually chastised the moderator for bringing up such a ludicrous topic.

One. Month. Ago.

Pfffft. The guy is changing his mind and stance to keep up with the hurricane he's caught up in. Ultimately no one will trust anything he says.

yeah, not the point. The point is, A MONTH AGO, it was absurd to imagine a conversation about access to birth control, but we are HAVING THAT CONVERSATION RIGHT NOW!!!

No. We're not having a conversation about access to birth control. That would be more rational than what we're actually doing.

Which is talking about how all women are painted trollops whose only purpose in life is to get stuffed by as many men as they can. Often at once! And how this gender specific reality is only augmented by these methods of mitigating God's ordained punishment for the sinful nature of womenfolk.

Have you seen a priest lately, young lady?

She's been trying, but the priest has been "counseling" Timmy the altar boy in the confessional booth for more than 2 hours now.

smedley89		2012-02-17 09:46:07 AM

what_now: Nadie_AZ: !!!

You've seen the GOP presidential hopefuls. You've seen the batshiat crazy stances the advocate. You've seen the GOP electorate run from hopeful to hopeful, hoping salivating, and ultimately ending up frustrated. Then they do it again.

You've seen all this. And yet you think this is absurd? My dear lady, where have you been? Are you sober??

They had a panel on woman's reproductive health WITHOUT. ANY. WOMEN.

Seriously. Think about that for a second. They refused to allow any body in possession of a uterus to talk about uteruses.

You can't possibly understand how insulting that is. You just can't. It's like every single time some motherfarking asshole said "stop being such a biatch! What are you- on the rag?" times 1000.

You think it's just young liberal women who are pissed about this? You think its just politically active women who are pissed at this? You think it's just women who currently take birth control who are pissed at this?

No. Everyone is pissed at this. We're tired of being judged by how we dress. We're tired of being told we aren't smart enough to join the discussion, even when this discussion is about us. We're tired of being told our skirt is too short, but we really should put some makeup on.

We can have our discussions about abortion and pay equity and childcare issues and even about working outside of the home. We'll discuss that.

We will *NOT* have a discussion about the future of our reproductive health. It is *NOT* on the table. And we sure as HELL won't let you discuss it without us.

Well said ma'am.

oldweevil		2012-02-17 09:47:05 AM

I am typically anti-abortion (not in favor of outlawing it, mind you) but in the case of randomjsa, I would have performed it with a wire hanger myself.

InmanRoshi		2012-02-17 09:51:37 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: Iraq would like a word.

Or Chile, Or Vietnam ...

Just because we were inept at it doesn't mean we didn't try our damnedest

Poopspasm		2012-02-17 09:52:45 AM

smedley89		2012-02-17 10:02:39 AM

More_Like_A_Stain		2012-02-17 10:08:27 AM

rosebud_the_sled: What is the difference between an American conservative and an Islamofascist?
Nuthin'

What is the difference between Terri Schiavo and an American conservative?
Nuthin'

What was Timothy McVeigh?
An American conservative.

What are American conservatives good for?
Nuthin'

Glad I could clear that all up.

American conservative

Good God y'all

What is it good for?

Absolutely nothin'

Say it again!

/ nah, just doesn't have the same ring as the original

Guntram Shatterhand		2012-02-17 10:14:22 AM

The Republican Party are masters at mobilizing people to vote.

For some reason, they have spent the last ten years mobilizing the Left. And it's hard to see how they can continue on this path since they're being funded by a distinct minority of rich Americans and are throwing everybody else under the bus. Seriously, the economy is still trying to grow and these assholes are now biatching about something as pointless as if people have sex or not.

The Republican beast is going extinct. In fact, if they didn't have the media in their back pocket, we could see their end in about five years. That's how long it would take. Five short years, and four of them would be people like Palin trying to rally the Derpers and ultimately fail.

qorkfiend		2012-02-17 10:15:06 AM

HotWingConspiracy: They used to get pregnant, but then they took an aspirin to the knee.

Teeeee heeeeee!

HeartBurnKid		2012-02-17 10:15:13 AM

God Is My Co-Pirate: There are a number of people I'd like to see locked into a room with Raven right now.

This guy?

www.theraveneffect.com

Lenny_da_Hog		2012-02-17 10:18:45 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: That bayer aspirin line, appropriate or not, is hilarious.

It was funnier forty years ago.

dickfreckle		2012-02-17 10:20:02 AM

oldweevil: I am typically anti-abortion (not in favor of outlawing it, mind you) but in the case of randomjsa, I would have performed it with a wire hanger myself.

I wish that more people were able to separate their personal morality or belief from the desire to force it on everyone else. That you are able to speaks volumes about your character, no matter how we might disagree on anything else. Hell, I don't like guns but I'm sure as sh*t not going to take yours. I don't personally dig abortion, either, but it's her body, not mine. In a relationship I'd like to think I have a say in what goes on with my own sperm, but as a lawmaker I'd never dream of touching the issue.

As for random, that guy has not once posted an original thought, which to me suggests him being a shill. No sense in trying to reason with a talking point machine. No matter the issue, he'll fall on the side his masters instruct him to rather than considering the situation and forming an opinion. Again, the mark of a shill. Most of us on Fark (including myself) are fairly predictable in terms of what side we'll fall on, but we have a special team of retards who will defend to the death even the dumbest claims based upon the partisan origin. It's like me finding a way to justify Obama amassing a private FEMA Sharia mercenary army because, well, if Obama designed it must be good, right? Or the opposite - Obama gifting puppies to an orphanage is somehow an evil harbinger of New World Order.

Smirky the Wonder Chimp		2012-02-17 10:20:06 AM

what_now: A month ago, Mitt Romney made it seem like a national conversation on birth control was absurd, because no one would ever deny a woman the right to contraception. He actually chastised the moderator for bringing up such a ludicrous topic.

One. Month. Ago.

Not too long ago, anyone who seriously suggested that the vote needed to be restricted to property owners would have been laughed off the stage.

And yet, here we are. Everything old is new again.

Debeo Summa Credo		2012-02-17 10:21:27 AM

InmanRoshi: Philip Francis Queeg: Iraq would like a word.

Or Chile, Or Vietnam ...

Just because we were inept at it doesn't mean we didn't try our damnedest

We tried to build an empire in Vietnam or Iraq? WTF are you talking about? We may or may not have agreed that the supposed threats of the spread of communism in the 1960s or the supposed fear of Saddam Hussein getting WMDs in 2000s was worth going to war over, but you have to be pretty clueless or hopelessly biased to think what we were doing was 'empire building'.

Bob16		2012-02-17 10:22:19 AM

Yeah those repubs are really screwed and there's probably no hope for them.

That's what the dem massacre of 2010 proves.

Debeo Summa Credo		2012-02-17 10:22:41 AM

Lenny_da_Hog: Debeo Summa Credo: That bayer aspirin line, appropriate or not, is hilarious.

It was funnier forty years ago.

Well, this was the first time I heard it.

HeartBurnKid		2012-02-17 10:24:00 AM

Bob16: Yeah those repubs are really screwed and there's probably no hope for them.

That's what the dem massacre of 2010 proves.

You better hope there's no hope for the Repubs. If this batch of them get in, we're all farked beyond imagination.

commonsensepolitics		2012-02-17 10:25:04 AM

First off, this really isn't about women's preventative services as much as it is about freedom of religion. Catholics aren't trying to ban or take away anyone's contraceptives. They simply don't want to have to pay for your sex life. Sex is a choice (in most cases). Therefore I shouldn't have to pay for that choice. You should! If you don't want to pay for contraceptives, don't have sex. I just don't see how much simpler it can get. This is fundamental government intrusion. The government has intruded before by legislating the definition of marriage and they shouldn't have nor should they have legislated a policy that says a gay person can't talk about their sexual orientation in the military. Lastly, it is high time that the government got out of the whole marriage business altogether. They can still give you a piece of paper that says you and whomever have agreed to a relationship contract for both tax purposes and legal issues.

Philip Francis Queeg		2012-02-17 10:29:44 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: InmanRoshi: Philip Francis Queeg: Iraq would like a word.

Or Chile, Or Vietnam ...

Just because we were inept at it doesn't mean we didn't try our damnedest

We tried to build an empire in Vietnam or Iraq? WTF are you talking about? We may or may not have agreed that the supposed threats of the spread of communism in the 1960s or the supposed fear of Saddam Hussein getting WMDs in 2000s was worth going to war over, but you have to be pretty clueless or hopelessly biased to think what we were doing was 'empire building'.

Client states are an integral part of empire building. See Empire, Roman.

qorkfiend		2012-02-17 10:32:12 AM

Bob16		2012-02-17 10:33:09 AM

kapaso		2012-02-17 10:35:48 AM

commonsensepolitics: First off, this really isn't about women's preventative services as much as it is about freedom of religion. Catholics aren't trying to ban or take away anyone's contraceptives. They simply don't want to have to pay for your sex life. Sex is a choice (in most cases). Therefore I shouldn't have to pay for that choice. You should! If you don't want to pay for contraceptives, don't have sex. I just don't see how much simpler it can get. This is fundamental government intrusion. The government has intruded before by legislating the definition of marriage and they shouldn't have nor should they have legislated a policy that says a gay person can't talk about their sexual orientation in the military. Lastly, it is high time that the government got out of the whole marriage business altogether. They can still give you a piece of paper that says you and whomever have agreed to a relationship contract for both tax purposes and legal issues.

Using religion as cover to provide substandard insurance is bullshiat. Nobody is forcing religious institutions to run businesses. If they don't want to comply with standard business practices then maybe they should stick to running churches instead.

TommyDeuce		2012-02-17 10:43:18 AM

HeartBurnKid: God Is My Co-Pirate: There are a number of people I'd like to see locked into a room with Raven right now.

This guy?

[www.theraveneffect.com image 450x294]

I'm thinking more like this one . . .

2.bp.blogspot.com

/Hot, like an H-Bomb in the sidecar.

GameSprocket		2012-02-17 10:46:53 AM

thamike: Mentat: The Tea Party is the greatest piece of political performance art I've ever seen. I salute you all.

[thedroidyourelookingfor.files.wordpress.com image 500x541]

/if obscure, it shouldn't be

Vulva: Oh Brian, you came.
Brian Topp: Uh, no, I just spilled my drink.

More_Like_A_Stain		2012-02-17 10:47:43 AM

I would like to see Obama come out for or against (it doesn't really matter which way) lolcats. The Congressional hearings would be awesome.

BenjaminFarklin		2012-02-17 10:48:13 AM

HeartBurnKid: Bob16: Yeah those repubs are really screwed and there's probably no hope for them.

That's what the dem massacre of 2010 proves.

You better hope there's no hope for the Repubs. If this batch of them get in, we're all farked beyond imagination.

"No hope" seems a bit strong.

While the R's appear to be badly out of touch to many of us, there is very large group of voters who are unwilling to exercise objective reasoning and independent thought. This is true of both sides, and much of my family is in this group on the (R) side. Rush says "think for yourself, people"; but his listeners (including some of my family) parrot his talking points verbatim and truly believe that they've arrived at that viewpoint through original thinking. There are tons and tons of voters out there who will vote against Obama, not because their thought process led them to the conclusion that the (R) alternative is better, but because they've been bombarded for four years with "Obama is destroying the country." They're not going to consider the possibility that they've been manipulated for their vote. And they'll pull the lever for every (R) on the ticket.

Fart_Machine		2012-02-17 10:49:48 AM

commonsensepolitics: First off, this really isn't about women's preventative services as much as it is about freedom of religion. Catholics aren't trying to ban or take away anyone's contraceptives. They simply don't want to have to pay for your sex life. Sex is a choice (in most cases). Therefore I shouldn't have to pay for that choice. You should! If you don't want to pay for contraceptives, don't have sex. I just don't see how much simpler it can get. This is fundamental government intrusion. The government has intruded before by legislating the definition of marriage and they shouldn't have nor should they have legislated a policy that says a gay person can't talk about their sexual orientation in the military. Lastly, it is high time that the government got out of the whole marriage business altogether. They can still give you a piece of paper that says you and whomever have agreed to a relationship contract for both tax purposes and legal issues.

Sigh, not sure if this isn't a troll. Catholics aren't paying for anyone's sex life. If anything they use contraceptives just as much as non-Catholics. Likewise the costs are being deferred to the insurance companies. Now if you have a problem with that then can I object to having to pay for people who, due to their religion, run up pool costs due to having large families?

stoli n coke		2012-02-17 10:50:07 AM

Bob16: Yeah those repubs are really screwed and there's probably no hope for them.

That's what the dem massacre of 2010 proves.

Think you're overestimating the influence of the Beckerheads on this go-round.
Especially now that moderates are seeing all those Tea Party "outsider" candidates back in 2010 were nothing more than carnies fleecing the rubes.

TDWCom29		2012-02-17 10:50:22 AM

Oh shiat, the Republicans want to take us back to the 50s? Their heads will explode when they find out what the tax rates are back now.

Debeo Summa Credo		2012-02-17 10:52:34 AM

qorkfiend: Debeo Summa Credo: InmanRoshi: Philip Francis Queeg: Iraq would like a word.

Or Chile, Or Vietnam ...

Just because we were inept at it doesn't mean we didn't try our damnedest

We tried to build an empire in Vietnam or Iraq? WTF are you talking about? We may or may not have agreed that the supposed threats of the spread of communism in the 1960s or the supposed fear of Saddam Hussein getting WMDs in 2000s was worth going to war over, but you have to be pretty clueless or hopelessly biased to think what we were doing was 'empire building'.

What's your definition of "empire building"?

I guess I'd say taking possession of land for profit or colonization, or imposing rulers against the will of the people of that country, for profit.

We were in Vietnam to help our allies fight against communists, with no desire to occupy or even to profit. We wanted to stem the growth of communism. We went into Iraq to keep Hussein from getting WMDs and also because we believed he was an autocrat whose people were against him.

Just to be clear, I was against the Iraq War but only because it was based on unfounded fears and unrealistic expectations regarding post-Saddam Iraq (as well as political reasons in the US), but it wasn't "Blood for Oil" or empire building except in the minds of leftist nutbags.

More_Like_A_Stain		2012-02-17 10:54:22 AM

stoli n coke: ...nothing more than carnies fleecing the rubes.

I've worked with a lot of carnies over the last twenty years, and I've never met one as unethical and vile as Eric Cantor or his crew.

Displayed 50 of 397 comments