Sorry About Our President.Com
 

A few years ago I remember this website. I added one of my own although this one sample I'm posting isn't it.


http://www.sorryaboutourpresident.co...x.php?vc84f3=5
I'm sorry that people are too stupid to understand their own best interest. When a rich white man votes Republican, it might actually be in his best interest. When the Bible-thumper votes Republican, it might appear to be in their best interest. But when the poor masses are voting Republican because their Church tells them to, they are NOT voting in their own best interest.

If you are under 30, and not a multimillionaire, vote Democrat or something else: Green, Progressive, Socialist even. Fascism simply does not suit you.

If you are over 30, and actually care about your kids and grandkids well being, don't vote away their rights and their future.

http://www.notsorryaboutourpresident.com/

Two websites, one very nice Google Ad Words money-making venture.

good one!
 

haha touche`

ohg...omg....you have to read some of these 'Not Sorry Reasons'

although #147 and #145 are cool 'not sorry reasons' Please read
number #143 and #144!!!


This IS what the evangelical christian television is telling people!
lies lies all lies! * faints * I can't believe it!

Location: Jose Tejas
W is a warrior for Jesus! If you hate him you hate Jesus and if you hate Jesus you are a terrorist!

First they did 9/11, then the bird flu, global warming, and VTech! FOUR MORE YEARS! -BADWORD- the constitution!






143 God Warrior
Did not apologize: 06.06.2007 - 05:14 AM




Location: Church
You're with us or you're with the terrorists. We occupy your lands to help you, and if you doubt this, then you are denying your country freedom, prosperity, and moral enlightenment.
Bush was appointed by God, and may he continue spreading the Lord's word. I hope that you will support us; so that you,too, may someday be a great Christian nation.

sky...

do you honestly think those are serious posts?
That's the sad thing about anti-right satire... there's nothing too extreme to be completely impossible or incredible anymore.

Yes because my own mother is one of them. My friend Shawn from Canada. His mother and grandmother talk the same way too.

It's crazy talk but you can't tell them that. They think they have the inside scoop from god. You have to know these things inorder to 'be ready'.

Don't get me wrong. We love our parents but we thing the way of this kind of thinking is really strange. :rollanim:


ps...I got to give a plug here. Anyone from Canada ...you've got to go to Lydia's pub in Saskatoon on Tuesday nights!!!

With all due respect, if anyone actually followed this advice they would be idiots. Vote because of what you believe and in a person who at least shares in values that you think are important in a person who is going to represent what you think is important. It is a complete falsehood to think that "poor masses" vote because their church tells them how to vote. Most people are smarter than that. To vote one way because of someone you are not is just stupid.

It's not a complete falsehood. I (sadly) know lots of examples. I guess you can quibble over how many count towards "masses", and I certainly hope that it isn't "most people", but it is a lot.

We have webisites like this but no incentive for impeachment...

I think Merc is right, while some people do vote because the church tells them too the majority will vote based on their personal interests (or at least what they think their personal interests are).

So how does that explain the almost 1/3rd who still support one of if not the worst president in 100 years of history? Clearly 1 in three of us is not thinking. Is that about the same number who also fall for e-mails from Nigerian princes? Curious. Some people will do most anything they are told - and call that thinking.

Before anyone believes the bullshit that in someway people vote anything other than their mind please note this well researched study:

http://www.princeton.edu/~bartels/kansas.pdf

It is a small but representative example.

The people who cry for impeachment are bulls' hind ends, emitting what bulls' hind ends usually emit.

Wake up: actual attempts to win a war started by somebody else do not rise to the level of high crimes nor misdemeanors. But try telling the cryptofascist somnambulants that.

These calls for impeachment are lies, nothing more. Unless under "more" you include the utterances of dupes. I am neither a liar nor a dupe and I dislike reading the outpourings of those who are.

This morning I was called a W. Bush apologist. The woman that called me this is under 30, and thinks that King Bill is the best thing that ever happened. When I asked her what she thought about JFK, and FDR, she said that they were war mongering Republicans. When I informed her that both were Democrats she had a fit and informed me that I was wrong. I cant wait to show her that she is wrong and the teacher she worships is an idiot for saying this.

She was also upset when I told her that both men were very rich.

a) It was just an example opinion. I didn't pick the worst or best.

b) well he was wrong about the 'poor masses' It's called the religious right and the Catholic church. They tell them how to vote rich and poor. They are called SHEEP after all.:sheep:

You have no data to prove your assertions. You are repeating the manta of the left-wingnuts. If you do, show it, I would like to read it. My reference was original research with data.

it's not that serious or important. I can't drum up the energy to care.

You can look up data if YOU WANT. Vote for who you want too.

My thread was totally silly bs to me. lol

Oh, ok, my bad. I was looking for an exchange of ideas on the subject. My bad.:headshake

Nothing to see here... moving right along.

I am not the sharpest tool in the shed so I'll take that as a compliment that you would think I had many to share of any depth. :)


When Al Gore lost I wept. ( I really did ) and swore my head was going to stay under that perverbial pillow until 'you know who' is out of office.


I have nothing of substance to contribute that would make a lick of difference. Thanks tho!

Unfortunately, I'm more worried about 'duck and cover' than 'head under pillow'.

The US has now publicly embraced a policy of 'preemptive war'. If our rivals and enemies followed suit, then things could get very ugly. For years we've held onto weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical, and biological) and convinced the world we could be trusted to do so by maintaining a defensive posture.

Now everything has changed, and maybe 1/3 of the US and almost noone in the world trusts the current the current administration in terms of honesty, competence, and restraint.

In a sense the 9/11 attacks were a preemptive strike by Al Qaeda and Co. It just back fired on them. Al Gore may have tried some kind of appeasement, or he may have grown a pair and got medieval on there asses.

I seriously doubt that. The majority of people doubted it too. And that is why Micheal Moore and Al "I invented the internet" Gore now make movies.:D

oh believe me. I am only trusting that the next administration is more sensitive to different ideologies than this one has been. Obviously preemtive striking dosn't work.


I am not sure how some people can keep smiling after knowing that this administration has destabilized the middle east.

I read this article yesterday. I thought I'd share it here.
The truth keeps eeking out but some refuse to believe what is right before their eyes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19378776/

It didn't backfire on Al Qaeda. They got exactly what they wanted. It backfired a bit on their allies of the moment, the Taleban, but I doubt they care all that much about that.

The 9/11 attacks were a stick to the hornet's nest, designed to get us to launch a knee-jerk Holy War.
They've gotten miles of propoganda out of this; we're reacting as if they have actual puppet strings attached to us.

Extremists will do things so that it becomes difficult for intelligent people to remain moderates. It is what Sharon did with his march to desecrate a mosque on Temple Mount; to create Intafada II. It is what the IRA did to promote so much unnecessary violence by all sides in N Ireland. It is what Chavez is doing in Venezuela to promote himself. It is what Hitler did to disparage the bourgeois and intelligencia. The resulting emotion makes intelligent thought difficult. We need only return to the Cellar of 2002 to see that among the many who insisted Saddam was a 'clear and present danger' when no facts existed. Logic was not where support for "Mission Accomplished" came from. That emotion is the extremist's objective.

Same bottom line point made using a completely different perspective.

What else is new?:whofart:

I can totally relate to that y'know. In 1992, in the depths of a deep recession, with unemployment figures going through the roof and Conservative politicians showing absolute lack of any kind of compassion for the newly unemployed (often whole towns died as their industry collapsed); with long roads filled with ForSale signs, and shops gone out of business, it was looking like a Labour win right up til the bitter end.

Only as the exit polls started to come in did it become clear that somehow, despite how badly they'd hurt the country, despite how broken our economy was and how battered our sense of national identity....Conservatives had won again.

Put me off politics for a good couple of years that. Just didn't want to know. Even in '97 when evervybody was predicting a Labour win, I didn't believe it. Was absolutely convinced the country would vote the bastards back in again when it came to the crunch. Total shock when Labour won by a landslide.

Imagining that Sharon went to do anything to desecrate a mosque takes a lot of imagination, and an absolute rejection of any common sense. Also, it takes acute and pernicious antisemitism, tw, which prefries your frontal lobes both left and right. I'd suggest you stop reading Communist, Nazi, and Palestinian websites; they are all too similar.

And right winged sources are diverse?

So far, the right-of-center seem to me the more accurate sources. Accuracy is all that's needed. Everything else is frosting.

Do not reject rightwing sources for being rightwing -- that is the error of the ideologue who has only wet sawdust between the ears (and no diploma). Do not confuse "right of center" for the Wrong Right.

And as I was commenting on Palestinian webpages among others, what is this "right winged sources" BS? Take your time about responding and think, Pierce, rather than contenting yourself with looking stupid. I mean, if you really are stupid, okay -- on several levels. But will that ever persuade anyone to adopt your points of view?

Well, that would amount to Q.E.D.

I am not persuaded Al Gore's values would be aimed at keeping the Republic, and I hold similar views of his party's values, which is why I don't vote for Democrats.

I think the Republic dodged a bullet when Gore lost. I thought it then, and I think so now. We have a war to win, one that would have come regardless of which party was in the White House, and started by others as has been the case for the past hundred years, and the Democrats simply don't know how. Until the Democrats can show me they can win the war better than the Republicans can, they have nothing I'm interested in. Successful war is successful foreign policy, questions of its disadvantages and wastefulness aside.

Why do you listen to WXYZ?

Because they play all the best music!!

How do you know it's the best music?

Because that's the music they play on WXYZ!!

How do you know that right-of-center sources are the most accurate UG?

Edit- UT asked in a better way than me.

Same person who would accuse Pierce of being stupid could not even read simple military political concepts in Thomas Barnett's book. And then he discovered Barnett discusses how to, for example, secure oil by doing NOT what George Jr, wacko extremists, and UG recommend. Suddenly UG could not read that book? Or are simple concepts that contradict his poltical agenda too toxic? Either way, UG is the last person to know who is stupid.

UG - you do yourself a big favor by not judging others as stupid. Your intellectual standing is not sufficient to make such judgements. You began here by knowing why the Vietnam war was lost But you never even read the Pentagon Papers. You have a bad habit of 'knowing' without first 'learning'. Therefore you are the last person able to judge who is stupid.

Good luck brother. Others have tried and failed.

Don't be any too sure of that, V -- tw is living in a fool's paradise. He can't stand that I can wipe the floor with him on matters of politics and history each and every single time I choose to. While I doubt I could manage so well on the topic of the electrical engineering of power sources -- someone finally mentioned this was tw's engineering specialty, and it wasn't tw, who perhaps could have tooted his own horn -- on history and on politics, I am the more skilled. I am also a far more emotionally mature man, not given to his sort of ranting and screeching in the crudest, most ill-founded attempt at clawing after some advantage I'm likely to see this decade. It is ill-founded because to date I have said absolutely nothing on Barnett's work beyond the bare mention that I am reading it with great interest -- and tw, in a complete absence of evidence and an access of dare I say fevered imaginings, is the one claiming as loudly as he can that I do not understand Barnett's book.

One is rather put in mind of an angry chimpanzee.

Barnett does calculate that military action has its place in the kind of foreign policy endeavors he lays out.

Tw, you are not a sage, and as long as you are constituted as you are, unable to form an adult relationship (a hint: adults do not sound like tw), and unable to learn history other than as may be taught by the Gosudarstvennyi Universitet Moskvy, you never shall be.

That's an extremely personal insult Urbane. That sort of thing makes your arguments a lot harder to take seriously.

@ dana...that quote you quoted is quite ironic if you think about it.

It dosn't make sense. It's like empaling oneself on on ones own sword.

UG - you even miss the simplest of points. You are criticized for attacking a person - calling him stupid - rather than addressing the topic. You don't even understand that basic point. You insult people as proof of superiority and righteousness. That tactic is common among extremists. It just does not play well in The Cellar.

You don't even understand you are being criticized for doing it. Calling Pierce stupid to prove your point? How is that logical?

Why do I listen to WXYZ, Because they play the music I like!!!
Nobody need to tell me what I like I all ready know what i like.
Their was a lot of wailing when Al Gore lost after 9/11 all that stopped.
There was lots of speculating going on. I shuffled that off with the conspiracy theorists the ignore file if you will, I will make up my own mind.

The truth hurts.:)

And the truth about his personality hurts tw beyond all endurance, as far as I can see. When a guy is really a four-letter man, it behooves the rest of us to know that. When a guy is as willing to think in delusion as tw is, it behooves us to know that. When a guy is simply incapable of behaving in any manner but to induce disgust at his antidemocracy sympathies -- for he has none visible for democracy and too much for something other -- then disgust is the only right thing to feel.

Tw's entire personality or onscreen persona (given the way he goes at things I do not believe they are separate) is designed to repulse the free, adult human being. In repulsion, he succeeds. That this... presence should anger me hardly constitutes a deficiency on my part. The man's a walking shame.

And you, you walking shame, cannot gainsay me. You remain forever without political acumen or people skills, which are in some degree the same thing. Nor will you understand that the stupid people are the kind of people least likely to agree with me, simply because they can't get it -- and thus the mediocre ones rise in that confederacy of dunces. Hardly a shock, but yes, it's an annoyance. So they get out-thought and out-punched; I can manhandle schmucks head-down into the dumpster of garbage ideas where they belong.

Why don't you just ignore him UG?

Because David Hume and I are in close agreement here. I too want to "thunder them, and crush them, and pound them, and reduce them to dust and ashes." -- D. Hume, in a letter dated 10 July 1769, to Abbe Andre Morellet.

The man is a communist and an undemocrat -- the degree of inhumanity required to be these things is unforgiveable. I do not avoid conflict with such animals in human form.

"I will not cease from mental fight
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand..."

This is what I'm on Earth to do -- annihilate undemocracy, and emasculate, make sterile, its practitioners. Fellow-traveling sympathizers get a like treatment, until their agony at picking the road to oppression becomes insupportable.

UG...it's the internet mate. lol

Good a place as any to slap a commie around like a hockey puck. They've got a hell of a lot to answer for; let them be pilloried until vultures come pluck out their eyes and livers.

UG...are you giving yourself a boner? ;)

What, to fuck the commies with? Or if commies are on one's Won't-Bang List, perhaps one should get them to autosodomize and then nail their pricks permanently into that orifice with sixteen-penny nails.

wow. I mean that, just wow.

And yet again I find myself wondering.....is UG really the person he presents on here? Or is he just a parody, well and consistently played?

UG is still fighting the Cold War. That post must be a quote from some comic book character. Maybe Sgt Rock in Korea?

Naw, he is a real person. With the experience to back it up. Your credentials are????

I would imagine most of us have the experience to back up being a real person.

What a shitload of biologically toxic waste reasoning complete with speculation based in wacko right wing 'screw all women' reasoning.

Experience without fundamental knowledge makes one his own worst enemy. Urbane Guerrilla's experience? He was an expert on Vietnam and yet he never even read nor understood facts in The Pentagon Papers.

Experience found in his posts is about as credible as TheMercenary's posts on military matters. Fully based in a political agenda while devoid even of basic knowledge of a high school education.

UG's posts based in insufficient knowledge and his biased political agenda are demonstrated by another stunning example: Then he discovered either how complex Thomas Barnett's book was or discovered that Barnett completely invalidated UG's political agenda. Either way, he could not read it until challenged. Well its been 9 month now since he so politely responded to a request for that discussion - and still no discussion.

Where is his credibility? At minimum, his posts only lied to us with contempt. However, I suspect his post's credibility lie in a political agenda where routinely rewriting history justifies his beliefs. I have suggested this often in response to inaccuracies in UG posts complete with pontiff tone. UG's posts continue to demonstrate the validity of my premise.

Serving as a soldier never justified support for the troops. Credibility in those posts so tarnished as to repeatedly advocate contempt for the troops - especially by advocating and defending "Mission Accomplished"- a war that even violates numerous and fundamentally simple military science 101 principles.

At no time does this discredit the integrity of UG. According to UT, anything that demonstrates his conclusions as excrement is neither an attack on UG nor insulting. The fact that his posts are often exposed as lies says nothing about UG; just exposes the credibility of everything in his posts. UG's posts simply expose a repeated lack of intelligent grasp complete with outright contempt for the American soldier by advocating their massacre. Meanwhile UG is a nice guy. Nothing here insults his intelligence - only the pompous, naive arrogance found in his pathetically 'poorly worded' posts. Some of those posts even beg for anal intercourse. But again, that says nothing about UG the person. It simply replies to the questionable validity of everything he posts - implies nothing about a penile nature in his character - which clearly does not exist.

UT - this is perfectly acceptable posting based upon your standards for civil and acceptable behavior defined in Violent crime up again in USA, more murders, robberies . Only UG's posts and the integrity of TheMercenary's clearly discredited, biased, unreasonable, and insulting posts are discussed. This new tone for the Cellar is refreshing? Screw the motherfucking posts from TheMercenary. Those diarrhea profusion posts represent simplistic 'pedophile like' agendas based in conclusions of mental infortitude. But TheMercenary is a nice guy.

Hah... I love it. tw fails in the argument and resorts to personal attacks. Hello Kettle!:)

Nor has tw ever proven me wrong -- he has alleged I'm wrong, up down and sideways. What he has demonstrated, proven that is, is persistent, obdurate delusive thinking. Allegation, for him, suffices. Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy, and weak of reasoning. Somehow, someday, he's going to get different results from trying the same old thing, over and over.

So and meanwhile, we can expect tw to continue to act like tw: in a couple of adjectives, both immature and anti-American. Direct question to you, tw: Do you want the United States to win? Your entire history of posting for as long as I've been here says No, and in boldface.

And tw does not have credentials in this field. (He's just missed an excellent opportunity to recite some. I doubt he will fill the lack.) He's never even served in the military, and has said so. Nor will someone of tw's temperament be any good at politics in any case, which leaves him in even worse case. But this incapacity does not stop this would-be pundit from shooting his mouth off. Thus, not only is contempt the response called for, it is a perfectly true and applicable response. What you say, tw, is what makes us despise you -- and any of the friends you don't have the people skill to make -- there's never evidence of any healthy adult relationships in your postings. There are not even hints. The man who cannot connect cannot do politics.

So. The only people qualified to hold an opinion, make comment , or take a stance on the war are those who have served in the military or in the field of politics?

Again you make assumptions about tw's capacity to form relationships. This stuff is really, really boring and unpleasant. It was funny at first, watching you go off on a rant. Watching tw go off on a rant too. But this is just getting pathetic. Your posts are much more interesting, UG, when you are arguing a political point than when you are playing out a personal feud on the boards.

I took UG's posts to be fairly amusing and I think he realized that and played up for the camera so to speak.

I can't imagine anyone took those particular posts seriously...did they?

I don't take it seriously. I think its a rant and taken in isolation probably funny. I just think the joke's getting tired.

Well maybe so. But I guess I don't take anything UG says very seriously, so I look forward to the times he decides to put on a show. ;)

I always considered a UG type as the missing color in a Pat Paulson for President campaign. It would have been the political contrast that Pat need for his platform - the absurdity of politics.