"There is no neutral ground between good and evil"
 

Shrub

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Mar19.html

Why does he have to talk at the level of a 5 year old??

he knows his audience?

the people he's trying to convince seem to have a difficult time with simple concepts.

-sm

Originally posted by smoothmoniker The people he is trying to convince are the people not in his audience. But, other than that, I pretty much agree with you.

Well, he does bring up a good point, in that the President seems to believe that good and evil are simple, easily definable, black-or-white absolutes. (Which is something that I consider to be extremely dangerous in a person, much less a guy with the keys to the nuclear football.)

I'm not a big fan of W's intellectual capacity (helloo.. helloo.. helloo...anybody here ..here..here..) but I think his approach to the three members of the so-called axis of evil (Iraq, Iran, North Korea) seem crafted to suit the country in question as opposed to the one-size-fits-all approach that one might assume he would use based on your characterization. He invaded Iraq, we have clandestine meetings with Iran in Sweeden and we have above-board and direct talks with North Korea. And we wouldn't invade Iran or NK in a thousand years under any pretext (real or imaginary).

I'm not really disagreeing with your main point as much as its implications. And do you really worry about W pushing the nuke-U-ler button? I don't.

He did reopen funding for new nuclear weapons, of a size that he considers to be reasonable to use in conventional warfare.

Using nuclear weapons in conventional warfare is like using a gun in a knife-fight. It can't be done. Once you've used the nuke, it's a nuclear war.

Indeed. Hence the "he considers".

LOL is that a comeback? For fuck's sake, I wipe my ass with sharper stuff than this.

Let's get facts straight you fuckwitted imbecile. I came here to debate you inbred, but that seems to be beyond the capability of you and a few others so you resorted to insults.

If you dont like my threads stay to fuck out of them, okay?

Every day of my life since he got into office.

Lighten up, Francis.

To be fair, you started with: I agree completely, but that is hardly particularly sharp or the introduction to a real debate.
This I agree with.

holy crap. is radar backing the dubya?

-sm

debate is fine, scrunchy. But you came on here and made disparaging remarks right out of the gate without letting anyone get to know you first. Perhaps you lurked for a while and have formed some opinions about some of us, but you need to understand that to us, you're a stranger. When a stranger comes at you, and you have no way of knowing whether or not they're being sarcastic, serious, or just plain rude, you tend to fire back twice as hard as you would to a familiar person.. First impressions matter, and so far it seems to me that you come looking for a fight.

I beg to differ lumber. I have lurked here for a while, and interpretted the board as head on debate.
My first post was to the France did something right for once! thread, and in it I replied to onyncougar
I usually use a uk site called ukshout.com and on that site, the above reply would be acceptable. However the response here was a torrent of personal abuse, and I quote

Now you tell me who was the one who was personally abusive?

It seems to me that some like to dish out the insults, but whine when they get them in return.

People like onyxcougar cant take an alternative viewpoint , they can only spew bile. Although this doesnt surprise me, most of his ilk can only hideaway on one sided sites. I've seen it on ukshout, they kick their ball off the park and storm off in a in a volley of insults.

Onyx you stay hiding on your little protected site, but dont expect me to fuck off, I've got balls unlike you, you eunuch.

:finger:

You pointed your criticism directly at her in your response to her comment about the French. You lose.

I'd back OJ Simpson before I backed Dubya. I was just pointing out the fact that even his writers can't come up with anything original. Republicant's often steal from those who are truly libertarian so they can hide the fact that they are fascists.

Yeah, well, perhaps cougar was a tad escalative in her reply, but when your argument begins with "yawn." you imply that you've heard this before and the person you're yawing at has nothing to offer, thereby invalidating their opinion. rude at best.

Regardless, I was actually referring to your calling me "nazi boy" over a wisecrack i made about the palestine situation. I was not offended, make no mistake. If you had known who you were talking to ( and if youve lurked for even a week, you've seen something i've written) you'd know that i am nothing of the sort.

I enjoy a nice flamefest as much as the next guy, and if you'd like to trade insults, I even created an insult thread that we could duke it out in if you feel froggy. My point is that if you care to fit in or have your pov taken seriously at all, you may want to get to know us and let us get to know you before you throw the first stone.

and if youve lurked for even a week, you've seen something i've written

Ahem... a whole week? ;)

Ditto fuckwad.

Insignificant? LOL well you're talking to me......what does that make you?



You're on? LOL you are fucking moronic, when did I ever tell you you were on that board?

You wouldnt last there two minutes, as previously stated people like yourself hide away with your own ilk.

And you wont find me trolling there, as those fuckwads like yourself run from there. As soon as your fuckwad compatriots left I decided to wander off too and find their like elsewhere.

Now off you go and lie on your back like a good little mattress, that's a certain way to get the attention you clearly crave.

ok, an hour

Scrunchy appears not to have read Dale Carnegie lately.

Scrunchy

fitting name ,
it's the sound all that sand in his vigina makes .:rolleyes:

Onyx if you have nothing to add to the debate, except your frustrated whining please leave, no one is forcing you to read it.

Now do the rest of you agree with Shrub that there is no neutral ground between good and evil, freedom and slavery, and life and death.

Isnt this a rather simplistic viewpoint, or do you agree with Shrub's assessment?

Somebody wrote a line in a speech that he read. Get over it.

Sure there's a middle ground: indifference.

Carrot Top is definitely not good, but I wouldn't go so far as to call him evil.

The evil of Carrot-Top must not be underestimated.

He read that line because in his extremist's world, there is only good and evil. That line is how George Jr thinks. Same as he was taught in nursery tales. But adults have long sinced learned the world is not just black and white.

Take spies, for example. Are there good spies and bad spies? No. Mostly all spies are considered evil. Different shades of evil. But no spy is really considered good - or fully trustworthy. Some spies more evil than others. Spies may be intentionally sent to their death just to mislead the enemy because spies are even so expendable. Spies are often suspect - some more than others - because that is the nature of a spy. So where is the good and evil line drawn?

There is no such thing as just good and evil - except in speeches and beliefs of George Jr. Saddam is not good. Therefore he must have been evil. Ergo the concept on which the 'Axis of Evil' speech is based. The White House Executive Summary condenses down to only good or evil - just like a nursery tale.

Hi Scrunchy.

You're a juvenile asshole.

Onyx has more substance in her little finger (which is much larger than your penis) than all your posts combined in the entire 3 weeks you'll stick around here.

I'm not eloquent.

All of the above is obvious of course to anyone that can read.

Rock on scrunch.....you're not the least bit entertaining, interesting, or controversial.

LOL Blue you say you aren't eloquent, well you sure got that right, you're a fucking retard.

Haha I'm not in the least bit interesting, entertaining or controversial, but you rush into the thread to throw comments at me:D

LOL what does that make you?

You've made a proper tit of yourself in your defence of onyx, what did she offer you to defend her, a cyber bj in chat?:rolleyes:

I really wish I could say it's been nice knowing you all, but I'd be lying.

You really are a bunch of inbred arses with very little independent thought.

Au Revoir:flipbird:

wow. ya know when you hear the truth, you hear the truth. Scruchy is dead on. We ARE a bunch of inbred arses with very little independent thought. I had no idea. but now that he said it, i realize that my mom is also my sister. why did that not occur to me as odd before? Oh, yeah, that's right, I don;t have much independent thought.....

Well, thanks for the life lesson, smoochie. It's been an eye opener for me. Looks like we've all learned a valuable lesson today, thanks to you. I'm sure I speak for the group when I say that it appears that your work here is done. You must have many other message boards on your agenda to cure of the idiocy we so recently suffered form. It's important work you do, and the internet is a safer place because you're there.

Farewell, Godspeed, Fuck you.

Is this like "I know you are but what am I?"? It seems to be a popular phrase with you. Which in itself is rather amusing, since you were japing someone's comeback prowess.

Quzah.

I'm hesitant to weigh in on this, but here goes.The thread starter has a question that should be asked. Scrunchy obviously has problems with communications.I find it scrumptiously ironic that scrunchy himself suffers from "W"'s problem-communicating.Hahaha.
I miss Bill.That man could deliver an eloquent speach.And ad-lib.If George has to ad-lib...ugh.

I'm listening to a series of great speeches right now. Winston Churchill, FDR, FJK, Reagan, MLK ...

Where did that kind of fire in the belly go? Where are the great leaders who spill out their convictions with language that makes you want to jump out of your seat and cry, "Amen!"

W is no Reagan. Kerry is no JFK. Oh well. 4 more years of skipping the State of the Union.

-sm

You're a fucking riot LJ ;-)

And I rushed in here to tell you that.

Somewhere or another I have the speech that Neville Chamberlaine (sp) gave declaring war on Germany. It's an awesome piece.

Oh man, I love that Chamberlain speech -

"We will give them Prussia, we will give them Austria, we will give them the Rhine, we will vacate the armistice demands, we will stand by as they rearm and re-provoke. We will aid in their dissolution of Yugoslavia,

We will surrender on the beaches, on the landings, on the streets and in the alleys. We will never stand, Never fight …”

Hold on. I may be getting confused.

-sm

Did we miss our meds today?

If meds = scotch then no, no we did not.

cheers.

-sm

To me, pursuit of political power over other people equals evil. That throws Stalin, Winnie, FDR, JFK, bin Laden, Kerry, Radar, and Bush all in the bucket. There are gradations of evil, with body count being a very important factor. Generally leaving people free to do their thing or actively helping others equals good. You may now muddy the water with talk of killing folks to preserve freedom.