SirLoins

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I find the American trend towards branding people quite obnoxious. 'Liberal' 'Conservative' etc. they are not ridgid concepts. <span id='postcolor'> What else is there but "branding?" Conservative, Liberal, Independent, Green, Religious right, Environmentalist, African American, Mexican American, whatever. Everyone calls themselves something. You can argue as to what degree of "conservative" that I am, but what else is there but labels? In politics there are only Republicans and Democrats. No independents. It's all a matter of degree. Some just don't admit it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Just because he doesnt cowtow to the party line? Because hes a voice of reason? Yeah, I can see how that might make you think he is working for the other side <span id='postcolor'> And you would have stood by Madaline Albright if she would have voiced a Republican thought or two? Ha! Tex, sooner or later you'll have to admit your liberal. Don't be ashamed of it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I might think Mr Bush has the intellect of a rutabaga, but I'll never denigrate you for believing in him. It takes courage to stand up for what you believe, even when there is a lot of people who disagree. Personally I think Colin Powell would make a far better president...but he's far enough down the list that you'd have to lose a good chunk of the senior politicians in the USA all at once for that to happen.... and I dont see that happening. Maybe in the next election<span id='postcolor'> I appreciate that Warin. It really takes no courage to stand up for your convictions. Believe me, this is not a tough crowd to deal with. I will always try to maintain the high ground. As for Colin Powell, I have been disappointed in his actions. Many times I would have thought he was working for the DemocRats. Don't worry though, in George Bush's 2nd term, I don't think Powell will be there.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 18 2002,00:40   -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote (SirLoins @ Sep. 18 2002,00:25) Voted for George W. Bush, and damn proud of it. I wouldn't talk about it too loud about it on social occasions. It is on the same level as being proud that you have a venereal  disease <span id='postcolor'> Like I said " I VOTED FOR GEORGE W. BUSH AND I AM DAMN PROUD OF IT" I will never be intimidated by other opinions of my president, nor will I change mine! </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> I'll take the two party system the United States has any day.  With all it's faults, it's the best. The more parties you have, the broader is the spectrum of the population that you can can represent politically. <span id='postcolor'> The two parties in the United States does indeed include a wide spectrum of ideas.  From the religous right to the Green Party.  The problem is depending which side your on you get lumped into either right or left. I am right wing, but in no way include myself with for example, the white supremist.  Unfortunately, they are identified with my party. I can't see, in my lifetime anything but a two party system in the US.

which one would you consider the best?

I happen to be right wing. A registered Republican and damn proud of it. Voted for George W. Bush, and damn proud of it. I know this will get your goats, being a minority here. Apparantly, anything right of center is considered extreme right wing to most of the people on this forum. So be it. I'll take the two party system the United States has any day. With all it's faults, it's the best.

As a relative newcomer to these forums, I have noticed many, many threads being locked. The only conclusion I can come up with is, one moderator, or another, decides that it is not worthy of this board. After reading the forum rules, I see nothing about content of subject that would justify these threads being locked. Don't get me wrong, as I find some of the subjects completely boring and not worthy of conversation, but, I find no other explanation. So, all I am asking is by what rule or other factors do you all decide which subjects will live, and which ones will die? Have I missed something in the posting rules? Can you please give some do's and don'ts. I hope this thread is worthy of discussion. Thanks

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> hawkeye Posted: Sep. 17 2002,01:26 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N.Ireland. Our politics are SNAFU to say the least. Needless to say I'll be spoiling my voting form. They all suck. <span id='postcolor'> Hawkeye, and others that think "they all suck." They do not all suck. No matter what country you live in the political system within that country, flawed as it may seem, is all you have. By "spoiling" your vote form, you do nothing to improve the system. Only by involving yourself in politics and voting, can you ever achieve change. It may seem hopeless, but great things happen in very small, sometimes inconcievable steps. The right to vote should never be taken for granted or thrown away. There are many countries that do not have that right. So whatever your politics, you should work within your system to change what it is you dislike. And the best way to do that is to vote. One vote does make a difference.

Warin, I have no personal beef, just wondering how you guys decide.

So your favorite web comics and favorite music video, the great pyramid vent shaft, etc. etc.etc..........has what to do with war, military conflicts or anything pertinent to Army?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 11 2002,22:22 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote (SirLoins @ Sep. 11 2002,02:34) short time I've been of this forum I have seen dozens and dozens of your post. Buddy, if you ain't liberal, your in denial. Hey I admit I'm conservative. The problem with liberals is they try to hide it. Be proud of what you are and fight for your beliefs, that's what I do. Nothing wrong with that. You've only seen one side of my opinions because we only argue the same 5 things over and over again. You have no idea where I stand on other issues. And just because I dont stick to the conservative line, does not mean I am all of a sudden a liberal. There is such thing as a middle ground, and that is where I am 90% of the time. I think that you, however, are being snowed by the news you watch. Saying that Fox offers an equal balance of views because they offer up a few sacrificial lambs to the conservative slaughter is like saying that Rush Limbaugh is a balanced show because he occasionnally takes a call from some half-crazed democommie. Also, I never said anything about other news shows being one-sided themselves. I am fully aware that all news shows have some political agenda or their own ulterior motives, which is why I avoid them for the most part. Now, what you need to realise, is that there are more flavors to life than ultra conservative, conservative, liberal, and ultra liberal. <span id='postcolor'> Well at least we agree that all news shows have their own political agenda. What I have never said is that I watch Fox news exclusively. It is one of many I watch. How else can I make up my own mind. Yes, I am conservative. Not as far right as all here think. To some here any conservative is a redneck idot right wing nut. I happen to believe in certain things that form my political stance. The five subjects that your agree to being liberal on that are discussed on this forum is all I have to go on forming my opinion of you. Of course, those 5 or so subjects cover a whole lot of ground. If you say your in the middle, I won't argue with you. As for Rush Limbaugh, he has never, never claimed to be anything but a conservative. And for Hannity and Colmes, are we talking about the same guys. I for one, have many times seen left wingers blast Hannity as much as right wingers have blasted Colmes. I can't believe you think that show is biased. Nice chatting with you

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 10 2002,15:18 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote (SirLoins @ Sep. 10 2002,059) That explains it all. The reason you think FOX is GOP is because you are so used to listening to and reading those liberal rags....The Washington Post , Newsweek and Time are some of the most liberal rags in the country. You can't deny that. So when you see Fox, which IS balanced and gives two points of view, your mind is confused into thinking it's conservative. Keep watching, you may one day see the light. LOL, that is fuckin rich. There is only ONE liberal on Fox, (Colmes) and he is always getting shouted down on the (supposedly) balanced show Hannity and Colmes. And for your information, The Economist is about as conservative as a European magazine can be- they endorse Bush, and endorse conservative policies, but UNLIKE Fox, they offer high quality reporting and their analysis is always well thought out and gives equal time to both sides. As for Newsweek and the Willie Pete, just because they can occasionally remove their tongues from G Dubyas ass every once in a while (unlike Fox) to question his very questionable policies- well, I dont have a problem with that. But guess what pal? It aint all about liberal and conservative. Im not either. All I care about IS seeing two sides of the issue. thats why occasionally I watch O'reilly, not because he allows two opinions to coexist on his show (lmao), but because he offers a different opinion than other shows on other channels. Look, I dont mind that Fox is conservative, no skin off my back, but that doesnt change the fact that it IS a conservative news channel. Anyone who thinks otherwise is sorely mistaken. <span id='postcolor'> Tex, you mentioned one lliberal on Fox. Now name one conservative on ABC NBC or CBS. I'll give you a hint, George F. Will on ABC's This Week with now George Stephanopolis. Ever seen George Will try to get a word in edgewise? Let me see on Fox there is also Marla Liason, Mort Kondrake, Greta VanSusterin, Geraldo Rivera. You bitch about Hannity & Colmes. Two sides, two opinions. Where's the beef? Also, I never blasted you for the Economist. I also think it's good to watch a variety of news. I still stomach Dan Rather once and a while. You must know your enemies and what they are up to. I still stand by my opinion, that your so used to watching left wing bias, that when Fox came along and tried to be center, it was so far off what everyone was used to, it seems conservative. One other think, in terms you seem to understand, ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN(clinton news network) still have their tongues up Bill Clintons ass. You say your not liberal or conservative. The short time I've been of this forum I have seen dozens and dozens of your post. Buddy, if you ain't liberal, your in denial. Hey I admit I'm conservative. The problem with liberals is they try to hide it. Be proud of what you are and fight for your beliefs, that's what I do. Nothing wrong with that.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Sadly enough the only reason that we're on FOX is that my Divo has a crush on one of the anchors Personally I think FOX has the worst production values. Today I caught 4 spelling mistakes, the spelled Secretary wrong!!!! (Scretary) FOX also tries to make alot of being "fair and balanced" but they're anything but... David Asner (sp?) and "Shep" stand out as two of the most biased anchors on television. It's horrible to watch.<span id='postcolor'> Let's see. Peter Jennings, Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Sam Donaldson, Cokie Roberts, George Stephanopolis, Larry King, Barbara Walters, Diane Sawyer, Bryant Gumble, all the morning talk shows, I could go on and on but I might get sick. These are but a few of the liberal leftist that dominate the majority of TV news. Who's anything but fair and balanced? Open your eyes.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 10 2002,00:41 by Tex -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Heres where I get my news: Washington Post The Economist Newsweek (not so much now that they have become kind of sleazy) Occasionally Time<span id='postcolor'> That explains it all. The reason you think FOX is GOP is because you are so used to listening to and reading those liberal rags....The Washington Post , Newsweek and Time are some of the most liberal rags in the country. You can't deny that. So when you see Fox, which IS balanced and gives two points of view, your mind is confused into thinking it's conservative. Keep watching, you may one day see the light.

Read this link. http://dailynews.attbi.com/cgi-bin....qaedadc Interesting?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am a European and a conservative, I am not a liberal or a pacifict and while I am not always a strong supporter of the US I fully support their right to defend themselves, Britain I expect will help. You generalising about 'Europeans' is as wrong as people generalising about Americans, especialy as Europe isn't a country. <span id='postcolor'> Paratrooper, you have my apologies. I agree about Britain. Who else do you think may join?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 09 2002,01:15 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote (SirLoins @ Sep. 09 2002,019) And let's hope that not too many share yours. What a twisted mentallity. How do your view your things? From someone elses perspective? It seems to me that Duke is using his own perspective just like me. How nice and refreshing. Ah..the wonderful american right win head in the sand isolationist mentality. Anyone who doesnt think the way you do is 'twisted' It is not the place of every other culture and society in the world to make themselves agreeable to you. It's a big world and there is nothing at all wrong with people believing in different things and living their lives in different ways. If you truly believe that it was just jealousy and hatred of 'the american way of life' that caused the 9/11 attacks, then I feel very sorry for you. Here is a hint: The root of why people dislike America actually has very little to do with the American way of life or American freedoms.<span id='postcolor'> Warrin, you should use your own standards when saying that anyone who doesn't think the way I do is twisted. Apparantly, I am twisted because I don't agree with the majority of left wingers on this site. So be it. Would the Europeans rather the US take our guns and go home? We could lock our borders and take care of ourselves and say screw the rest of the world. Who will you call the next time Saddam invades or uses WMD? The UN? That will be the day, as the UN is nothing militarily without the US. All you guys do is bitch at the US. You should be thankful, even with it's faults, that we are the ones in power, not the Saddams' of the world. I hear George Bush compared to Hitler on this site. That my friend is twisted. To compare the honarable President of the United States, (I say that because I know you all hate him) to Hitler truly shows ignorance and spite.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 09 2002,00:20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ Sep. 08 2002,23:57) Denoir you scare me. What Bush did was bomb the enemy. That is also what Osama did with those airplanes. You have to put things in relative context, not just viewi things from your own perspective. Believe it or not, but not everybody in the world shares your opinions. I wish they all shared my opinions. Osama did do that, but he killed innocent civilians on purpose, the U.S. did not. <span id='postcolor'> I think your holding your own very nicely Duke </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 09 2002,00:17 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ Sep. 08 2002,23:57) Denoir you scare me. What Bush did was bomb the enemy. That is also what Osama did with those airplanes. You have to put things in relative context, not just viewi things from your own perspective. Believe it or not, but not everybody in the world shares your opinions. Edited by denoir on Sep. 09 2002,00:17 <span id='postcolor'> And let's hope that not too many share yours. What a twisted mentallity. How do your view your things? From someone elses perspective? It seems to me that Duke is using his own perspective just like me. How nice and refreshing.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 08 2002,20:31 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote (SirLoins @ Sep. 08 2002,14:20) If the guy had nothing to hide, then why does he play hide this ludicrous game of cat and mouse? Well, because there is no contingency plan for stopping the sanctions and inspections, among other things. No timeline for anything has been presented to out friendly dictator. No conditions have been set to say we will leave you alone of we do not find evidence you are hiding something. What do you want? Inspections in a country indefinately? Absurd! EDIT: Absurd is the whole inspection plan, not you. <span id='postcolor'> Whatever it takes BN. Look we were never allowed to inspect fully in the first place. I think because we don't have a timeline is certainly no reason not to go ahead with inspections.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 08 2002,15:33 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Sep. 08 2002,15:26) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2243627.stm He knows best because he was there. He is American too.<span id='postcolor'> I don't have the link with the actual film of this idiot being turned away from inspecting a faciltiy by the Iraqi officials. He is clearly heard saying "you are refusing my entrance into this facility?" (not an exact quote) Look, I personally would accept as an option if we could have inspections without any interference whatsoever from Iraq. HA! If the guy had nothing to hide, then why does he play hide this ludicrous game of cat and mouse? Of course the United States could just pack up the military, secure our own borders and tell the rest of the world to kiss our asses. Is that what you guys want? To have to deal with this without the help of the US? Right or wrong, I support my governments policies. If we do or don't go after Iraq, one way or the other we will one day find out who was right and who was wrong. I hope you guys are right. Because if I'm right, discussions are over. End of game.

I hate to sound like a broken record but, what will it take to show you guys that Saddam Hussein would not hesitate to use WMD? He has shown he has no hesitation in poisining his own people. I'll take the chance. Thank God that President George W. Bush has the balls to stand up to this guy while a the spineless European countries stand by and do absolutely nothing but bitch and complain about American policy. It's not about OIL! It's not about George Senior! It's not about KYOTO! It's about saving the planet from fanatical Muslems! Wake up and smell the roses while you still can.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Posted: Sep. 07 2002,015 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote (SirLoins @ Sep. 07 2002,00:53) I can't believe you would give a rats ass about someone arrested in California for exposing himself to a police officer in a public bathroom. Why would you give any weight to any musician, movie star, athlete, or any other celebrity opinion, simply based on their celebrity status? Their political statements, whether on an MTV interview, or in the lyrics of their music are simply trying to cash in on what they think is popular thought on a particular subject. You don't think it's all about the money? HA! Hum. *cough*Jim Baker*cough* There are a lot of people out there that do bad things, but that doesnt stop them from having valid political opinions. If we are to listen to you, anyone famous automatically loses their right to express an opinion and be taken seriously. Doesnt sound very fair to me. How do you know that Mr Michael doesnt hold his opinions very dearly? The answer is that you dont. You are just dismissing them because of his fame and his notoriety. <span id='postcolor'> Not my point at all Warin. Of course he is entitled to and very well may be sincere about his political opinions. What gets me is that a lot of people seem to jump on their political bandwagon simply because of their celebrity status. Plus, his music always has and always will suck, and I hold that opinion very dearly.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote (denoir @ Sep. 06 2002,017) I give the operation a 50/50 chance of being executed. It all now depends what Bush's pet dog Blair does. Reminds me of the new video of George Michael. You should watch it once! It is made like a comic and there you also see how Bush throws a piece of wood and Blair catches it like a dog...but that is not all, the video is really really awesome!<span id='postcolor'> I can't believe you would give a rats ass about someone arrested in California for exposing himself to a police officer in a public bathroom. Why would you give any weight to any musician, movie star, athlete, or any other celebrity opinion, simply based on their celebrity status? Their political statements, whether on an MTV interview, or in the lyrics of their music are simply trying to cash in on what they think is popular thought on a particular subject. You don't think it's all about the money? HA!

Warren Posted: Sep. 06 2002,02:10 It's about Bush needing a foreign adventure to keep peoples minds off of the economic slowdown in the US. With all due respect Warren, 1st of all the slow down of the US economy has nothing to do with Bush. (We can argue that on another thread) 2nd I seriously doubt that any president (other than BjBilly) would stoop to that level to "distract" the american people. This is way bigger than that. Saddam must go, with or without the help from the UN or any other country. If we let this guy loose it will be too late. Does anyone out there really believe that this guy would hesitate in using nuclear weapons, given the chance?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Posted: Sep. 03 2002,18:30 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Forget what Loins? <span id='postcolor'> I was just going back to what started this thread. Until very recently, Billy Clinton was the king of fundraising. Look, as sad as it is, fundraising, by both parties, is a necessary evil of politics. If you don't have the money, you don't get elected.