Yeah, monarchies should no longer exist. It should be George and his bitch Laura, and his pet pigs Rumsfeld and Cheney, ruling everything.
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Vic
It wasn't intended to be an argument, it was a statement of fact.Originally posted by: Forsythe
Lol, quote me what you posted and name me _one_ argument!
How's your queen, btw?
:laugh: It's so sad that 'queens' and 'kings' exist to this day.
I like the petty insult, nice touch. So you're saying those who are liked here are all asskissers?Originally posted by: Vic
What's your point, n00b? I'm not here for the popularity contest. I speak my mind and don't hold back. For every one who hates me, there are 10 or more who respect me and tell me so.Originally posted by: RBachman
How do you explain the many well-respected forum members who aren't magnets for petty insults then?
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Forsythe
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Vic
It wasn't intended to be an argument, it was a statement of fact.Originally posted by: Forsythe
Lol, quote me what you posted and name me _one_ argument!
How's your queen, btw?
:laugh: It's so sad that 'queens' and 'kings' exist to this day.
I dunno, she doesn't do anything except travel and smoke cigarettes, don't care much about her. She's mainly a figure of denmark, and if you're australian you definently know where denmark lies and what our queen is called because some girl frmo australia married the danish crown-prince. She's the face to the world, allthough i don't know how good the royal family is doing it. I can't tell you how much they earn us from travelling around the world, but the gain us alot of goodwill. They cost us about 9$ million every year.
She's there to keep danish conservatives happy (old people and the more nationalistic all care about her, those are the conservatives). I wouldn't mind if whe went.
What's sad is that poverty still exists in america they way it does today.
The poverty in Europe is pretty sad, too. However, the belief in a queen and king is ridiculous, IMO. It's just more of the sheep-like mentality of many Europeans.
Originally posted by: lordsaytor
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Vic
It wasn't intended to be an argument, it was a statement of fact.Originally posted by: Forsythe
Lol, quote me what you posted and name me _one_ argument!
How's your queen, btw?
:laugh: It's so sad that 'queens' and 'kings' exist to this day.
Yeah, monarchies should no longer exist. It should be George and his bitch Laura, and his pet pigs Rumsfeld and Cheney, ruling everything.
Not at all. Just that they don't rock the boat quite as hard as I like to do. And might I say that your vindictive attempt to defame me is quite weak? The witchhunt style of questioning you switched to is hilarious (and a logical fallacy, oh ye who says I don't use logic). Is your next question to ask me if I have stopped beating my wife yet? Or are you going to pretend again that you were just being sarcastic?Originally posted by: RBachman
I like the petty insult, nice touch. So you're saying those who are liked here are all asskissers?Originally posted by: Vic
What's your point, n00b? I'm not here for the popularity contest. I speak my mind and don't hold back. For every one who hates me, there are 10 or more who respect me and tell me so.Originally posted by: RBachman
How do you explain the many well-respected forum members who aren't magnets for petty insults then?
Originally posted by: lordsaytor
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Forsythe
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Vic
It wasn't intended to be an argument, it was a statement of fact.Originally posted by: Forsythe
Lol, quote me what you posted and name me _one_ argument!
How's your queen, btw?
:laugh: It's so sad that 'queens' and 'kings' exist to this day.
I dunno, she doesn't do anything except travel and smoke cigarettes, don't care much about her. She's mainly a figure of denmark, and if you're australian you definently know where denmark lies and what our queen is called because some girl frmo australia married the danish crown-prince. She's the face to the world, allthough i don't know how good the royal family is doing it. I can't tell you how much they earn us from travelling around the world, but the gain us alot of goodwill. They cost us about 9$ million every year.
She's there to keep danish conservatives happy (old people and the more nationalistic all care about her, those are the conservatives). I wouldn't mind if whe went.
What's sad is that poverty still exists in america they way it does today.
The poverty in Europe is pretty sad, too. However, the belief in a queen and king is ridiculous, IMO. It's just more of the sheep-like mentality of many Europeans.
Oh. So Europeans are just simple sheep that can be herded to wherever. And an American is the epitome of the independent mind who really thinks a President acts on behalf of their sorry asses.
Originally posted by: Vic
Not at all. Just that they don't rock the boat quite as hard as I like to do. And might I say that your vindictive attempt to defame me is quite weak? The witchhunt style of questioning you switched to is hilarious (and a logical fallacy, oh ye who says I don't use logic). Is your next question to ask me if I have stopped beating my wife yet? Or are you going to pretend again that you were just being sarcastic?Originally posted by: RBachman
I like the petty insult, nice touch. So you're saying those who are liked here are all asskissers?Originally posted by: Vic
What's your point, n00b? I'm not here for the popularity contest. I speak my mind and don't hold back. For every one who hates me, there are 10 or more who respect me and tell me so.Originally posted by: RBachman
How do you explain the many well-respected forum members who aren't magnets for petty insults then?
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: lordsaytor
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Forsythe
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Vic
It wasn't intended to be an argument, it was a statement of fact.Originally posted by: Forsythe
Lol, quote me what you posted and name me _one_ argument!
How's your queen, btw?
:laugh: It's so sad that 'queens' and 'kings' exist to this day.
I dunno, she doesn't do anything except travel and smoke cigarettes, don't care much about her. She's mainly a figure of denmark, and if you're australian you definently know where denmark lies and what our queen is called because some girl frmo australia married the danish crown-prince. She's the face to the world, allthough i don't know how good the royal family is doing it. I can't tell you how much they earn us from travelling around the world, but the gain us alot of goodwill. They cost us about 9$ million every year.
She's there to keep danish conservatives happy (old people and the more nationalistic all care about her, those are the conservatives). I wouldn't mind if whe went.
What's sad is that poverty still exists in america they way it does today.
The poverty in Europe is pretty sad, too. However, the belief in a queen and king is ridiculous, IMO. It's just more of the sheep-like mentality of many Europeans.
Oh. So Europeans are just simple sheep that can be herded to wherever. And an American is the epitome of the independent mind who really thinks a President acts on behalf of their sorry asses.
No, Canadians are just simple sheep that can be herded to wherever. Just mention the US and they'll all get into a frenzy!
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
LOL@RabidMongoose. Poor kid is still bitter that the France/Germany told the US to get lost over Iraq which they were right about and he needs to take shots at the whole continent of Europe to make him feel better. I bet this guy doesn't even own a passport. I know that the op and cwjerome don't. LOL!!!
Originally posted by: Vic
Well, thank you milord for slumming it here on ATPN.Originally posted by: Tango
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Tango
Uncorrect. I said the two areas are different under so many point of view that a comparison requires energies, time and the right communication channel. Internet fora do not provide the right medium for such a dicussion. You probably missed my last post. I do never insult you, but not because you didn't deserve it. I just try to avoid arguing with high-school kids. If you are older than this, not that would be a problem.
Ah yes... you keep insulting me based on my supposed age or level of education, denying that you ever do it, all the while being unable to compose a basic sentence or spell simple words. Lovely.
We discuss anything the mods allow here, pal. You aren't a mod, so you don't get to decide what we do and do not discuss, regardless of how you feel about internet fora as a medium. Your opinion was noted and disregarded.
You sound like somebody having the kind of emotive reactions that are usually associated with that period of life. I did not call you names like you did. Anyway, that's fine for me
I do apologize for my spelling. As you probably can understand english is not my first language, being in fact my fourth one. Still, I should try to do better, and I do apologize for this.
I'm perfectly fine with the idea that you can discuss whatever you want. I just don't like to lose time on theoretically flawed discussions, expecially considering the limitations of internet fora. I stressed this concept more than enough. You are more than welcome to come to Columbia University in New York for a symposium on different economic policies and the effect they have in both developed and developing countries. I will be among the lecturers together with far-more-qualified-than-me people from the UNDP, the world bank and IMF.
Mid November if you want.
Regards
Originally posted by: Tango
I don't understand. Just providing a better frame for the discussion. Why are you calling me milord? Are you intollerant of any intellectual of academic environment?
Trolling, flaming, insults, disinformation, misdirection, changing the subject to make personal attacks... nope, sounds like another day on ATPN.Originally posted by: RBachman
I'm not attempting to defame you at all. Calling my inquiries a "witchhunt" is actually quite defensive, suggesting maybe I've struck a nerve. I meant only to suggest you look inward a bit - you certainly suggest it to others enough. In this thread you've chided people for trolling and pettily insulting others, and also committed both offenses yourself. Doesn't that seem a bit strange to you?
Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
Originally posted by: Tango
I don't understand. Just providing a better frame for the discussion. Why are you calling me milord? Are you intollerant of any intellectual of academic environment?
I'm an astronaut.
You see, it's easy to say anything on a forum in regards to credentials.
Originally posted by: Vic
Excellent post. This, for me, is why I don't like the Europe praising that is so prevalent here. Sure, they have gay rights, but not freedom of religion. Sure, they have "free" healthcare, but not the right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure. And so forth with many examples.Originally posted by: Rainsford
I usually try and stay away from Europe bashing threads, especially when they try and link liberals and Europe. However, I find it interesting that for all the Europe bashing, there is at least one thing I think conservatives would like about Europe. Most European countries, with a few exceptions of course, are quite a bit closer to the police state mentality than we are in America. England especially does not seem to feel very strongly about putting limits on their police, and certainly their court system is nothing most Americans would be proud to have. Many other European countries are the same way, for all our talk of "police states", Europe seems to have a much lower level of personal freedom than we do here in the US.
I am not going to pass judgement on the entire region for that, there are certainly good things as well, and overall I like Europe. However, I just thought I'd throw a bit of common ground out there for the conservatives who seem to dislike Europe so much. I'm sure you don't like all the "socialism" and gay rights, but I imagine you can get behind pervasive surveilance, expanded police powers, outlawing encryption where the government doesn't have the keys (in France, I believe), etc, etc. Certainly you guys can appreciate that!
And before anyone gets too mad, I'm kind of kidding here. Still...
I have no desire to live like that and IMO, the one comes from the other. The lack of freedoms is the price of socialism. And I, for one, would rather be poor and free than pampered as a slave. Some individuals here, however, lack that same confidence and maturity.
Originally posted by: Woody
Excelling post ^ GamerExpress
One of the few that was worth reading.
It's this whole "You're either with us or against us" attitude that is insane. The administration implies that if you don't agree with us completely you are unpatriotic and anti-American. In the context of foreign powers it means if you don't go to war when we tell you then you are branded as a supporter of terrorism. This is infuriating and pretty much what every tyrant has done throughout history.
There are some (a very few) small things that Bush has done that I like but not many. I fear that many Bush supporters forget how fragile freedom is and how fragile our position as world leader is. For the last five years we have been systematically eroding our world power base militarily, economically, and diplomatically. I'll explain....
Militarily: After the first Gulf War (Kudos to Bush Sr. and the free press), the US was seen as invincible. Clinton also led a very successful limited humanitarian war in Eastern Europe and the result was an incredible support for the United States and it's military. We maintained that right through the incredibly well executed invasion of Afghanistan after 9-11 and the suppression of the Taliban. It was the foolish attack and occupation of Iraq that has made the US look weak and vulnerable and exposed us to the world as no longer invincible. Most people knew this would happen but no one listened.
Economically: I think Bush would have made an excellent credit consolidation salesman. "I can lower your monthly payments on your dept and give you more cash for free!!" Bull! Everyone with a credit card knows you need to eventually pay off the bill or face bankruptcy. Except that Bush knows he can carry the credit through his term and leave the dept to the next guy....not his problem. You simply cannot spend more than you make in the hopes that you will have more money in the future to pay it off. Personally, my middle class taxes have not gone down. What little I save in my federal taxes is paid our to state and local taxes who no longer get the federal funds they need for education. As a result, poorer communities can't properly educate their children and only the rich will be able to go to college. Our world standards of education are dwindling which means our future generations will be less able to compete economically with foreign powers.
Diplomatically: Do I really need to explain this? Many Bush supporters just don't give a crap that the rest of the world's attitude toward Americans has declined rapidly since the incredible support we had after 9-11. They have no idea how important it is to have respect from your peers.
Originally posted by: Woody
Excelling post ^ GamerExpress
One of the few that was worth reading.
It's this whole "You're either with us or against us" attitude that is insane. The administration implies that if you don't agree with us completely you are unpatriotic and anti-American. In the context of foreign powers it means if you don't go to war when we tell you then you are branded as a supporter of terrorism. This is infuriating and pretty much what every tyrant has done throughout history.
There are some (a very few) small things that Bush has done that I like but not many. I fear that many Bush supporters forget how fragile freedom is and how fragile our position as world leader is. For the last five years we have been systematically eroding our world power base militarily, economically, and diplomatically. I'll explain....
Militarily: After the first Gulf War (Kudos to Bush Sr. and the free press), the US was seen as invincible. Clinton also led a very successful limited humanitarian war in Eastern Europe and the result was an incredible support for the United States and it's military. We maintained that right through the incredibly well executed invasion of Afghanistan after 9-11 and the suppression of the Taliban. It was the foolish attack and occupation of Iraq that has made the US look weak and vulnerable and exposed us to the world as no longer invincible. Most people knew this would happen but no one listened.
Economically: I think Bush would have made an excellent credit consolidation salesman. "I can lower your monthly payments on your dept and give you more cash for free!!" Bull! Everyone with a credit card knows you need to eventually pay off the bill or face bankruptcy. Except that Bush knows he can carry the credit through his term and leave the dept to the next guy....not his problem. You simply cannot spend more than you make in the hopes that you will have more money in the future to pay it off. Personally, my middle class taxes have not gone down. What little I save in my federal taxes is paid our to state and local taxes who no longer get the federal funds they need for education. As a result, poorer communities can't properly educate their children and only the rich will be able to go to college. Our world standards of education are dwindling which means our future generations will be less able to compete economically with foreign powers.
Diplomatically: Do I really need to explain this? Many Bush supporters just don't give a crap that the rest of the world's attitude toward Americans has declined rapidly since the incredible support we had after 9-11. They have no idea how important it is to have respect from your peers.
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Vic
Excellent post. This, for me, is why I don't like the Europe praising that is so prevalent here. Sure, they have gay rights, but not freedom of religion. Sure, they have "free" healthcare, but not the right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure. And so forth with many examples.Originally posted by: Rainsford
I usually try and stay away from Europe bashing threads, especially when they try and link liberals and Europe. However, I find it interesting that for all the Europe bashing, there is at least one thing I think conservatives would like about Europe. Most European countries, with a few exceptions of course, are quite a bit closer to the police state mentality than we are in America. England especially does not seem to feel very strongly about putting limits on their police, and certainly their court system is nothing most Americans would be proud to have. Many other European countries are the same way, for all our talk of "police states", Europe seems to have a much lower level of personal freedom than we do here in the US.
I am not going to pass judgement on the entire region for that, there are certainly good things as well, and overall I like Europe. However, I just thought I'd throw a bit of common ground out there for the conservatives who seem to dislike Europe so much. I'm sure you don't like all the "socialism" and gay rights, but I imagine you can get behind pervasive surveilance, expanded police powers, outlawing encryption where the government doesn't have the keys (in France, I believe), etc, etc. Certainly you guys can appreciate that!
And before anyone gets too mad, I'm kind of kidding here. Still...
I have no desire to live like that and IMO, the one comes from the other. The lack of freedoms is the price of socialism. And I, for one, would rather be poor and free than pampered as a slave. Some individuals here, however, lack that same confidence and maturity.
True enough, but we also need to remember that the lack of socialism doesn't mean the presense of freedom. While there are certainly trade-offs, it is possible that if we're not careful, we could end up with the worst of both worlds. While I agree that social and economic freedom tend to belong to the same line of thought, having one doesn't automatically give you the other, especially if some people are fighting against it.
No one complained about CNN during the first Gulf War. It's the same network and they are not liberal, except that to an extremist just about everything is liberal. Websites like "The Weekly Standard" that you linked are just trash talking gossip sites designed to stir up your emotions and no intelligent person should take the content any more seriously than reading about the "Bat Boy" in the "Inquirer." There are plenty of liberal agenda sites also. All these websites and the mainstream media are based on the First Amendment of the "Bill of Rights!" To insinuate that the free press is part of a "communist" agenda is not just right wing, it's anti-American at the basic level of our founding principals.Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
On the military part, unfortunately these days the press has gotten more and more slanted. If they don't like something, they will tell you everything bad that has happened without mentioning anything good (reason why I never watch CNN "Communist News Network"). But also, Clinton greatly cut the military yet still used it for stuff - how can you expect that to work out? When Bush Jr came along, he had a weakened military but was able to use it well in post 9/11 in removing the Taliban. Iraq is a sticky situation, should we have gone in there or not? If we didn't, could we have gotten attacked by Saddam and his weapons caches?
This is a very weak argument, even for an extremist supporter. This is why no member of Bush's administration would ever push this theory except allow it to spread in the rumormill.Originally posted by: SparkyJJOAnd on his not having weapons, well, think for a moment. If YOU were Saddam, and the USA was coming after you, would you just leave the weapons there for them to be discovered? Probably not, you'd probably move them someplace, like say.... Saudi Arabia maybe? Or Iran? Or how about Syria? Who knows, but somewhere, anywhere where they won't be found. Saddam wasn't stupid when it came to that.
-sarcasm Yes, very exciting. I as an American, feel that most importantly we should help less advantaged nations dig themselves out of third world status and opressive dictatorships by sacrificing American blood, increasing the risk of international terrorism (a small price to pay so that they can have elections and bloody civil war) while mortgaging the future of my own nation to pay for it all. /sarcasm- I just find it hard to believe that right wing philosophy really gives a crap about the Iraqi people and isn't in fact more concerned with flexing our military muscle for whatever reason and keeping the oil flowing.Originally posted by: SparkyJJONow, with all the insurgents and attacks, have we gotten anywhere? Well, yes. The elections were held. Now true it is only one small step, but it is one step closer. And check this out LINK
Interesting, isn't it?
Not again! To actually have the audacity to make such an argument is phenomenal in itself. Reread my post about the analogy to credit cards. My guess is that if you had a credit card that you could max out and then leave the dept to your kids you would do it right?Originally posted by: SparkyJJOEconomically, I agree in some ways, Bush hasn't done the best job at it. But, we have gotten the sour economy from good ol' Clinton. The good economy we had during the 90s was from Reagan and Bush Sr. It takes a few years for things to show up. Yes, what happens now does affect the now some, but the bigger effects aren't seen until much later. It happens every time. I'll bet that if we had several liberal democrats in office one right after the other, by the 3rd or 4th term you'd be seeing a mess and would be screaming for a change. Eventually Bush's tax cuts will show up in a positive way but I have this feeling that because people just see the here and now a democrat will be in office and will take all the credit (like Clinton did) for the work of others.
I don't think many of them actually "hate" us. Hate is for extremists and terrorists. I have friends all over the world and the ones I speak to in Europe are more along the lines of feeling sorry for us rather than hating us....it's actually kind of embarrasing. The last statement you made sounds exactly like a typical argument for a dictator's power grab. You have no idea how far gone you are with these rationalizations.Originally posted by: SparkyJJODiplomatically, could I care about what France and Germany think? NO, because they are not the measure of everything. They put up this front about hating the US or whatever, but if they were attacked like we were on 9/11 they'd suddenly be our "best friends" because we actually have some military that can do something and have some guts to use it when needed! Frankly, if the liberals like France and Germany and Europe as a whole so much, why don't they all go over there? Maybe then the republicans could show that yes conservatism does work if the liberals don't screw around with everything.
This is what I find most interesting. I never saw myslef as liberal. In fact I voted for and supported both President Reagan and President Bush (Sr.). I don't regret that even today but I never voted for Jr. The main reason I supported President Clinton and candidate Gore is for exactly the reasons you describe. I'm for streamlining government, especially at the federal level, I'm for reducing taxes by reducing spending, increasing powers for states on local regulations, especially social issues, these are all my true conservative values. You really need to take a closer look at the policies and agenda of the Bush administration in general because clearly you don't listen or see what's going on. The hard fact is that under Bush we have more regulations, higher taxes (federal tax cuts have simply been forced onto the local level with huge property tax increases and other a larger dept overall) for middle class working Americans. It is also apparantt that you don't really know what socialism or communism is and I recommend you read up on these topics before you continue quoting propaganda trash you read from those messed up web sites. In other words, this last whole statement you made is completely opposite of the facts.Originally posted by: SparkyJJOBack to the freedom thing: What really bugs me about the liberals is they complain about Bush or whoever taking away our freedoms when THEY are the ones doing so! They want more power to the government and less to the people, more federal regulations, more more more more...! If this country was left to the liberals well we would be socialist if not communist.
Really?Originally posted by: Forsythe
WOW!! Cool down!
First:
All Vic said is bollocks.
Second:
We have freedom of religion.
We have the complete right to be secure from unreasonable searches.
You best bring up one of those many examples because those 2 are utter bs.
Originally posted by: Vic
Really?Originally posted by: Forsythe
WOW!! Cool down!
First:
All Vic said is bollocks.
Second:
We have freedom of religion.
We have the complete right to be secure from unreasonable searches.
You best bring up one of those many examples because those 2 are utter bs.
1. Danish taxes pay for the state religion, the Evangelical Lutheran Church. In America, that is NOT considered freedom of religion, even if you can otherwise go to any church you want. But it gets worse: the Danish constitution says that Denmark is a "Christian" nation, that the Evangelical Lutheran Church is THE state religion, and that the Danish parliament is the church's representation in government. That kind of "freedom of religion" in America would cause riots. Don't you even know your own country?
2. While not Denmark, the citizens of Great Britain do not have the right to be secure from unreasonable searches. While I am sure the word "unreasonable" is open to debate among some, in GB it means that (for example) if a local bank was robbed, the police have the power to search each and every single house in the area if they so choose, a power which would be considered most unreasonable in America.
BS? I don't think so.
Originally posted by: chcarnage
Maybe he doesn't know this because it doesn't affect the life of the Danish people at all? Some time ago I discussed separation of church and state on this forum and I argumented that the word "God" is printed on every dollar note. It's true but what's the impact of this fact on the average American? A very little one if any.
In my opinion you put the taxpayer perspective a bit too much in the foreground (Yes it was originally the topic but it's used now to measure freedom and liberty). There are other aspects of civil liberty like freedom to express one's opinion and participation on the democratic process which also are guaranteed in most parts of Europe.
The US has some scratch marks in its track record, too. The US government showed to have a problem with private use of digital encryption technology. On page 1 of this forum is a topic about the FBI's new campaign against pornography. The PATRIOT Act and the prison of Guantanamo Bay limit the rights mostly of those on American soil without citizenship.
So today's conclusion is that countries on both continents have space for improvement and accomplishments to defend.
Originally posted by: Vic
Excellent post. This, for me, is why I don't like the Europe praising that is so prevalent here. Sure, they have gay rights, but not freedom of religion. Sure, they have "free" healthcare, but not the right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure. And so forth with many examples.Originally posted by: Rainsford
I usually try and stay away from Europe bashing threads, especially when they try and link liberals and Europe. However, I find it interesting that for all the Europe bashing, there is at least one thing I think conservatives would like about Europe. Most European countries, with a few exceptions of course, are quite a bit closer to the police state mentality than we are in America. England especially does not seem to feel very strongly about putting limits on their police, and certainly their court system is nothing most Americans would be proud to have. Many other European countries are the same way, for all our talk of "police states", Europe seems to have a much lower level of personal freedom than we do here in the US.
I am not going to pass judgement on the entire region for that, there are certainly good things as well, and overall I like Europe. However, I just thought I'd throw a bit of common ground out there for the conservatives who seem to dislike Europe so much. I'm sure you don't like all the "socialism" and gay rights, but I imagine you can get behind pervasive surveilance, expanded police powers, outlawing encryption where the government doesn't have the keys (in France, I believe), etc, etc. Certainly you guys can appreciate that!
And before anyone gets too mad, I'm kind of kidding here. Still...
I have no desire to live like that and IMO, the one comes from the other. The lack of freedoms is the price of socialism. And I, for one, would rather be poor and free than pampered as a slave. Some individuals here, however, lack that same confidence and maturity.
For example you CANNOT show any religious object or symbol on your body at school, or while working as a public officer.