I love when liberals stab each other in the back

[12clicks]

Lets see, for the al gore presidential run, joe liberman took slings and arrows for changing his beliefs to be more in line with gore's position to better help gore get elected.
Now liberman is running for pres and gore comes out in favor of dean at a time when it wasn't necissary unless you're gore and want attention.

when asked what liberman thought of it, he replied,"I'm not going to talk about what I think of it"

[Dravyk]

You're so easily amused, my friend.

[Rich]

That's because Liberman is a crazy neo-conservative like the people currently in office. He shouldn't have been Gore's running mate last time, Gore knows it now. A Dean/Clark ticket will own GWB and that's all that matters.

[12clicks]

Originally posted by Dravyk
You're so easily amused, my friend.

indeed I am. life is more fun that way.

[Dravyk]

Originally posted by 12clicks
indeed I am. life is more fun that way.

LOL! Difficult to argue with that one.

[12clicks]

Originally posted by Rich
That's because Liberman is a crazy neo-conservative like the people currently in office. He shouldn't have been Gore's running mate last time, Gore knows it now. A Dean/Clark ticket will own GWB and that's all that matters.

from your lips to god's ears.

[Rambozo]

Yeah those pesky liberals-
Let's get rid of them all.
This country will be much better off when the country
is COMPLETELY run by the giant corporations and Christian Conservatives.
Let's do away with all those stupid environmental
laws that hurt Corporate profits.
And let's get rid of that First Amendment and let Jerry Falwell,Pat Robertson and John Ashhahahahaha decide what we can see, say and put on the internet.
Any adult webmaster who claims to be a conservative
is either a moron or a hypocrite. A REAL conservative wouldn't touch this business with a 10 foot pole.

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by Rambozo
Yeah those pesky liberals-
Let's get rid of them all.
This country will be much better off when the country
is COMPLETELY run by the giant corporations and Christian Conservatives.
Let's do away with all those stupid environmental
laws that hurt Corporate profits.
And let's get rid of that First Amendment and let Jerry Falwell,Pat Robertson and John Ashhahahahaha decide what we can see, say and put on the internet.
Any adult webmaster who claims to be a conservative
is either a moron or a hypocrite. A REAL conservative wouldn't touch this business with a 10 foot pole.

Being Right-wing and anti the socialist-left has nothing to do with being one of those christian radical types. This business was MADE for free-market capitalist right-wingers!

[nicchick]

12 Clicks
There's an old saying that you should commit to memory-
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you're an idiot, than to open it and remove all doubt."

[Rambozo]

Sperbonzo-
I don't blame you for wanting to distance yourself from the Christian right. But the reality is that they ARE the conservative movement in this country and as long as the GOP is in charge, they will get more and more power and influence.
Don't worry though-
When they put you out of the adult business,
you can open a Bible study site.

[traffictrader]

Originally posted by Rich
That's because Liberman is a crazy neo-conservative like the people currently in office. He shouldn't have been Gore's running mate last time, Gore knows it now. A Dean/Clark ticket will own GWB and that's all that matters.

I ALMOST agree with that, I think a Clark/Dean ticket has a better shot, because Clark looks less insanely liberal to swing voters, sadly, I doubt Clark will get the ticket.


I love how politics mocks the intelligent voter. They give us a hint of the obviously best canidate (McCain in '00, Clark in '04) then, they are snatched away from us and we have to watch idiots rule the country.

Sigh.

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by Rambozo
Sperbonzo-
I don't blame you for wanting to distance yourself from the Christian right. But the reality is that they ARE the conservative movement in this country and as long as the GOP is in charge, they will get more and more power and influence.
Don't worry though-
When they put you out of the adult business,
you can open a Bible study site.

Rambozo-

I don't blame you for wanting to distance yourself from the socialist left. But the reality is that they ARE the Liberal movment in this country and if they regain power, you will pay more and more in taxes, (as will your customers), and there will be JUST AS MUCH INTERFERENCE IN THE PORN BUSINESS. (Just remember the political correctness don't-exploit-women movement from the left).

Don't worry though, when you are out of the adult business,
you can get goverment assisted housing and cheese.

[RB Content]

I dont know because truly Clark has great credintials and is a VERY smart man. But I do not think he as liberal as he lets on.

I also do not believe he is even as presidential as Dean could be. But I will give it up to Clark he is one honest SOB which I like. But you know the rest of America doesnt like that kind of honesty. So I think the political saavy of Dean is a better fit with Clark being the honesty check for the presidency. Good mix.

Now is it saleable, if Bush has a good year with Iraq AND the economy? Thats what needs to change. It needs to be less predicated on bad republican and Bush news and more on how much better the Democrats would do. Oh and nail the current regime on the violations of the bill of rights more.

Might help.

I do agree though that a bad year would seal GW's presidency

[Rambozo]

Sperbozo,
That's the difference between us.
I DON'T want to distance myself from my party.
And if you don't think there is a difference between the Left and the Right's approach to porn, you are sadly naive.
A lot of porn would be illegal in this country already if the ACLU didn't challenge the laws. The courts ruled with them for now.
Let's see what happens when Scalia and and Rehnquist have their say.

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by Rambozo
Sperbozo,
That's the difference between us.
I DON'T want to distance myself from my party.
And if you don't think there is a difference between the Left and the Right's approach to porn, you are sadly naive.
A lot of porn would be illegal in this country already if the ACLU didn't challenge the laws. The courts ruled with them for now.
Let's see what happens when Scalia and and Rehnquist have their say.

OK, we agree to disagree on this topic

[dig420]

Originally posted by sperbonzo


Rambozo-

I don't blame you for wanting to distance yourself from the socialist left. But the reality is that they ARE the Liberal movment in this country and if they regain power, you will pay more and more in taxes, (as will your customers), and there will be JUST AS MUCH INTERFERENCE IN THE PORN BUSINESS. (Just remember the political correctness don't-exploit-women movement from the left).

Don't worry though, when you are out of the adult business,
you can get goverment assisted housing and cheese.

if being Republican had less to do with some macho self-image and more to do with reality you would realize that Republican administrations typically spend MORE than Dems, and they get around raising taxes by borrowing, which forces the NEXT President to raise taxes to pay it back. It happened to Bush I after Reagan, it'll happen to the next President after Bush II.

Any objective observer can see that the Republican Party is basically all about getting people elected regardless of the cost. They have no core issue, they'll expand their campaign to accomodate any disreputable group that will associate with them if they can bring some votes, hence you have the Religious Right and the southern vote, where all they care about is keeping the black man down.

Republicans don't lower taxes. They don't open new markets, they don't remove tariffs, but they can always count on the vote of the less sophisticated half of the country voting on their single issues or thinking that they have to be Republican because they want to be a cowboy just like George Bush.

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by dig420


if being Republican had less to do with some macho self-image and more to do with reality you would realize that Republican administrations typically spend MORE than Dems, and they get around raising taxes by borrowing, which forces the NEXT President to raise taxes to pay it back. It happened to Bush I after Reagan, it'll happen to the next President after Bush II.

Any objective observer can see that the Republican Party is basically all about getting people elected regardless of the cost. They have no core issue, they'll expand their campaign to accomodate any disreputable group that will associate with them if they can bring some votes, hence you have the Religious Right and the southern vote, where all they care about is keeping the black man down.

Republicans don't lower taxes. They don't open new markets, they don't remove tariffs, but they can always count on the vote of the less sophisticated half of the country voting on their single issues or thinking that they have to be Republican because they want to be a cowboy just like George Bush.

I'm not trying to make this personal at all, but if you don't think that the Democrats don't do EXACTLY what you are talking about...

getting people elected regardless of the cost...

no core issue, they'll expand their campaign to accomodate any disreputable group that will associate with them ....

etc, etc, etc....

and I could add to that, that the Dems actually have a vested interest in keeping people down and dependent on goverment hand-outs, since that will keep the people who are dependent voting them in over and over, as well as fostering race problems so that they can scream about them and get votes that way, etc, etc, etc....

If you don't see it, then I believe your view to be VERY myopic.

[dig420]

Yeah the old welfare queens bankrupting our country eh? you know that the overwhelming majority of welfare recipients in this country are white, right?

They've had the dole in every country and every society since the dawn of time. Do you think that there might be a reason for this? That it's a NECESSARY thing? Bad things happen to good people all the time, and it is the duty of a civilized country to see that it's poorest citizens are cared for, as well as it's richest. You think welfare is bad? Would you like it better if we had people dying in the street from starvation like some 3rd world country?

It's not about keeping people dependent. It's about the fact that if you don't have money you can't get an education, and without an education you're always one paycheck away from homelessness. It's a way that society has devised to allow the poor an opportunity to better themselves, which most do eventually, contrary to conservative propaganda. It could be YOU applying for food stamps one of these days.

[dig420]

In 1968, Richard Nixon won the White House. He did it in a shameful way -- by dividing Americans against one another, stirring up racial prejudices and bringing out the worst in people.

They called it the "Southern Strategy," and the Republicans have been using it ever since. Nixon pioneered it, and Ronald Reagan perfected it, using phrases like "racial quotas" and "welfare queens" to convince white Americans that minorities were to blame for all of America's problems.

The Republican Party would never win elections if they came out and said their core agenda was about selling America piece by piece to their campaign contributors and making sure that wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of a few.

To distract people from their real agenda, they run elections based on race, dividing us, instead of uniting us.

But these politics do worse than that -- they fracture the very soul of who we are as a country.


------ Howard Dean

[dig420]

Originally posted by sperbonzo



I'm not trying to make this personal at all, but if you don't think that the Democrats don't do EXACTLY what you are talking about...

getting people elected regardless of the cost...

no core issue, they'll expand their campaign to accomodate any disreputable group that will associate with them ....

etc, etc, etc....

how many KKK members do you think vote Democrat? How many pontificating moralists (besides Leibermann) consider themselves liberal. There are many, many types of people that are not welcome in the Democratic Party and in fact that's what the Southern Strategy was all about. Southern racists no longer felt comfortable in the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party didn't feel comfortable with them. You could say that the Democratic Party gave up on the southerners for purely ethical reasons and the Republicans gladly welcomed them, which says something about both parties.


Face it, conservatives are the bad guys. You are the bad guy.

[Rich]

Originally posted by dig420

The Republican Party would never win elections if they came out and said their core agenda was about selling America piece by piece to their campaign contributors and making sure that wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of a few.

Dean said that?

[12clicks]

Originally posted by nicchick
12 Clicks
There's an old saying that you should commit to memory-
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you're an idiot, than to open it and remove all doubt."

My memory isn't what it used to be. Can you just repeat it to me everytime you hand me my fries at the drive through window?

[12clicks]

Originally posted by dig420

The Republican Party would never win elections if they came out and said their core agenda was about selling America piece by piece to their campaign contributors and making sure that wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of a few.


------ Howard Dean

ahahahaha, yeah. this clown is the next dem to lose in a landslide.

[dig420]

Originally posted by 12clicks


ahahahaha, yeah. this clown is the next dem to lose in a landslide.

Brilliant rebuttal Ronnie, you never let me down.

Rich, yep he did and it looks like he's going to be the guy since he got the Gore endorsement. I like a strong guy like that in the race, it's next best thing to James Carville going for it ;)

[sperbonzo]

dig420 I find it interesting that you attach race with welfare....I never did, and I don't in my mind either. I'm perfectly aware of the facts regarding welfare in this country. I try to read sources from ALL sides of the issue, not just the once that reinforce my own pre-existingviews.

As for me being on welfare someday....you should be careful to know the person you're talking to. After the Gulf war, when I got out of the army, I WAS homeless, broke, and jobless in LA (in 93 when the unemployment rate was 14%). I did what it took to get myself a job. I dug through the trash to get the classifieds, I walked up to 10 miles to go to interviews (hiding my stuff in the dumpster behind the building. After a few months I got a job and I got out of the city park where I was sleeping. A few months later I became the assist manager of the phone room. I went back to the park and offered EVERY single person that I had known there a job. Not ONE showed up.


Now, 10 years later, I have worked my ass off.....I have a brand new 330 ci convertable, a boat, and a place on the water in Miami. Nobody gave me shit....and I worked like a mother f$#@ to get here. (I haven't had a vacation in about 4 years).

So don't tell me about what would happen if my luck changed. I already know. I would work my ass off and get myself out of it.

[Rich]

Originally posted by 12clicks


ahahahaha, yeah. this clown is the next dem to lose in a landslide.

You call getting the majority of the popular vote losing by a landslide?

[Rich]

Originally posted by dig420


Brilliant rebuttal Ronnie, you never let me down.

Rich, yep he did and it looks like he's going to be the guy since he got the Gore endorsement. I like a strong guy like that in the race, it's next best thing to James Carville going for it ;)

That's 12dicks for you, he has yet to post a single valid argument for anything but his use of lame one liners and the smile is priceless. At least he seems to think so.

[Rich]

Originally posted by sperbonzo
dig420 I find it interesting that you attach race with welfare....I never did, and I don't in my mind either. I'm perfectly aware of the facts regarding welfare in this country. I try to read sources from ALL sides of the issue, not just the once that reinforce my own pre-existingviews.

As for me being on welfare someday....you should be careful to know the person you're talking to. After the Gulf war, when I got out of the army, I WAS homeless, broke, and jobless in LA (in 93 when the unemployment rate was 14%). I did what it took to get myself a job. I dug through the trash to get the classifieds, I walked up to 10 miles to go to interviews (hiding my stuff in the dumpster behind the building. After a few months I got a job and I got out of the city park where I was sleeping. A few months later I became the assist manager of the phone room. I went back to the park and offered EVERY single person that I had known there a job. Not ONE showed up.


Now, 10 years later, I have worked my ass off.....I have a brand new 330 ci convertable, a boat, and a place on the water in Miami. Nobody gave me shit....and I worked like a mother f$#@ to get here. (I haven't had a vacation in about 4 years).

So don't tell me about what would happen if my luck changed. I already know. I would work my ass off and get myself out of it.

What if you got cancer before you made your money? Or lost your legs or went blind in the gulf war. Any of your war buddies have Gulf War Syndrom? How's the GOP taking care of them now? I fail to see how tax breaks for Enron will help them, but maybe I'm stupid.

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by Rich



What if you got cancer before you made your money? Or lost your legs or went blind in the gulf war. Any of your war buddies have Gulf War Syndrom? How's the GOP taking care of them now? I fail to see how tax breaks for Enron will help them, but maybe I'm stupid.

Whatever you say...there are plenty of economists that would agree that what you are saying is stupid.....I try to be agreeable.



(By the way....Why does Bush get blamed for Enron when they were CAUGHT on his watch, but under Clinton they were happily getting away with malfeasence? That never made sense to me....maybe I'm stupid also? )

[Ironhorse]

Once again, typical conservative bullshit. Looking for a fire where there isn't one. The democrats have only ONE agenda this time: it's to get Bush out PERIOD

Your divide and conquer, "let you and him fight" techniques will not work this time.

[Ironhorse]

Originally posted by sperbonzo
(By the way....Why does Bush get blamed for Enron when they were CAUGHT on his watch, but under Clinton they were happily getting away with malfeasence? That never made sense to me....maybe I'm stupid also? )

Duh, you just might be, I didn't say it, you did.

Bush is not getting flak over Enron because it happened on his watch, but because of his and a certain 'out of sight' vice president and his business connections to Enron.

[RB Content]

IF you are a Republican conservative how do you justify the christian rights attempts to put you out of biz? Or do you now believe that the christian right is not heavily involved in the consevative movement or Neo cons that are in office now?

I mean how do you justify it in your head?

Not talking about fiscally because you know what if your in jail aint no big deal whether they are more biz friendly or not.

Mat

[$5 submissions]

Originally posted by Rambozo
Yeah those pesky liberals-
Let's get rid of them all.
This country will be much better off when the country
is COMPLETELY run by the giant corporations and Christian Conservatives.
Let's do away with all those stupid environmental
laws that hurt Corporate profits.
And let's get rid of that First Amendment and let Jerry Falwell,Pat Robertson and John Ashhahahahaha decide what we can see, say and put on the internet.
Any adult webmaster who claims to be a conservative
is either a moron or a hypocrite. A REAL conservative wouldn't touch this business with a 10 foot pole.

[Rich]

Originally posted by sperbonzo



Whatever you say...there are plenty of economists that would agree that what you are saying is stupid.....I try to be agreeable.



(By the way....Why does Bush get blamed for Enron when they were CAUGHT on his watch, but under Clinton they were happily getting away with malfeasence? That never made sense to me....maybe I'm stupid also? )

I don't think there's a maybe involved, you are stupid. Bush gets blamed for Enron because the criminal was his good friend and #1 campaign donator, Kenny Boy, who helped make major decisions in his administration. And, what do you mean CAUGHT? The company collapsed. Is he in jail now? Fuck no, but Tommy Chong sure is.

It's amazing, people really have to talk slowly and with very small words for republicans to understand anything. I guess years of watching Rush and Chris Matthews have really dumb'd you guys down beyond the point of normal comprehension. Nothing you've said so far makes sense. I guess when your President only has a grade 3 reading skills that's to be expected.

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by Rich


I don't think there's a maybe involved, you are stupid. Bush gets blamed for Enron because the criminal was his good friend and #1 campaign donator, Kenny Boy, who helped make major decisions in his administration. And, what do you mean CAUGHT? The company collapsed. Is he in jail now? Fuck no, but Tommy Chong sure is.

It's amazing, people really have to talk slowly and with very small words for republicans to understand anything. I guess years of watching Rush and Chris Matthews have really dumb'd you guys down beyond the point of normal comprehension. Nothing you've said so far makes sense. I guess when your President only has a grade 3 reading skills that's to be expected.

Why do liberals always feel the need to dive right into personal attacks? Particularly against people they don't even know and know nothing about....

All I can say to you is.....Good luck with THAT whole thing.

[sperbonzo]

and by the way....please just remember that both sides have their fair share of "conspiracy" books.

Just do your best to be open minded and not so overwhelmed by the left-wing view that you don't bother to look at any other source at all.

[Rich]

Originally posted by sperbonzo


Why do liberals always feel the need to dive right into personal attacks? Particularly against people they don't even know and know nothing about....

All I can say to you is.....Good luck with THAT whole thing.

I'm not a liberal, I just hate Bush and the current American Repulican party. Anyone who supports them is a fucking blind moron, don't try to blame your ignorance on me.

[sperbonzo]

Originally posted by Rich


I'm not a liberal, I just hate Bush and the current American Repulican party. Anyone who supports them is a fucking blind moron, don't try to blame your ignorance on me.

I think that the important thing here is that you're not bitter about it........

and that's......good.

[davidd]

Originally posted by Rich
That's because Liberman is a crazy neo-conservative like the people currently in office. He shouldn't have been Gore's running mate last time, Gore knows it now. A Dean/Clark ticket will own GWB and that's all that matters.

Do you honestly believe what you typed above?

[Rich]

Originally posted by sperbonzo



I think that the important thing here is that you're not bitter about it........

and that's......good.

Bitter? More like pissed off. Who can look at Bush's track record and not be pissed off? Stupid people, that's who. Or people who are just so afraid to admin that they ever supported the wrong person that they'll turn a blind eye to anything. I'm sorry you don't think I should be attacking you personally, but any so called adult webmaster who supports the Bush regime should be curb stomped, not debated with.

[RB Content]

Am I right in believeing that you dont answer my question BECAUSE you have defense of being in support of the neo-cons?

I just have a hard time undertanding why its better to vote conservative when the want to put me in jail? How can fiscal policy out weigh my freedom?

[Rich]

Originally posted by davidd



Do you honestly believe what you typed above?

Which part, about Dean/Clark being able to beat Bush, or about Lieberman being a neo-con? Both are true.

[RB Content]

I say m"me" as we are all in the same boat. We can stay legal and yet they STILL want us in jail. How can you even think of supporting that.

I am open let me know what I am missing?

[davidd]

Originally posted by dig420
In 1968, Richard Nixon won the White House. He did it in a shameful way -- by dividing Americans against one another, stirring up racial prejudices and bringing out the worst in people.

They called it the "Southern Strategy," and the Republicans have been using it ever since. Nixon pioneered it, and Ronald Reagan perfected it, using phrases like "racial quotas" and "welfare queens" to convince white Americans that minorities were to blame for all of America's problems.

The Republican Party would never win elections if they came out and said their core agenda was about selling America piece by piece to their campaign contributors and making sure that wealth and power is concentrated in the hands of a few.

To distract people from their real agenda, they run elections based on race, dividing us, instead of uniting us.

But these politics do worse than that -- they fracture the very soul of who we are as a country.


------ Howard Dean

Hmmm, do you have the right party? I would seriously rethink who are the fear mongers and race baiters.

Who was it that put out the commercials blaming Bush for chaining that guy behind his truck in Texas?

Who is it every election that tells the senior citizens the 'Social Security Trust Fund' will be taken from them?

Who is it every election that says the mean old GOP is going to take your welfare checks?

Who is it every election that says the GOP is going to stop illegal immigration?

Now on another issue, since you brought up Nixon, I will bring up LBJ, and was he any better than Nixon?

Who was the first president to saturate his cabinet with non-whites?

[Rich]

Originally posted by RB Content
Am I right in believeing that you dont answer my question BECAUSE you have defense of being in support of the neo-cons?

I just have a hard time undertanding why its better to vote conservative when the want to put me in jail? How can fiscal policy out weigh my freedom?

You're crazy if you're waiting for a reasonable answer. All adult webmasters who are Republicans have no consideration of anything besides the images the GOP presents. They don't really know, care about, or understand any policies or issues. They all think they're going to be rich cowboys in a country with no black people if they vote for Bush.

[Pornwolf]

All of this talk is for nothing. Bush is a shoo-in for the next election. I'm not happy about it and I will vote against him but I'm not blind to the facts.

[RB Content]

Thanks Rich Understood they have no reason to like them so they will chew there own foot off if it looked like a hotdog

[dig420]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by davidd


Hmmm, do you have the right party? I would seriously rethink who are the fear mongers and race baiters.

Who was it that put out the commercials blaming Bush for chaining that guy behind his truck in Texas?

-- does the name Willie Horton ring a bell? And I've never seen or heard of this commercial you're referring to.

Who is it every election that tells the senior citizens the 'Social Security Trust Fund' will be taken from them?

-- It will. Republicans are constantly trying to divert money from SS into other programs. This is fact, read a newspaper. Why do you think Gore was going on and on about a lockbox during his campaign.

Who is it every election that says the mean old GOP is going to take your welfare checks?

-- They are. They want to kill all entitlement programs.

Who is it every election that says the GOP is going to stop illegal immigration?

-- They try. Don't you remember Buchanan and his big fence?

Now on another issue, since you brought up Nixon, I will bring up LBJ, and was he any better than Nixon?

-- tons better on every issue besides Vietnam.

Who was the first president to saturate his cabinet with non-whites?

-- Uncle Toms are worse than racists.

so now that you've been shown that Repubs are in fact behind all these initiatives you abhor, I suppose you'll vote Democrat in the next election right?

no. Like I said, people that choose to be conservatives do it for reasons that have nothing to do with the actual state of the Union. It's a much more personal and disturbed thing. Especially conservative pornographers.

I can't imagine what mental contortions it must require to be that Sybil-like.

[dig420]

Originally posted by Rich


You're crazy if you're waiting for a reasonable answer. All adult webmasters who are Republicans have no consideration of anything besides the images the GOP presents. They don't really know, care about, or understand any policies or issues. They all think they're going to be rich cowboys in a country with no black people if they vote for Bush.

Sad but true.

[davidd]

Originally posted by Rich


You're crazy if you're waiting for a reasonable answer. All adult webmasters who are Republicans have no consideration of anything besides the images the GOP presents. They don't really know, care about, or understand any policies or issues. They all think they're going to be rich cowboys in a country with no black people if they vote for Bush.

I do know, care, and understand politics and issues on all levels dating back to the founding of the country. That is why I can discuss these issues with others (_you_) who are clearly blinded.

I am already rich.

I live in a Caribbean nation that is majority controlled and populated by black people of ALL origins, and love it.

I have no want or desire to be a cowboy.

So, let's hear the next batch of insults you decide to unleash on people who truly believe in what the U.S. was intended to be. I am not a GOP cheerleader as you may want to believe. You have been bamboozled a long time ago to close your mind to anyone who may think differently than your socialist views.