http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/102008/10052008/412515McCain a sexist? Absolutely!
I find the latest assertion by the McCain campaign that Barack Obama is sexist to be laughable. Consider how John McCain values women in his personal life. His first wife was a swimsuit model who was faithful to him while he was a POW.
McCain divorced her after she had a disfiguring accident. Nine months before the divorce, while still living with his first wife, McCain began dating his current wife, another model who was as wealthy as she was beautiful--and 18 years younger than him.
Now, he has selected a former beauty queen to become his running mate.
In 1998, McCain told a despicable joke in front of a fundraising audience, mocking Chelsea Clinton's looks.
Certainly John McCain acted honorably as a prisoner of war. But one must wonder about his superficial and dishonorable treatment of women who can't win a beauty contest.
Mark Melnyk
Fredericksburg
An admirable idea (not shared by the US, mind, since their intention was to help themselves not Afghanistan) not backed up with sufficient research and thought, in this particular case. Suppose that was the American intention. How long before they invaded? Not long enough given the potential, and realised, consequences.Enteebee said:Well, in a perfect scenario for such an argument... say with Afghanistan. Great injustice was done there, the people were suffering and they are suffering more as we try to correct such injustice. The hope would be that we could (though we probably won't given the present situation) set the nation up for a prosperous future whereby the people of Afghanistan never need to know such fear again.
Oh but they also needed to invade to hunt down Bin Laden, so time was pressing. Or should they have not gone after him? Idk I think it's legitimate for a nation to attack another who is actively supporting someone who launched a successful attack on their citizens, it's war?Nebuchanezzar said:At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt.
An admirable idea (not shared by the US, mind, since their intention was to help themselves not Afghanistan) not backed up with sufficient research and thought, in this particular case. Suppose that was the American intention. How long before they invaded? Not long enough given the potential, and realised, consequences.
A direct attack against citizenry responded to by an attack against military/governmental structures? Also, unlike Iraq both the initial invasion and the current occupation does have the support of the populace (afaik from surveys and such) http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/afghan-survey2007.html#rightNebuchanezzar said:I don't think that hunting down Bin Laden was the most pressing thing for them to do. Sadly, war on terror or not, terrorism is continuing (and did continue) full steam ahead.
IMO a greater evil was committed in invading Afghanistan than in the initial 9/11 attack.
I have a crush on tina fey.chicky_pie said:http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/vp-debate-open-palin-biden/727421/
Tina Fey doing the Biden/Palin debate.
LEGEND
c'mon buddy? style? is it cause she makes you laugh? lol, she is a bombo.JaredR said:I like Palin's style: the way she speaks and the way she looks. lol.
VOTE ONE Vice President Milf!JaredR said:I like Palin's style: the way she speaks and the way she looks. lol.
no, I don't believe in isolationismEnteebee said:- Should we only care about injustice that occurs close to home?
- Should we only act where we fear for our own safety?
the United States got gamed by the neocons, who themselves fell into a trapGood afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances.
...
I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.
That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics
...You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.
I see again you fail to notice that my comments were directed towards Nebuchadnezzar and Bigboyjames's opposition to the war in Afghanistan.Captin gay said:no, I don't believe in isolationism
but america was already fighting another war
I believe B. Obama's 2002 speech elucidates the antiwar movements position on Iraq perfectly:
the United States got gamed by the neocons, who themselves fell into a trap