Ann Coulter calls Edwards a Faggot.

[! B L U E WAR R I O R..!]

Is there something particularly offensive about calling someone something that he/she obviously is not?  Edwards is married with kids.  Despite his fantastic hair, everyone, even Ann, knows hes not gay.  Sooo she called him a faggot, people call Bush a nazi and war crimminal all the time, both equally untrue statements.  Will you all get up an arms about such comments that serve only to cheapen the severity of the holocaust?

Bush is a war criminal, though.

some called george washington a war criminal...though.

yet he like george bush was a commander in chief...

even though he bush calls himself a humble "decider" he is really a Commander.


"the 911 Commander-in-Chief"

[Sell Out]

Is there something particularly offensive about calling someone something that he/she obviously is not?  Edwards is married with kids.  Despite his fantastic hair, everyone, even Ann, knows hes not gay.  Sooo she called him a faggot, people call Bush a nazi and war crimminal all the time, both equally untrue statements.  Will you all get up an arms about such comments that serve only to cheapen the severity of the holocaust?

Bush is a war criminal, though.

some called george washington a war criminal...though.

yet he like george bush was a commander in chief...

even though he bush calls himself a humble "decider" he is really a Commander.


"the 911 Commander-in-Chief"

I think to compare Washington to Bush is a tad misguided...
For starters, the American Revolution was about representation for (what would become) the US.  Iraq was first about WMD, then about Saddam Hussein, then about Iraqi Freedom(c).  W could learn a lesson or two from Washington's cherry tree incident.

[! B L U E WAR R I O R..!]

"the 911 Commander-in-Chief"

I think to compare Washington to Bush is a tad misguided...
For starters, the American Revolution was about representation for (what would become) the US.  Iraq was first about WMD, then about Saddam Hussein, then about Iraqi Freedom(c).  W could learn a lesson or two from Washington's cherry tree incident.

aye think it is easy to compare bush to washington...both as commander-in-chief moved the forces of our people's independent resolve to defend our interests...for starters, "freedom of the people" is a big interest america has in the world politique...the kurds were systematically being irradicated...towns at a time were being vaporized...even gassed...sound familiar?  bush stopped this...

and the war with iraq was also representation for {what will later become} Kurdish Iraq, an area of huge economic interest to the united states.

the continued war in iraq was about three things:...a totalitarian nepotistic regime...human genocide and hydrocarbons...

was aye the only one who thought this was why we were BACK there to finish the job?

sorry...bush has only done what aye hoped he would do...even delaying any comment on the israeli defense of its region, last summer, was a good move by bush... if iraq simmers down sooner than later...that will be the feather in his legacy cap....for now...the kurdish north is safe from the furor.


and aye see you conveniently left out the rooting out of the taliban's control over a country and the targets painted on dr. ayman zawahiri's and osama bin laden's heads.aka AFGHANISTAN.


and in case you haven't noticed the crescentors have been thwarted covertly and publicly by the policies bush has put in place...

not to mention the FACT that there have been no attacks on american soil since bush put his "don't tread on me" warning out there...


trust me when aye write how this translates to the "crescenting guerrillas":..."if you harm the hair of one american citizen on american soil...we are going to go to find out who was behind it and go to your neighborhood and fuching level it.  period."

aye don't know if, badlikemug, you think bush was lying when he conveyed this...aye thought he was speaking sober truth...

now ask yourself...am aye wrong?

[ctg31]

You know who else used a terrorist event to seize unprecedented power, stomp on civil liberties, and invade other nations?  Hitler.  Maybe the people AJF mentioned weren't so far off, huh?

[annab]

"the 911 Commander-in-Chief"

I think to compare Washington to Bush is a tad misguided...
For starters, the American Revolution was about representation for (what would become) the US.  Iraq was first about WMD, then about Saddam Hussein, then about Iraqi Freedom(c).  W could learn a lesson or two from Washington's cherry tree incident.

aye think it is easy to compare bush to washington...both as commander-in-chief moved the forces of our people's independent resolve to defend our interests...for starters, "freedom of the people" is a big interest america has in the world politique...the kurds were systematically being irradicated...towns at a time were being vaporized...even gassed...sound familiar?  bush stopped this...

and the war with iraq was also representation for {what will later become} Kurdish Iraq, an area of huge economic interest to the united states.

the continued war in iraq was about three things:...a totalitarian nepotistic regime...human genocide and hydrocarbons...

was aye the only one who thought this was why we were BACK there to finish the job?

sorry...bush has only done what aye hoped he would do...even delaying any comment on the israeli defense of its region, last summer, was a good move by bush... if iraq simmers down sooner than later...that will be the feather in his legacy cap....for now...the kurdish north is safe from the furor.


and aye see you conveniently left out the rooting out of the taliban's control over a country and the targets painted on dr. ayman zawahiri's and osama bin laden's heads.aka AFGHANISTAN.


and in case you haven't noticed the crescentors have been thwarted covertly and publicly by the policies bush has put in place...

not to mention the FACT that there have been no attacks on american soil since bush put his "don't tread on me" warning out there...


trust me when aye write how this translates to the "crescenting guerrillas":..."if you harm the hair of one american citizen on american soil...we are going to go to find out who was behind it and go to your neighborhood and fuching level it.  period."

aye don't know if, badlikemug, you think bush was lying when he conveyed this...aye thought he was speaking sober truth...

now ask yourself...am aye wrong?

Yes.  About so many things that it's not even worth starting to go into.

[AJF]

You know who else used a terrorist event to seize unprecedented power, stomp on civil liberties, and invade other nations?  Hitler.  Maybe the people AJF mentioned weren't so far off, huh?

I find your comparison personally offensive and outlandishly misguided...You should consider some sensitivities before making such a claim.

[dashrashi]

Comparisons like that are always rhetorical and I wouldn't recommend getting too het up over them.

[AJF]

Comparisons like that are always rhetorical and I wouldn't recommend getting too het up over them.

I would usually agree with you, but the point of the thred is kindof all about getting too het up over things.  And I do find the comparison personally offensive, so why not get het up? I find the comparison much much much more offensive than using the "f" word, in my opinion.  It isnt fair to say one is offensive and one isn't.

[! B L U E WAR R I O R..!]

You know who else used a terrorist event to seize unprecedented power, stomp on civil liberties, and invade other nations?  Hitler.  Maybe the people AJF mentioned weren't so far off, huh?

yes but you don't have a very good analogy in that hitler gassed his own countrymen and attempted to eradicate a culture from the planet...that analogy above is more suited to saddam hussein...

hope this helps you.

[! B L U E WAR R I O R..!]

"the 911 Commander-in-Chief"

I think to compare Washington to Bush is a tad misguided...
For starters, the American Revolution was about representation for (what would become) the US.  Iraq was first about WMD, then about Saddam Hussein, then about Iraqi Freedom(c).  W could learn a lesson or two from Washington's cherry tree incident.

aye think it is easy to compare bush to washington...both as commander-in-chief moved the forces of our people's independent resolve to defend our interests...for starters, "freedom of the people" is a big interest america has in the world politique...the kurds were systematically being irradicated...towns at a time were being vaporized...even gassed...sound familiar?  bush stopped this...

and the war with iraq was also representation for {what will later become} Kurdish Iraq, an area of huge economic interest to the united states.

the continued war in iraq was about three things:...a totalitarian nepotistic regime...human genocide and hydrocarbons...

was aye the only one who thought this was why we were BACK there to finish the job?

sorry...bush has only done what aye hoped he would do...even delaying any comment on the israeli defense of its region, last summer, was a good move by bush... if iraq simmers down sooner than later...that will be the feather in his legacy cap....for now...the kurdish north is safe from the furor.


and aye see you conveniently left out the rooting out of the taliban's control over a country and the targets painted on dr. ayman zawahiri's and osama bin laden's heads.aka AFGHANISTAN.


and in case you haven't noticed the crescentors have been thwarted covertly and publicly by the policies bush has put in place...

not to mention the FACT that there have been no attacks on american soil since bush put his "don't tread on me" warning out there...


trust me when aye write how this translates to the "crescenting guerrillas":..."if you harm the hair of one american citizen on american soil...we are going to go to find out who was behind it and go to your neighborhood and fuching level it.  period."

aye don't know if, badlikemug, you think bush was lying when he conveyed this...aye thought he was speaking sober truth...

now ask yourself...am aye wrong?

Yes.  About so many things that it's not even worth starting to go into.

why? because what aye mentioned is actually happening in the world...and criticising what aye wrote won't change anything and campaigning against it is futile?

aye think the other positions and rationale are wrong...you are on the losing side of an argument and you should give up...

so your answer makes my stance stronger.