Comments Posted By Svenghouli
Displaying 31 To 40 Of 82 Comments
PC,
You never attacked my comparison between Coulter and the Left's love child Michael Moore. And yes in 2004 the Democrats were openly in love with Moore.
"A ridiculous assertation. Both sides use people effected by this tragedy to bring a human element to it. Ann herself invoked the name of her friend Olsen. 9/11 was personal. That does not mean we attack the dead and their relatives. I cannot believe anyone would defend her comments. Yet the right is. Paid political consultants are defending what she said. It’s nuts."
Ann actually did not attack the dead, she attacked the widows who are still alive. In fact, she didn't attack all of the widows she just attacked a small group. She claimed they are using their position to curry favor for the Democrats. I am not condoning it, but that is why she is doing that. Both parties do use use victims on both sides of the political equation to put a human face on a tragedy or incident. However, they also tend to milk something for all it is worth. Does that make them wrong? I am not certain, because that is simply the nature of the political machine.
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 14.06.2006 @ 12:20
Bruce you are right. She stated that it was impossible to debate with liberals when they would bring out orphans and widows to the political front line. She claimed that any attempt at dialogue would appear cruel. Victims political sides of the tragedy that have been exploited. At least that is how I see it.
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 13.06.2006 @ 23:29
PC,
you are right about the difference between Ann Coulter and George Carlin. you must realize that Coulter is a political pundit in the same vein as Michael Moore, a hate monger that thrives off adversity. How about you go to Daily Kos, Moveon, and Thruthout and attack Michael Moore and the pile of dribble known as "The Inconvenient Truth". There you will see the similarities between the left and the right.
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 13.06.2006 @ 23:18
Just a side note, isn't it ironic that a person who despises consumerism is on Leno to promote a movie?
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 13.06.2006 @ 15:05
GUANTANAMO SUICIDES A STAIN ON AMERICAN JUSTICE
If Gitmo is in fact a high security prison, wouldn't there be cameras? To prove innocence or the guilt of those involved wouldn't they release the tapes?
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 12.06.2006 @ 16:56
SOMETHING MISSING THIS WAY COMES
Not even Fox News issued a poll.
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 12.06.2006 @ 01:35
SPINNING THEIR WAY TO DEFEAT IN NOVEMBER
Andy,
The reasons why we lost in Vietnam is summed up in this phrase, "War of attrition". Many have argued including Walter McDougall that the game plan was flawed. McDougall stated that the U.S. was use a prevent defense while we tried to win of the over the populous with public works. You know build schools, roads, and other acts of generosity. We did this instead of invading North Vietnam. It's messed up, the U.S. won the Tet Offensive, but it was deemed a loss.
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 10.06.2006 @ 17:13
Ray, are you in the same boat as those across the pond that welcomed Hugo Chavez with open arms? The same Chavez who is openly striving to jack up oil prices. The same Chavez who has had noted Anti-Semites advising him. The same Chavez who supports Libya and Iran unconditionally. The same Chavez who supports drug exports and the terrorists groups (FARC)that are funded by them?
david minzer,
You know answer why Rick can't attack Scrapiron. It is the same reason why the majority of the liberals in America refuse to disown Michael Moore? Saddam did harbor terrorists, but I do agree with you on one thing. If someone has evidence about the direct connection between Saddam and 9/11, please present it.
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 9.06.2006 @ 23:04
Many think debate about what is considered a slaughter is akin to the "problem of the heap", "problem of baldness", and my personal favorite "problem of insanity due to personal politics"(how far left or right does a person have to be certified mentally disturbed).
However, considering that only 2500 have died is no small feat in itself. Consider World War I if you want talk about slaughter look at the Battle or Verdun, the Battle of Somme, and the Battle of Passchendaele. The Battle of Verdun had a total 220,000 deaths for both sides. There were days where there were over twenty thousand deaths.
The Battle of the Bulge in WWII is another example of a single battle that was worse than the entire Iraq war/occupation. The US and Britain had over 10,000 deaths in a span of one and a half months.
While it is terrible that anyone has to die, the difference bewteen the slaughter's of past battles to the one of the entire Iraq conflict which is over three years old now is staggering.
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 9.06.2006 @ 16:47
IRAQI GOVERNMENT FIDDLES WHILE THE COUNTRY BURNS
Wouldn't it be wonderful if the Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki would reference Moussedeh? Afterall, before the British the Iran and Iraq was simply Persia. Of course, he would pull it off without the melodrama. Also, this time the U.S. will not have to cut deals with the British about paying them back for support in the Korean War.
Comment Posted By Svenghouli On 6.06.2006 @ 00:40
