Say Anything Blog

maybe when the war protests go on annually for 24 years they’ll be relegated to the back pages.

P: You just don’t get it, do you?  The war protestors have been at it since the Sixties, in one form or the other, so your point is in error.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

Oh, I get it R108, and my point is not in error.  Your protestors have been at it for 24 years “in one form or another”.  Nothin’ new here, move along.

P: You don’t get it, and my point is right on the mark.  You said that the reason WaPo gave differential coverage is because of the length of time the killing of the unborn has been protested; this is completely untrue, but the antiwar fools have been at it a lot longer.  It’s pure propaganda on the part of WaPo, nothing more.  They support the antiwar fools, and don’t support those who favor letting unborn babies live. They are not reporting the news, they are fomenting leftie propaganda.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

Puzzle, like there’s something new about socialists and communist apologists opposing U.S. military operations.

Like there’s something new about Jane Fonda being anti-war.

Personally, I’ll believe the media is playing fair when they start showing all the signs those anti-war protesters hold and reporting all the things their leaders say.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Which is worse, ignorance or apathy?

“I don’t know and don’t care.”

Nowadays falsehood stands erect and truth lies prostrate on the ground.

You’re all just pissed that the rally made the front page and old hash abortion protesters didn’t.  As I said, it is just possible that the abortion protesters were the same as they have been for the past 24 years so what’s news above the fold of that.

However, with the Iraq war front and center in the US now including the presidency, the congress and the fact that the people spoke on November 7.

And don’t bother Rob, with the argument that the election wasn’t about the war.  No one’s buying that argument and you can make until you’re blue in the face, but the major issue of the election was in fact the war.

but the major issue of the election was in fact the war.

Right.  Because Abaramoff, Foley and Cunningham had nothing to do with it.  Nor did the fact that the exit polls showed a majority of voters no longer identifying Republicans as the party of lower taxes and limited government.

Get a clue, Puzzle.  Just because the liberals in the media choose to “paint a picture” of an event that happens to meet with your pre-conceived notions doesn’t mean it’s true.

My view will be vindicated when the Dems lose a bunch of ground in 2008.  They got a lot of low-hanging Republican fruit, but they won’t have that benefit this next time.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob, I said the major issue was Iraq; Abramoff, Ney and the overspending Rs et al were important to the demise the Republican majority.

Is that your prediction for 08 and should we take alook at your 06 predictions.  I think I’ll wait since it is way too early for prediction but you go ahead and predict all you want.  You were wrong on November, boy were you wrong.  I was wrong as well, by underpredicting the numbers in the house and senate, you were really wrong.

Puzzle, you’ll believe what you want.  I was wrong on the last election, but only because I wasn’t so much looking at the corruption angle either.  I was looking at the war, but the election wasn’t about the war.  The election was about corrupt Republicans spending like Democrats.

You saw my post right after the election.  The key 15 seats the Dems picked up were all tainted by corruption.  If Iraq was the big issue you would have seen Republican losses outside that circle of corruption.  We didn’t.

But, saying the election was about Iraq is convenient for your side’s current political agenda so there’s no point in even talking about this with you.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

You are as ignorant as you are partisan.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Is that the arrogant namecalling part of you talking there Rob?

There is alot NEW in Technology! That is pretty bad when abortion is refered to as “old hash"…

Is that the arrogant namecalling part of you talking there Rob?

It’s a statement of fact.  I’ve yet to hear you depart from a Democrat talking point.

And before you accuse me of the same, let me say that I’ve differed with my party over the minimum wage, prescription drugs, campaign finance and illegal immigration, just to name a few.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Let’s see what the conservatives say about the election;

It voted against Bush’s war of democratic imperialism and the mismanagement of that war. It voted against Jack Abramoff, Duke Cunningham, and Mark Foley. It voted against a party that postures as conservative while indulging in a six-year pig-out on the taxpayers’ tab, the altarpiece of which was a $250 million “bridge to nowhere.”

And what do you think is at the top of the list at the annual Republican retreat this weekend.. hm.... ah go ahead and take a guess; I don’t think it’s the minimum wage.. I don’t think it’s the estate tax.... I don’t think it’s NCLB....
ding ding ding, yes indeed, it is the Iraq war.

Which talking points memo did you copy/paste that from, Puzzle?  I can’t find that text on the internet.

And who the hell is American Conservative magazine?  Never heard of ‘em.  Sounds awfully Buchananite to me.

And yeah, of course Republicans are going to be talking about the war.  A lot of the cowardly Republicans are probably going to flee from their support of it, but that won’t be because they now feel the war was a mistake or that we can’t win.  They’ll flee because they know no matter how hard we try and no matter how much success we have in Iraq from here on out the media is going to ensure that the public perception of the war is one of failure.

Just like with Vietnam.  You know, we had a shift in tactics in Vietnam too.  WE got a new commander (just like now) and we started seeing a lot of victories in that war.  The problem is that the media refused to report those victories, and Congress (typically more concerned with political implications than sound policy) chickened out and we retreated.

Allowing the bloodbath that followed as the Communists massacred the opposition.

You won’t be willing to acknowledge any of that, though, because the current story being painted by the media is convenient for you.

Political expediency trumps what’s best for the country, right Puzzle?  Just so long as the Dems keep winning elections it won’t matter what happens in Iraq once we leave.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Actually Rob, it came right from the American Conservative magazine no need for talking points when Google finds it all for you unlike you Rob. 

But now I’m off to watch the union awards show.  Have a great night.

Actually Rob, it came right from the American Conservative magazine no need for talking points when Google finds it all for you unlike you Rob.

Actually, puzzle, that quote isn’t even on Google.  So why are you lying?  Why not just admit that you copied it out of some liberal talking points email?

You clearly didn’t find this through an internet search.

But now I’m off to watch the union awards show.

Great.  Hope you folks have a great time talking about how unions have lost 326,000 members this year.

Which union thug will be getting an award for that?

Have a great night.

I will.  You too.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I heard Obama is using union workers to make all his campaign stickers etc. Maybe he will be there tonight???

Puzzle,

FYI, Rob doesn’t dig Buchanan so quoting AmCon isn’t going to get you very far.

Oh it’s break time on the union awards show.  Actually Rob, I won’t wait for an apology from you.  I typed in a question about the election, the conservatives and up popped the American Conservative mag website with the article.  It was quoted from there.

Now I will await an apology from you, but again, I won’t hold my breath.  I know you have extensive history with getting talking points from various web bloggers, including your source on the hill. 

I’m waiting.........

ZsaZsa if you’re gonna quote me quote me correctly.  I said old hash protesters, not old hash abortion.

I could have sworn I saw Old hash abortion protesters. Sorry!

I typed in a question about the election, the conservatives and up popped the American Conservative mag website with the article.  It was quoted from there.

So then you won’t mind providing me a link to it.

Now I will await an apology from you, but again, I won’t hold my breath.

I’ll apologize when you link me to the article on the web.

I know you have extensive history with getting talking points from various web bloggers, including your source on the hill.

My opinions are my own.  That they often line up with the opinions of others is not something I can help.  What’s different between you and I is that I don’t have a problem criticizing my own party.

I’ve yet to hear you do the same.

FYI, Rob doesn’t dig Buchanan so quoting AmCon isn’t going to get you very far.

I figured it was Buchananite.

And who does dig Buchanan these days?  There’s a reason he’s on the political margins.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

It’s really simple, I typed this question into google:  Why did the Republicans lose on November 7, 2006? and here it is:

http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_12_04/buchanan.html

Rob wrote this:

Actually, puzzle, that quote isn’t even on Google.  So why are you lying?  Why not just admit that you copied it out of some liberal talking points email?

You clearly didn’t find this through an internet search.

Now I’ll wait for the apology rob,

I figured it was Buchananite.

And who does dig Buchanan these days?  There’s a reason he’s on the political margins.

Yeah, Buchanan founded it.

The same people who are behind Tancredo and Hunter.

Puzzlefeet said, Let’s see what the conservatives say about the election;

Since when did Buchanan equal “the conservatives”?

Only one person here takes that guy seriously as a conservative and we don’t consider that person (freerepublicans.com) to be a conservative himself.

Only one person here takes that guy seriously as a conservative and we don’t consider that person (freerepublicans.com) to be a conservative himself.

Yeah Puzzle, what were you thinking by quoting a non-conservative like Buchanan round these parts?  Don’t you know better?

Next time, send an IM to likwidshoe and ask him to run the conservative purity litmus test on the source that you cite, mmmkay?

/sarcasm/

Puzzle, my apologies.  I still think you copy/pasted it from a liberal talking points email given that emails like that always put the publication/date of the quote with it rather than just linking to it.

Which is why you didn’t link to it.  But whatever.  IT’s clearly online, so you get the benefit of the doubt.  I’m sorry.

But since when does Buchanan speak for all conservatives?  He is on the political margins.  Quoting him as some sort of arbiter for conservative thought is like holding up Ralph Nader as a spokesman for liberalism.

I’m not much on political labels, but Buchanan is hardly an authoritative (or objective) source.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

But since when does Buchanan speak for all conservatives?  He is on the political margins.  Quoting him as some sort of arbiter for conservative thought is like holding up Ralph Nader as a spokesman for liberalism.

Yeah Puzzle, how dare you quote a publication founded by someone who nearly was the GOP candidate for President in 10 years ago and won the New Hampshire Primary.

How could you think that by citing suck a fringe character you would gain credibility?

/sarcasm/

War Protesters:  “ 3,000 killed in three years”

Pro-Life protesters:  “33,000,000 killed in 33 years” (that is about 1,000,000 per year x 3 = 3,000,000.  Want pure numbers?  There they are.

Communism is evil

The same people who are behind Tancredo and Hunter.

The only people who court Buchanan are the leftie TV shows who use him as a token “Republican” who speaks out against the President.  He is not a conservative; he’s a reactionary.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

Rob: Google isn’t an objective source either; they are way to the left.  Check out their censorship for the ChiComs.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

He is not a conservative; he’s a reactionary.

Conservatism is a reactionary ideology.

The left pushes gay marraige, conservatives react.

The left pushes the killing of babies, conservatives react.

It just goes to show that there is huge disconnect between modern (neo) conservatives, and those who are traditional (paleo) conservatives.

Rob, that’s is no apology when you continue to lie.  Apology not accepted.  I told you where I got, it wasn’t good enough for you, you wanted more, I gave you the question I put into google and the cite for quote, and you continue to lie.  That, Rob, was no apology when you giveth and taketh at the same time.

I told you I didn’t use any talking points, period. I gave you the question I put into google and the cite from google.  You are truly pathetic when proven wrong, you just can’t admit without all the excuses.

Chief, They could care less about those numbers because the Supreme Court says it is OK. It makes me weak to see those numbers…

In the coverage against the war and for abortion, it strikes me as ironic.  We have some of the younger types here, as well as grizzled veterans I am sure.

How many of you remember the scenario of the GI or Marine that has survived his tour of duty in the ‘Nam, whether at Khe Sahn, I Corps, or on a PBR, only to, upon his return, be spat upon by some hippy at the bus station, where they call him ‘baby killer?’

These same smelly, useless hippies would march on Washington, NOW signs and clotheshangers held aloft, for the Woman’s Right to Choose.  But what it boils down to was the woman’s right to kill her own baby.

They were and are the babykillers, yet somehow feel themselves morally superior to those who have risked all and endured hell to defend the rights of others.

This is the DoubleThink
* that George Orwell wrote of in action.  And it continues to this day in almost every facet of Leftist thinking.

*

“To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself. That was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink.’

...for great justice

And the Taiwan scandal on Google’s mapsite.  They just “gave away the free island country to Communist China.  Thanks to many bloggers, they did reverse the giveaway.  Nice of them to enslave millions of free people.  Google=Communists.

Communism is evil

Why would the media report on the anti-abortion protests anyways, it’s not as if Bush cares to show up anyways.

free.  He cares.  There is presidence for this mode of delivery of message.
Zsa Zsa.  Thanks.  <sarcasm… now maybe if we could just get the Supreme Court to ‘authorize’ the congress’ next War Proclimation !
Move_Zig.  Thanks for your support and understanding.  That is exactly what this is> A woman’s “right” to kill children.  There are plenty of birth control methods out there now.  Most women are completely irresponsible and murderers as well as perverts and immoral teachers.  We had yet another case of a 59 year old principal—a female, and a 20something cheerleader’s coach—female involved with corrupting young girls!

Communism is evil

Conservatism is a reactionary ideology.

Only if you think that the founding of the United States of America was a reactionary act.  In fact, it was a revolutionary act, and conservatives, who believe in the founding principles of this country, are revolutionaries, standing for individual independence in this age of collective thinking.
Buchanan is no kind of conservative at all.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

With regard to citing sources it’s important to know Leftist methods of politics.  Politics for the Left is no gentlemen’s disagreement.  It is war by another means.  They commonly use lies and ad hominum attacks.  See: ’The Words They Use,’ by Balint Vazsonyi.

Lies, such as the ones the discredited Prof. Bellesiles pushed in his book ‘Arming America.’ The lies feminazi’s used in shrilly screaming that the Superbowl resulted in a spike of wife-battering due to an excess of testosterone, but which later exposed as a complete fabrication.  Lies the tree huggers used in planting the fur of an endangered species in a part of forest they wanted protected against development.

Another way of creating fear, uncertainty and doubt in the ranks of those who would oppose them, is to plant sources within the opponents ranks and make it seem as if the enemy line is crumbling.  A good discussion of Front Groups, Agents of Influence and hidden attribution is given in the book by Roy Godson and Richard Shultz - DEZINFORMATSIA: Soviet Active Measures.

The labels have changed (as they often do) but the methodologies of the Left have not.  These are the same Left-over Left that pushed for disarmament in the face of Soviet aggression, that made sure the West cut and ran from Rhodesia, from Angola, Mozambique and South Africa, from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, from Nicaragua, from Panama, from Iran and are now beating the Defeat Drum for Iraq.

“You shall know them by their works.”

I would not place too much stock in the source cited above.  True conservatives would stay home, or at worst hold their nose and vote for Bush and the GOP, even if we have become infested with RINO’s.  I suspect the quote cited above is essentially a Leftist who always was a Leftist.

Anne Coulter has written on this phenomenon, that is of the Left falsely attributing a source who is supposed to be a conservative, but later turns out to be a life-long Leftist.  Sorry, I don’t have the link that that particular op-ed however.

...for great justice

Only if you think that the founding of the United States of America was a reactionary act.  In fact, it was a revolutionary act, and conservatives, who believe in the founding principles of this country, are revolutionaries, standing for individual independence in this age of collective thinking.

Yeah, but you are using the modern meaning of conservatism to describe the classical version of liberalism.

The notion of Global Democratic Revolution was not in the American Conservative lexicon till after 9/11 - thus it is itself a reactionary ideology.

The Bush Doctrine of Regime Change is really a classically liberal notion.

The great irony is the group that has been actively opposing the notion of spreading a form of democracy across the world is the Democratic Party who say that “some people can’t handle democracy, so why force it upon them?”

We can see that this is a wholely racist belief, but it shows just how the meanings of these labels change over time.

America was founded on the belief that freedom was given to all mankind by the Creator - a classically liberal belief.  A Democratic Party that was claims to be built on the idea of progress and change has become the stonewall of democracy.

Now, to say that those against using American forces to spread liberty are not conservative is completely false.  From a historical viewpoint, those against the spread of freedom are conservative and those for it are the liberals - using the classic meanings of the words that is.

Update on my last post.  I just read the link to Buchanon’s piece about why conservatives lost in this go-round, and for the most part, I can’t say I disagree with his assessment.  I do disagree that Americans voted for Democrats and much as a disgusted and betrayed Conservative American simply refused to play the Good Ho to Republicans who out-Democratted the Democrats.  I would say that the Left has no mandate, but that the Conservatives just refused to vote again for RINOs.

...for great justice

Conservatism is a reactionary ideology.
The left pushes gay marraige, conservatives react.
The left pushes the killing of babies, conservatives react.

Or… the Right proposes welfare reform, the left reacts. The Right proposes limits on killing babies, the left reacts.

Reactionism seems to be in the eye of the beholder. Conservatives are pursuing a “liberal” agenda while the Liberals attempt to “conserve” the gains they made through the unelected courts. So, who are the true “reactionaries”?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

free, you are perverting the English Language.  Our founding fathers, including those first National Guardsmen who met the British at Concord Bridge were not liberals.  They were conservatives.  They told the truth, stood up for their families with force and held to traditional, WASP values if you wish. 

Liberals lean to the left, toward communism.  They do not work for a living, generally and want to take from others what they refuse to work for themsleves.

I offer you the code name of the convicted spy, Julius Rosenberg.

Communism is evil

Free---Clinton, in 1998 signed the “Doctrine of Regime change” in Iraq.

President Bush has the integrity and courage to put words into action, unlike liberals who talk and talk, pass 14 resolutions and then do nothing, or put a man on trial for over five (5) years and let him die before giving him a chance to defend himself.  Wimps.  Loosers.  Liars.

Communism is evil

Our founding fathers, including those first National Guardsmen who met the British at Concord Bridge were not liberals. 

There is a difference between modern liberalism and classical liberalism.  I’m not gonna debate that reality with someone who throws around the traitor label.

You are correct with your characterization of modern liberals, but classic liberals were closer to what we would call libertarians than anything.

Chief, Freep’s got a point about the classical definition of liberal.  It didn’t stand for big-government, big-tax, politically-correct, regulate everything politics.  It stood for individual freedoms and liberties.

But aside from that, don’t even bother getting into a semantics debate with Freep.  He likes to cover his political naivete with buzz words and long-winded philosophical rantings that, once deciphered, are mostly conflicted and meaningless.

And if you don’t believe me, ask him about populist conservatism once.  It’ll make your eyes bleed.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Free: First of all, “reactionary” means regressive, not that you react to issues.  It means a desire to return to the past, especially to a monarchial type of society.  It has nothing to do with individual independence.  Your confusion is why I call them “lefties”, which means they support Marxism/collectivism.  They want central control, and abhor individual freedom.  The problem with so-called libertarians is that they don’t know the difference between right and wrong, and tend to be morally relativistic.  Definitely not modern conservatives or classic liberals of bygone days.
The real definitional problem here is one caused by Karl Marx.  He was really an “intellectual monarchist” who favored a ruling political class of intellectuals who “knew better” how the proletariat should lead their lives.  He was against both religion and hereditary monarchy, and so was mistakenly characterized as “left-wing”.  By today’s standards, the collectivists are “right-wing” in the sense that they stand for a big, all-powerful central govt, while the conservatives stand for relatively weak and decentralized govt, instead vesting a lot of power in the individual citizens.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

Gents, IMHO, labelling has been very important in politics and politics has been around since Og1 met Og2.  One of the major problems we are facing in this discussion has been the Memory Hole that the Leftist control of the educational system has been using to good advantage.  The classic theories of ‘Natural Law’ and the Stoic’s beliefs, posited by Plato’s De Re Publicas and its development through the Enlightenment and adoption by our country;s Founding Fathers.  Those sort of things are no longer taught.  And for good reason.  It would expose the unwashed masses to dangerous concepts of freedom, responsibility and self-reliance.

The concept that Freedom is innate and God-given, that government is formed for the common defense and to provide for the general welfare and to secure the liberties of life, liberty and happiness, were all—in their time—Liberal. 

On the other side were the King George III monarchists, loyalists, what-have-you.  For the first time in history, Freedom was written into law and not just a philosophical aspiration.

That Liberal label has been adopted and perverted by the modern-day Left, who have always hidden behind camouflage terms: moderns, bolscheviks, marxists, liberals, progressives and moderates… always changing the name to something good-sounding as the true meaning finally became attached to each new label.

But on the Marxist side of the house, the lingo of Left Wing, Right Wing, Reactionary and the like, come straight out of Das Kapital and the Communist Manifesto.  They are part of the Leftist world view and if you use their terms, they define a battlefield which is skewed and meant for your defeat.  Left Wing and Right Wing come from the commi definition of the old French Parliment, where the Royals sat on the Right, wearing Royal Blue, and the Communists (from the abortive ‘commune’ uprising) wore Red and sat on the Left.

Reactionairies have always described whoever resisted the Revolution, in whatever the country the revolution was taking place, be it Cuba, Russia, China or Vietnam.  I have had the honor of being labelled a Reactionary by some commie puke (and the further honor of kicking his Leftist butt).

Another major (intended) misconception is the political spectrum.. Leftists would have you believe that Conservatives are Right Wing.

That’s unadulterated BS.  The true spectrum consists of the Constitutionalists, who adhere to the plain language and original intent of the Constitution, and at the other extreme, the Statists, who push for State ownership and control of all property and ownership even of the People.  In Statist regimes, with militariistic societies, state control of all property, secret police and death camps (Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and Red China) the Government is in charge.

In free societies, the People are in charge of government.  If there is confusion, it is the result of years of camouflage, lying and misdirection by those who seek power

...for great justice

MZ: Good going!

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

Zig-R108

Rob: Google isn’t an objective source either; they are way to the left.  Check out their censorship for the ChiComs.
robert108 on January 28, 2007 at 09:18 pm

I mostly agree Robert. Wikipedia is the same...you can get some good info from both of them but you have to be skilled at reading between the lines.

Zig-

labelling has been very important in politics and politics has been around since Og1 met Og2

Another humdinger, home run-Zigs--Not too much flashy language or overreaching vocab--Easy to understand for a simple minded man like me-- You need to register for one of Rob’s reader blogs- Can I have your permission to crosspost? You can find profile info in the “authors” section of the reader blogs.

Nowadays falsehood stands erect and truth lies prostrate on the ground.

I get it R108, and my point is not in error.  Your protestors have been at it for 24 years “in one form or another”.  Nothin’ new here, move along. You’re all just pissed that the rally made the front page and old hash abortion protesters didn’t. As I said, it is just possible that the abortion protesters were the same as they have been for the past 24 years so what’s news above the fold of that.
Puzzlefeet on January 28, 2007 at 03:21 pm

There is alot NEW in Technology! That is pretty bad when abortion is refered to as “old hash"…
Zsa Zsa on January 28, 2007 at 07:37 pm

ZsaZsa if you’re gonna quote me quote me correctly.  I said old hash protesters, not old hash abortion.
Puzzlefeet on January 28, 2007 at 08:33 pm

I could have sworn I saw Old hash abortion protesters. Sorry!
Zsa Zsa on January 28, 2007 at 08:36 pm

No need to apologize to this piece of dog squeeze.. You were/are correct and she is, as usual, incorrect.(sorry Zsa Zsa-I’m tryin’)

Wait--"incorrect" is incorrect; she’s lying and it’s quite obvious. I detest this kind of liberal back-pedaling bullshit ! (Sorry Zsa Zsa)

Here’s an English lesson for you pussfilledfeet:

Adjectives are called modifiers and they describe or limit(modify) substantives which are nouns & pronouns.

Any adjectives which describes a noun is
named from its descriptive power, not from its limiting power.

Your adjective “old hash”directly preceeded the noun “abortion" that it was describing (modifying)--not “protesters” as you claim.

You also used “abortion” in “abortion protesters” as a modifier to describe (define) the noun protesters.

ZSA ZSA was absolutely justified in pointing out the fact that Peefeet considers abortion “old hash” and Peefeet should apologize to Zsa Zsa for her duplicity.

Like saying “I support our troops butI hate Bush, the military and the war.”

That’s like saying “I support the Chicago Bears...except when they’re playing football.”

“I want to know God’s thoughts; the rest are details.”

Chief
C’mon- you don’t really believe this do you?-“Most women are completely irresponsible and murderers as well as perverts and immoral teachers.”

There is presidence for this mode of delivery of message.
Zsa Zsa.  Thanks.  <sarcasm… now maybe if we could just get the Supreme Court to ‘authorize’ the congress’ next War Proclimation !
Move_Zig.  Most women are completely irresponsible and murderers as well as perverts and immoral teachers. 
Chief RZ on January 28, 2007 at 10:48 pm

Precedence
Proclamation

“I want to know God’s thoughts; the rest are details.”

Thanks R108 and Bezu.  Bez, repost away, that’s just fine.  I’d love to blog, but I have an incredible time crunch problem.  I caught hell for spending my first Sunday in front of my machine at this blog.  I will visit often, time allowing.

Joel, I don’t understand the post and quote attributed to Chief (a ‘gunner?’ chief, as in CWO?).

While I disagree that

“most women are completely irresponsible and murderers as well as perverts and immoral teachers.”

...for great justice

I’d love to blog, but I have an incredible time crunch problem.

MZ, then just start up a reader blog here on SA.  Everybody does it, and because so many people are posting it means you don’t have to devote any time to maintaining an audience.  Just post when you have time, and you’ll get a response.

If you want to try it, just click the “request a blog” link at the top of the right sidebar on this page.  I’ll get the request, approve it, and then you’ll be set.

if you have any problems.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Rob (is that ‘Black Jack’ Pershing?)

Cool!  Thanks!

...for great justice

It is General Pershing indeed.  Brigadier General, in that particular photo.

And I look forward to seeing some blog posts from you.  Your comments have been great thus far.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I do appreciate that their occasional immorality accrues to my benefit!
Move_Zig on January 29, 2007 at 10:09 am

Well said, Sir! LMAO

“I want to know God’s thoughts; the rest are details.”

Gee Joel, you must be an english major, not. Since you describe the “noun” abortion as a modifier, it is then an adjective for the word protesters, as the term Abortion standing alone in the sentence would not make sense.  It is an adjective as is ‘old hash’ pertaining to protester and not to ‘abortion.’

It has been known in the english language to use more than one modifier (adjective) with a noun as in “old hash abortion protester.”

Oh and as so many have written on this site, the namecalling obviously shows your lack of substance.

Joel...Thanks for noticing! Usually Likwidshoe is quick to point those things out. I kept waiting for someone to notice!!!  Actually, I had really hoped Puzzle would have accepted responsibility for saying it. BUT oh well...???

When you talk about “old hash”, you have to be talking about Jane Fonda, but she got front page coverage.  Hmmm…

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

Zsa Zsa, I did accept responsibility for writing the following: 

old hash abortion protesters didn’t

I didn’t call abortion old hash I called protester “old hash abortion protestors”.  You wrote that I said “old hash abortion”.  Now are we clear? so there’s nothing to go “oh well” about.

P: How do you then explain all the coverage given to that “old hash” war protester, Jane Fonda?

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

What’s there to explain, r108, you’re just an angry guy crying cuz you’re not getting your way.  Acting a bit like a petulant child today.

P: Thanks for the pathetic attempt at insult, instead of a substantive reply.  You didn’t answer my question.  You claimed the differential coverage of the two events was due to abortion protests being “old hash”, and I pointed out that war protest is even “older hash” than abortion protest, and then that Jane Fonda is the epitome of “old hash”.  Your reply was to attempt to insult me.  Not impressive.  Your reasoning is based on a false premise, and your conclusion is wrong.  The differential coverage is because the MSM emphasizes and exaggerates stuff that supports their agenda, and minimizes the stuff that doesn’t support their agenda.  It’s obvious to any thinking person.

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

of course, R108, you’re always right, and I mean right! And king of the insults.  I just love how you like to whine about insults and you sling ‘em like the best of them. I am in no way obligated to answer you biased questions just as you are not obligated to respond to my writings.  See that’s how it works on blogs.

P: Thanks again for the weak attempt at insult, rather than giving any sort of substantive reply.  I refuted your premise, and you have no comeback.  Of course, you are not obligated to answer my question(because you can’t), and so you stand refuted.  That’s the way it works on blogs(and in real life, as well).

If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they c