Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Oh No, not MY mom...

Posted on 03/06/2003 9:46:29 AM PST by CommandoFrank

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 last
To: HitmanNY
Speaking of Willie Wonka, has anyone noticed the beginning of that movie has one hard working woman supporting, through hand laundry work, 4 adults that stay in a bed, for years, till a golden ticket is found? At that point one of the guys can get up and go to a candy factory.
81 posted on 03/06/2003 1:11:11 PM PST by BabsC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: CommandoFrank
Brainwashed, my friend.

If it's any consolation, my family's the same way. The funny thing is...they're extremely conservative! But don't be the one to point that out to them. I just poke fun...it drives them crazy.

Hey, I take revenge where I can.

Best Regards,

82 posted on 03/06/2003 1:17:07 PM PST by scoopscandal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CommandoFrank
How is taking out Saddam getting rid of the fundamentalist Islamics all over the world? How is it stopping the spread of the above?

Red herring / straw man. Nobody is making that argument.

We are the country (not France and Germany) that is becoming less relevant in the eyes of Europeans.

And the importance of this is what, exactly?

I equate Bush with dictatorship.

You can make that equation in your own mind all you want, but don't expect anyone else to agree with you, since you have nothing but your own hatred of Bush to back it up.

Yes, with Hitler--he started out saying he was going to liberate all the countries that he took over. He pre-emptively took over those countries. He was arrogant and a bully.

Yes, and everyone knew that Hitler was lying about the "liberation" thing from the very beginning. Even Neville Chamberlain knew that; it's why he ran squealing to Munich to work out a deal; if Hitler had been telling the truth, who would have cared?

By comparison, everyone today knows that it's Iraq that needs liberating (though that's not our main reason for going in, so this is sort of a straw man / red herring as well). And no argument you can come up with can disguise the FACT that Saddam is not the legitimate ruler of Iraq. He murdered his way to power. That means you should be CHEERING any action that will make his people free.

Bush can't wait to get his hand on Iraqi oil.

It has been proven physically, fiscally and mathematically that it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for this to be about Bush getting "his" hands on Iraqi oil. Anyone that makes this argument is either an intentional liar or an imbecile.

Oh, by the way Mom, what about the billions of dollars' worth of deals, mostly oil-based, that France, Germany and Russia have with Iraq? By your line of thinking, why is their extreme pressure to prevent any war not EQUALLY about getting their hands on Iraqi oil? come on, we're waiting for an answer.

He is an arrogant ass.

This is hate speech, not an argument.

If I were president I would not have done my arrogant best to get all the allies to hate us.

(Okay, we know you like the word "arrogant." Please stop using it in every other sentence.) And my question above stands: Why shouldn't I believe that their newfound hatred of us (which, by the way, they all insist is not the case, and that this is merely a "disagreement") is based purely on the fact that we're about to seriously F--- up their drooling lust for Iraqi oil?

I would not start a war without figuring out how we will pay for it and how long we will be there.

Bulls--- falsehoods. It is impossible to know how long we'll be there until the first objectives are successfully obtained. And we already know how we'll pay for it. You simply don't want to take the time to read up on it.

I would put more money into homeland security instead of sending all the troops overseas. I would not drill in the artic. I would not let our forests be cut down indiscriminately.

Irrelevant red herring, irrelevant red herring, irrelevant red herring. All three of these are near-certain indications that we're merely dealing with a Bush-hater, not anyone seriously interested in the issue at hand.

I would deal with Saddam through the United Nations, not go it alone.

Guess what dear? As of this point, that is PRECISELY WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING ALL ALONG. In case you haven't noticed, WE HAVEN'T INVADED IRAQ AND TAKEN OUT SADDAM YET. We've been playing the UN game ALL ALONG. So stop lying.

I would be sick to hear that the Pentagon has ordered 75,000 body bags (and they have) to send our youth back home in.

Yeah, but it would be just fine as long as the UN gave their rubber stamp to it? Or if the UN placed the order itself? You couldn't care less about the number of dead American soldiers except where the body count can be used to attack George W. Bush and help elect your precious Hillary into the White House.

Oh, and you appear to be conveniently ignoring the fact that last time, we ordered 16,000 body bags, and ended up using 390. And almost a full 1/3 of that number was due to a single lucky shot when of one Saddam's completely aimless SCUDs happened to randomly fall in the middle of a US base.

I would not call it liberating the Iraqi people by going in and blasting them to kingdom come.

So you have access to all of the Pentagon's most highly classified documents, and know for a fact that our battle plan is "Go in and nuke everything in sight"? No, you don't. So stop lying.

I would not cover the truth with saying we will "liberate" the people of Iraq.

It is physically impossible for you to know what the battle plan is, thus it is impossible for you to know what "the truth" is. Stop lying. (And you DO know perfectly well that the citizens of free, democratic Iraq will indeed be liberated compared to the authoritarian cult of personality they currently live under.)

I would tell the Americans that it will take trillions (this is the number that has been reported on CNN and in many papers) and that we may be in Iraq for ten years or more.

The public already knows the latter - it's so typical of a liberal to think only THEY know what's going on, while everyone else is completely clueless. And the "trillions" number has been reported on CNN and in many papers ... where it was almost immediately debunked as insanely laughable, many orders of magnitude beyond even the wildest possible real life scenario.

After "Liberating" the people out of their homes and into the hereafter we will have to rebuild the place.

More lies. We're going to literally kill EVERY SINGLE IRAQI, and yet the moment we're done doing that, we'll have to rebuild the completely empty country. Does. Not. Compute.

Where will the money come from since we already have a huge deficit? It will come down to the cities and states which will get less and less money and cut more and more services (maybe even close state parks if it gets bad enough) and state and local taxes will skyrocket even more than it has.

No, once more you're lying. It will largely come from the sale of Iraqi oil, which will be ours for the period of time we're running a military occupational government.

Are you willing to pay the price to get rid of Saddam?

I would be, yes, even if we had to pay every last cent ourselves.

Trillions of dollars sunk into that sink hole, maybe thousands of American lives lost not to mention increased terrorism here in the US as retaliation for the war;

Lie; Possible truth, but unknown, and it doesn't matter anyway since we have an all-volunteer armed forces and they knew what they were getting into; and Lie, because we're going to be subject to increased terrorism whether we take out Saddam now or sit on our hands like pansies for years and wait for Saddam to get powerful enough to either attack us himself or to openly sell his WMD technology to other terrorists.

huge deficits, an economy even more messed up than it now is; a stock market that doesn't know which way is up.

Lie, lie, lie. The former has been dealt with here already, and as for the latter two, those will be solved as soon as the main military campaign is over, in a matter of weeks at most.

I am through talking about this. You can send all the quotes you want. I won't read any more of it. The whole thing is making me ill. Can we please quit talking about this. It makes me ill.

Then I suggest you stop lying to your son, and maybe he'll stop feeling the need to drown you in free Clues®. And by the way, you want to know what true arrogance is? It's sending a thousand-word spewage of anger and hate to someone, and then admitting at the very end that you're not the least bit interested in hearing what the person you just spent the last twenty minutes insulting has to say in response.

83 posted on 03/06/2003 1:25:51 PM PST by Dont Mention the War ("Quinnipiac" - Native American for "Big Smelly Compost Heap of RAT Dung")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CommandoFrank
How is taking out Saddam getting rid of the fundamentalist Islamics all over the world? How is it stopping the spread of the above?

One point to make on this, Frank, is that Saddam is paying $25k to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers.

Stopping that alone would be worth it.

SD

84 posted on 03/06/2003 1:28:38 PM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HitmanNY
EWWWWwwwwww!

That's an image I didn't need reconjured!

85 posted on 03/06/2003 1:46:38 PM PST by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: CommandoFrank
You have mail
This is what you see at the top of the main screen. Click on it and your mail will pop up. Good Luck!
86 posted on 03/06/2003 2:19:21 PM PST by netmilsmom (Bush/Rice 2004- pray & fast for our troops this lent-Peace through strength)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CommandoFrank
Frank ?

Just out of human decency I'm moving to another thread . Good luck .

87 posted on 03/06/2003 3:12:36 PM PST by Ben Bolt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BabsC
Wonka is a wild film, and the story was changed a bit for the movie.

I had always felt that Wonka is a homicidal maniac, though the film has a throwaway line 'they will be ok, a bit wiser for the wear' or something like that. So the children don't seem to die as I had always felt for years.

The movie is sinister in some ways - when the gang gets on the boat about 2/3rd into the film there are only enough seats for the 'surviving' people. Wonka clearly knew that none of the children who had been tested so far would 'pass' and get to the boat.

Sinister.

For what ist worth, I try and quote 'Wonka' at least once a week - when someone catches the reference, that makes me feel very good.

That being said, I do love it when Mr. Wonka really sticks it to those awful kids (AND their parents).

Man, more kids and adults should watch that movie and LISTEN!
88 posted on 03/06/2003 3:22:40 PM PST by HitmanLV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Wonka rules! At least I think he does. I'm pretty sure he does. He does. I think. :-)
89 posted on 03/06/2003 3:23:39 PM PST by HitmanLV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: BabsC
Speaking of Willie Wonka, has anyone noticed the beginning of that movie has one hard working woman supporting, through hand laundry work, 4 adults that stay in a bed, for years, till a golden ticket is found? At that point one of the guys can get up and go to a candy factory.

Yep, Charlie's homelife isn't very good.

I'm glad they all live happily ever after.

90 posted on 03/06/2003 3:25:48 PM PST by HitmanLV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: CommandoFrank
Throw in some pics of Saddam's Gassing victims for good measure...

And maybe this...

AMERICAN DISASTERS......



A little political review,
a time to think & remember...
From a Navy man...

After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured
1,000;

President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and
punished.


After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five US military
personnel;

Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.


After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and
injured 200 U.S. military personnel;

Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.


After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and
injured 5,000;

Clinton promised that those responsible! would be hunted down and
punished.


After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 39
U.S. sailors;

Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.


Maybe if Clinton had kept his promise, an estimated 3,000 people in New
York and Washington, D.C. that are now dead would be alive today.

AN INTERESTING QUESTION:
This question was raised on a Philly radio call-in show.

Without casting stones, it is a legitimate question.

There are two men, both extremely wealthy.

One develops relatively cheap software and gives billions of

dollars to charity. The other sponsors terrorism.

That being the case, why was it that the Clinton Administration spent more
money chasing down Bill Gates over the past eight years than Osama bin
Laden?

THINK ABOUT IT!
It is a strange turn of events.


Hillary gets $8 Million for her forthcoming memoir.
Bill gets about $12 Million for his memoir yet to be written.

This from two people who have spent the past 8 years being unable to
recall anything about past events while under oath!

Sincerely,
Cmdr Hamilton McWhorter
USN(ret)


P. S. Please forward this to as many people as you can!
We don't want this woman to even THINK of running for President.

Remember:
The Alamo
Pearl Harbor
9-11-01
The Clinton Years
All Truly American Disasters!!!
91 posted on 03/06/2003 6:52:35 PM PST by da_toolman (It's time to start carrying a big stick and speaking damned little.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeeperz
Welcome Freeper! Glad you're posting.
92 posted on 03/06/2003 8:41:21 PM PST by Auntie Mame (Let us endeavor so to live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry.--Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Inspectorette
That's how I looked at it too, and laughingly told him so!
93 posted on 03/07/2003 6:06:49 AM PST by Marysecretary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: CommandoFrank
Sell your mother to Barbra Streisand. Do it today.
94 posted on 03/07/2003 6:20:34 AM PST by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CommandoFrank
Dude, it's your mom. Argument is useless. My mother lived for some time under a fascist regime and still talks about how wonderful it was to feel safe all the time because of the machine-gun armed guards on every street corner. I've never been able to convince her that that might not have been the best of all possible societies. At a certain point, you just have to let it go and let mom be mom.

With mom, you have one choice - are you going to engage in political or religious discussions, or are you going to Christmas and Thanksgiving dinner? Well, which is it? Do you feel lucky today? Do you?

95 posted on 03/07/2003 6:30:20 AM PST by FateAmenableToChange
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: da_toolman
I saw this email. There is truth and fiction there. Propaganda is not useful IMHO. Especially when it is about a dead horse.
96 posted on 03/10/2003 10:46:48 AM PST by thetruckster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: CommandoFrank
I feel sorry for you... I cannot imagine having a mom I could not have a rational conversation with! :-(
97 posted on 03/10/2003 10:56:44 AM PST by Terriergal ("what does the LORD require..? To ACT justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Inspectorette; CommandoFrank
As far as her not wanting to talk about it any more, I feel that way about my adult daughter, who has the same viewpoints as your mom. I just don't want to hear anything more that she has to say about it, because what's the use of arguing?

My sisters are that way --- although they are more on the fence. They tend to be conservative but they balk at the idea of using force for anything except direct self-defense... It's hard to get them to talk about any of it. I don't usually bring it up on purpose or force a discussion, but I don't refrain from offering my opinion on the rare occasion when they do bring up a controversial issue. I'm the baby of the family though and they still tend to look at me as if I don't know or understand anything.

98 posted on 03/10/2003 11:00:16 AM PST by Terriergal ("what does the LORD require..? To ACT justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson