The irony of being Dick Cheney
- Thread starter John Reynolds
- Start date
That was quite interesting.
I had been under the impression that Kerry did more "heroic" stuff than Clark, but it doesn't seem to be so from reading the site. Sorry btw I wasn't trying to take it off topic.
I tried myself to download the list of campaign contributions a while back and it was gigantc, like 180MB and unsearchable... lol It was a joke no single person oculd figure out what is actually going on and that is the point I suppose...
I had been under the impression that Kerry did more "heroic" stuff than Clark, but it doesn't seem to be so from reading the site. Sorry btw I wasn't trying to take it off topic.
I tried myself to download the list of campaign contributions a while back and it was gigantc, like 180MB and unsearchable... lol It was a joke no single person oculd figure out what is actually going on and that is the point I suppose...
Here's a good read as well, dealing with this very issue.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4212900/
Coincidence? Color me skeptical.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4212900/
Coincidence? Color me skeptical.
To be honest i'd have called the thread "The embarassement of having a name like that"...
Always better than a friend of mine, Mr Peter Dicks.. always had fun finding him middle names, such as Likes, Sucks, things like that.... errrr back to topic...
Always better than a friend of mine, Mr Peter Dicks.. always had fun finding him middle names, such as Likes, Sucks, things like that.... errrr back to topic...
The unbearable lightness of Dick Cheney:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...0210/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/halliburton_contract_4
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...0210/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/halliburton_contract_4
Does it make a difference that Halliburton got a no-bid contract for the Balkans, also?
Yeah he also supports gay marriages. And he calls himself a republican.
later,
epic
later,
epic
epicstruggle said:Yeah he also supports gay marriages. And he calls himself a republican.
later,
epic
:|One of his daughters is gay. He has gone on record supporting gay marriage (union).london-boy said:epicstruggle said:Yeah he also supports gay marriages. And he calls himself a republican.
later,
epic
later,
epic
To be precise my :| was directed at your "And he calls himself a republican"....
Oh well...
:| was directed at your "And he calls himself a republican"....Oh well...
Thats was supposed to be a sarcastic comment based on the title of this thread the irony of being cheney. You see hes a republican and he supports gay marriage not something that go together, hence the comment about "calls himself a republican" is ironic.london-boy said:To be precise my
Oh well...
later,
epic
ps seems like alot of people dont get sarcastic comments around here. Me included.
I know i was just nitpicking, i like being horrible to u, epic...
And here i was thinking that i was the most loveable, hugable character on b3d.london-boy said:I know i was just nitpicking, i like being horrible to u, epic...
epic
epicstruggle said:And here i was thinking that i was the most loveable, hugable character on b3d.london-boy said:I know i was just nitpicking, i like being horrible to u, epic...
epic
That title goes to Humus. Not hugable ( :| ), but most loveable by far...
epicstruggle said:Yeah he also supports gay marriages. And he calls himself a republican.
later,
epic
Union? Yes. Marriage? No.
But I'm glad you, a republican, have made it a point to state that republicanism begins and ends with some form of exclusion. You know, 20 years ago you would be damned to call yourself a republican. Being a Hindu from South Africa/India, I'm sure you have dark skin.
They didn't like darkies very much for the longest time, and in many areas, still don't.
My bf and I saw a Jesse Helms advertisement from 1990 when he ran against a black man for the congressional seat. It aired on MSNBC a few days ago. It was a pair of white hands holding a copy of triplicate and the voice over was saying this while the hands increasing conveyed a sense of anger and frustration by crumpling the paper:
"You needed that job. You deserved that job. But they gave it to a minority. Take your country back. Vote Jesse Helms."
1990 epic. 1990.
Whatever you think of republicanism, it's still based on divisiveness and fear. This latest trend focusing on gay men and women is simply the latest FUD being tossed out unfortunately.
You of all people should bone up on the party you support epic. It's not pretty.
2 posts from that i mention it might be union and not marriage, basically the samething just different words.Natoma said:epicstruggle said:Yeah he also supports gay marriages. And he calls himself a republican.
later,
epic
Union? Yes. Marriage? No.
All the difference for alot of people.
So we arent an all inclusive party. We have standards. Im quite a happy member of the republican party. Not sure how welcomed Id be in the democratic party, seeing as Im pro-life.
No offence but the republicans freed the slaves, it was the dems who gave them (blacks/minorities) equality. Which is greater?? All in the eye of the beholder, I guess
Im a merit based kinda guy. So affirmative action really pisses me off. Why should a black from nigeria, get special treatment over a poor white person. No reason in my eye. I feel if your disadvantaged(economically/socially) then help should be provided, but not race based.
Senator Byrd made racial slurs what last year or the year before, whats the point.
No offence, but i think your a bit blind on this issue. I see more hope for gays/minorities in the republican party then in the democratic party. What have blacks gotten from being beholdend to the democrats for the last 20 years.
Hey I try to change my party from the inside. Instead of calling it names from the outside. I write letters/opinions where I feel i can do good for my party. I do think economically we are going down the wrong road, but will give Bush the chance to fix that on his own.
later,
epic
epicstruggle said:
Democrats have standards as well. But those standards do not involve public and active exclusion of others. At least, that is not the preferred policy.
epicstruggle said:
The slaves were freed officially, but for 100 years, republicans and democrats used institutions from Chain Gangs to Jim Crow in order to keep Blacks in a third-class tier, below White Women.
True freedom didn't come for blacks until the 1960s, and that's when the Republican Southern Strategy took shape, i.e. the back lash against democrats who supported equal rights for blacks.
epicstruggle said:
There are tens of millions of minority citizens born in this country epic, so I'm not really sure where the "black from nigeria" bit comes from. Anyway, whatever you think of Affirmative Action, the point of the ad was to play to the fears of white men and women in the south, especially against a black insurgent. That has been the "Southern Strategy" of the Republicans since George Wallace founded modern day Conservative Republicanism in the 1960s.
epicstruggle said:
There are bad apples in every tree. However, the democrats have not based their entire political strategy in a rather large chunk of society on race baiting.
It turned out to be politically suicidal for the Democrats to support Civil Rights in the 60s. For the last 40 years, it's basically given the Republicans free reign over the southern vote. That is why Howard Dean came out earlier this year saying that Democrats couldn't go to the south talking about the normal cultural wedge issues that Republcans like to run on, i.e. God, Guns, Gays, Blacks.
Democrats have to run on Jobs, Health Care, and Education, because those are the things that are universal to us all, no matter what color we are. One reason Wesley Clark got into the race with so much brouhaha was because here was an intelligent, Four Star General, who also came from the South and could appeal to "The Southern Voter." The sad thing is, presidential elections are still being shaped by the Civil Rights decisions in the 1960s to give equal rights to minority citizens, because the Republicans have used it in every single election.
Read up on the Southern Strategy. There's four decades worth of information to absorb.
epicstruggle said:
Higher standard of living, and increasingly diverse and enlarged middle class, better education, and more jobs for one. And it's been the last 40 years roughly, not 20.
I see no way for gays to have "more hope" in the republican party, especially after the past 2 years. This is what I see in the republican party:
"You're welcome to vote for us, but we will not treat you as equal citizens in this nation."
Nothing Republicans have done has changed this view. Btw, the Log Cabin Republicans have seen absolutely no political influence, despite their long history of agitation from within. So there goes the "hope inside the republican party" theory.
epicstruggle said:
I'm not calling republicans names at all. I'm bringing up the history and political strategies of the republican party. If that's calling them names, then so be it. But it is the history of the party you support.
Similar threads
