killjoy

lol. I'm a liberal now...lol. Hilarious. Last week I was a neo-nazi right wing. Now I'm a liberal. You're still an idiot. What? Both of them? .

They were featured on the news more often. .

By the way the obvious point about Hitler was to bring someone in the equation that we all knew was an asshole and how just because people talk smack about you doesn't mean he's was ok. There's no 'leader' connection. The only connection is notoriety. .

It comes as no surprise to me. American intelligence works almost exactly the way major media outlets work. Both idioms work on the basis of gathering information on not only the specific topic, but also on the specific story. IOW, each element from the ground up understands the story the people immediately above them are trying to build and tries to prove it. Each individual passing the information they gather to the one directly above them. By the time it gets to the intended market it sounds as good (or as bad) as they can make it sound, but by then one has to multiply the story by a bullshit factor of at least 0.10. .

Yeah that must be it. I don't know how accurate the times on the top are, but yours reads 12 minutes later. Guess you win. Of course that's it. I made one post about Ann. The conversation drifted from there and you're every bit as guilty about it as I am. You're harping at me about how she's no big deal. I agree. Where you get this idea I'm obsessed with her, as far as I can see, is my one post (actually in another Ann thread I posted her take on a geometry quiz but it was a light joke at most). So from my one post you now have your self-rightious outlet on all those people who obsess with her. I'm not one of them. I am someone who will bite back though. That's the only reason I have more than one post in this thread. I'm glad to see you're not impressed with her. Keep telling yourself that. I think that makes 3 posts I've ever made about her in about 3 years I've been posting on forums. You need to slow down. .

Of course you're only contributing to the hijacking by making another post about her. Don't let that stop you from thinking you're better than others though. And no, actually that she pisses people off and people put her down is no proof whatsoever that she isn't a mindless twit. By that reasoning Hitler must've really been an ok guy...you can tell by the way everyone's always talkin' smack about him. Go ahead and buy her books. The only thing that's self-evident is her utter refusal to research anything or believe anything other than her fantasies. If you want to waste hours of your life reading disinformation all the power to you. .

Thanks gc, Gee. I wonder if she ever got back to him? .

I see. So when write out a list of all the things you dislike there is equality between them all? All things you dislike you dislike equally? The word dislike is an absolute statement? Like "four" or "affirmative"? No, like "good" or "bad" and "love" and "hate", dislike IS a relative statement. Unless you "love" steak equally as much as your wife, or you "dislike" eating liver equally as much as you "dislike" finding a toenail in your ice-cream. By all accounts those words are relative and require context. If by that you mean that you now realize you shouldn't have been snotty or at least shouldn't have been so without expecting return treatment of the same, well alright then. No biggie. Misunderstandings like this happen all the time and I suppose this one can last as long as either of us wants it to. .

Compared to whom? Anyone right now could Google a fine list of nations the US has either covertly or overtly entangled themselves with, especially during the Cold War, but few think to make the same list about the Soviets and the KGB to make a comparison. When you do you realize that the US wasn't really doing anything they weren’t. When the Soviets were screwing around in South America so were the Americans. No, I probably can't link you to 'proof' that the Soviets or Chinese were involved in the very same places, playing the very same dirty games as the US during the Cold War years, but that lack of information suggests something all on its' own: That we hear a lot about the dirty deeds of the US during these times but next to nothing about the Soviets....most people thought it was all lies. After the Wall came down and ever since we learn that indeed the Cold War was a tango that involved two or more, but all we ever hear about is the US. Incompetence is the sole sin of leadership. Yes Bush 'lied' about the reasons to go into Iraq. Well, he didn't so much lie as rely on the worst thinnest reason of all. Before 9/11 there were plenty of reasons to dispose of Saddam, and I feel sure that if the US banged the drum long enough on the issue the 'Coalition of the Willing' would've been MUCH larger, U.N. approval or not. Saddam was cheating over and over again and crossing the line when it comes to the cease-fire agreement made in '91, ('92?). It had to be done. He was siphoning money from the Food-for-Oil for himself, which is no different than the behavior that got him into this mess in the first place when he 'nationalized' (harde-har-har) the nation’s oil. Nationalize is supposed to mean for the people but of course that's not where it was going to. That put him on the shit list long ago. So there were plenty of reasons to rid Saddam before 9/11. Unfortunately 9/11 comes along and in order to gain support at home for an invasion of Iraq any president would've had to tie it in with a war against terror or against whoever caused that attack. And so we have the WMD rationale. There were most definitely WMD of some amount, and to the American people that sounded like a fine reason - dirty bombs and all. Unfortunately/fortunately the rest of the world found it hard to get behind this reasoning. The trumped up molehill-into-a-mountain rhetoric was just too easy to dismiss, and yet there was so much of it that it eclipsed all the good reasons to go in there. Based on the particulars of what they were calling a threat, why not just invade the closest university/college chem. lab? There were good reasons to dispose Saddam, but WMD was probably the worst one. To the American people however a link to terrorism or the threat of those WMD falling into the hands of people who would want to use them in terror attacks was the only reason worth listening to. Much of the USA's usual allies however didn’t 'get it', and it was reasonable that they shouldn't. So here we have the invasion and really things were going ok, or better than could be expected (Cheney and Rumsfelds' over-optimistic predictions not withstanding), until Abu Garib. That was the biggest mistake they could've made and one could make the argument that Iraq was 'lost' from that point on. It was a stupid thing to do and if you were going to do it well shit, you had bloody-well not get caught at it (although I don't see how that truth would not have 'outed' sooner or later). So yeah, there was a 'lie', but that's hardly out of the ordinary for any nation....in fact it's pretty much a necessity in a lot of cases, but it was the incompetence in Iraq that cost both the Americans and the Iraqis. The only sin of leadership is incompetence. Deception on the other hand is a requirement. .

Your presumption that my feelings or self-esteem were hurt is ill-placed, but if it makes you feel better to believe they have been then all the power to you. I can forget and move on if you can (well I can even if you can't actually). Of course that's a relative statement. I dislike Ann compared to whom? If there was a list I suppose she's on it, but I hardly think that two or three mild posts on the subject of Ann qualifies as some kind of unreasonable fixation with her. Of course you're free to judge that (and others) for yourself. Seems to me that if your point wasa simply about what the interviewer said then you should've restricted your point to that instead of starting it with this: Which is clearly an unnessesary smart-ass statement if your only point was what the interviewer said...especially when there were only 2 posts (barely) that you were responding to. Your sacasim was as clear as it was unnecessary. It is a 'personal attack'. A rather childish one that now you pretend never happend or seem to expect you won't get a response to. If you're going to throw those out you're going to get them back. Not much point in pretending you're above it after the fact. .

Ann's geometry test: http://server6.theimagehosting.com/image.p...eometryTest.jpg

Do you know what a extradition treaty is and the basics of its' mechanics? Do you know what amnesty is? Please go look it up because I'm not going to explain it to you without charging $68/hour, and it's important to understand what you're talking about. Once you do look it up you will understand why we offer amnesty and will not extradite those who come here to escape the draft, but will deport those who desert. .

Well what can I say BHS? There were a grand total of 2 posts you quoted and in neither of them did anyone express hate for our bag of coat hangers we call Ann...but that didn't stop your smart ass shot: What was that all about? I said something about A.C. and someone agreed with me and I don't think it’s unreasonable to call what you said in return a 'shot' or certainly smart-alecky-ness. You can't dish it, then get it in return, then whine about getting it. and... As far as I could tell you didn't have a point....besides maybe the one at the top of your head. Maybe if ya posted fewer smart-ass remarks towards comments that were never directed towards you in the first place then people will listen to you more. If there's one thing I disrespect on forums it's people who take shots then act like they're "too mature" to take shots. .

Nope. Sorry. You sound like she does when she squirms. No, her context was "why didn't Canada come to Iraq? They went with us to Vietnam", and the context most certainly was in an official manner - i.e; The Canadian Forces. I saw her argue the point and you could see in herr eyes she didn't really know one way or another, she just decided she didn't like her interviewer contradicting her so she tried to bluff the rest of the way. She's a dolt. End of story. Trust me that was the context. If you really need me to prove it I can dig up the link later. .

Like it or not Canada has 20 languages. Like it or not Quebec and their martyrdom of the french language gets more and more irrelevant every year. You should've all made your bid to separate while you had the chance. Every year there are wars, bird-flu, unemployment, gang problems, drug problems, firearm related problems, rampant alcoholism and yet every year all we ever hear from Quebec is their 'neverendum' whining:- "How come no one speaks French--waa waa"? Who cares? It’s not our fault you made a static language that can’t create new words, (what’s that? You don’t believe me? Ok, what would, say, “4-wheel drive” be in French? Admit it; you’d speak that part of your sentence in English). Get over yourselves already. French can't be enforced even in Quebec, go ahead and keep trying though. Go ahead and be offended. Go ahead and separate. .

Yeah but in all fairness you 'personally' probably would never join the forces in the first place right? So it's not really a fair analogy. Canada provided amnesty for persons who were facing the draft. That's all. Our regard for the conflict in question is inconsequential....unless you want the US to start allowing our scumbag bikers to hide down there.

I think your post may have had merit until you brought her up. Ann Coulter has never opened her mouth or typed a sentence and been right at the same time, in her entire life. This is a woman who said Canadians went to Vietnam and continued to try and pound that square peg into the round hole no matter how much the Canadian journalist (who was a journalist during those years as well) tried politely to inform her of her mistake. Interviewer: "No, Canadians never went to Vietnam." Ann: "Oh I'm pretty sure they did...". LOL! There's really no arguing with people like this and both the Left and the Right are full of them. Obviously she knows she's wrong at this point and just refuses to admit it....you know, with her "superior intellect" and all. .

Welp, time for killjoy to kiss his sister: I gotta hand it to Carolina. Sure they played really well but I'm more impressed with the way they handled themselves after 2 bad defeats. I know, I know. Game 5 was overtime, but the way Pisani stole the puck with his dipsy-doodle play and shot it in the net like artillery, then we need not get in to how badly they were beat in game 6, well I have to hand it to Carolina: a lot of teams, (Montreal comes to mind :-) ) would've just cracked and splintered away like so much dead wood after those defeats. Seemed to me the Oil didn’t really show up until the 3rd period, but then Carolina was hammering them so hard it was difficult to tell. Good job Carolina! OILERS NEXT YEAR! ...But 'Coulda-beens' are ever present. .

And besides, doesn't he have work to do? .

France: The Ivory Coast? China: Taiwan and Mongolia? Pakistan: It's influence over Afghanistan? Belgium: Rwanda? Britain: India? There are so many. I give up. Who? .

4 - nuttin'honey!! HAHAHAHAHAHA Where are all the doom-talkin knobs now? I wanna honestly thank every one of them because they just make this all the sweeter! HAHAHA!! "Oh yeah, eh? They'll be out by game 5" Oh yeah. Anyone from Edmonton knows better than that. We can do ANYTHING! Nothing's impossible. And all those guys who tried to sound like they knew what they were talking about or like they don't care about hockey and "Oh look what we got here -- the World Cup. I'm going to pay attention to that for as long as I can stay wake" ect ect. WE knew just like you did that was loser talk and loser talk can only lose. Not really much different than Afghanistan: "Oh no...it's like impossible, eh?" Well don't worry yourselves ladies....cover your eyes or hide your head under the pillow if it gets too scary for ya....no worries: we got a bunch of Edmontonians out there too and they're gonna get it done instead of wallowing about timidly whining about all the obstacles and how it's "impossible". Edmonton's gonna bring the Cup home to Canada, FOR Canada, where it belongs and no one's going to remember the posers who were pretentiously cheering for soccer when everyone knows they don't know soccer any better than they know lawn bowling. .

Typical lame reporting by the Canadian media. How do they know it's "impossible" until they've at least given it a good try first? .

Please state how on earth America's democracy could be thought of as anywhere near as bad as ours. America's democracy is "bad" simply because of either voter apathy or foolish pride on the part of the voter to never change his/her party (ie. I'm a democrat/republican and will be for life). Subsequently you get a 95-98% re-election rate for congress, and I think even presidents. The problem is that democracy doesn't show it's true value until the people are truely passionate about something. They need a reason to vote or they either wont, or will just vote in the 'same-ol-shit'. Right. No women may vote. No one under 40 may vote. no one who doesn't own vast tracks of land may vote. etc. etc. I would prefer a monarch to an old style democracy. .

I just hope it sticks. It's not so much the idea that he defected that impresses me but that he was so public about it. Kudos to him but he just put a huge bullseye on his head. There isnt anyone out there reporting on the 'anti-suicide bombing'* demonstration in Kandahar yesterday either. Wonder what happened there. * somone else's words.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/200...-defection.html .