NationStates Jolt Archive

*this was a reasonable way for anyone to respond when confronted by the pure evil lies of neoconservative nazi warmongers.


Howard Dean, the newly minted leader of the Democratic Party, and former Pentagon adviser Richard Perle made clear their opposing views on the war in Iraq during a debate marred by a protester who tossed a shoe at Perle.


Perle had just started his comments Thursday when a protester threw a shoe at him before being dragged away, screaming, "Liar! Liar!"


Perle, a Pentagon official during the Reagan administration, was more recently chairman of the Defense Policy Board, a group of non-government experts who advise the defense secretary. He was a major proponent of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, while Dean was among the war's most prominent opponents.


In his new role as chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Dean has stressed that Democrats are stronger than Republicans on defense.


"Defense is a lot broader than swaggering around saying you're going to kick Saddam's butt," Dean said Thursday, drawing cheers from the crowd in this city that overwhelmingly voted Democratic last November.


Perle said the war in Iraq was justified based on the intelligence available at the time. "Sometimes the things we have to do are objectionable to others," he said.


Dean also said the Bush administration has ignored the mounting threat in Iran and North Korea. "We picked the low hanging fruit in Iraq and did nothing" about the other, more dangerous regimes, he said.


Perle had his own barbs, too. He began his opening comments in the 1 1/2-hour debate by saying Democrats "looked at the Democratic Party and chose a physician to lead them."


Perle was forced by one of the questioners to recast a comment he made on Sept. 22, 2003, in which he predicted that within one year, there would be "a grand square in Baghdad named for President Bush."


"I'd be a fool not to recognize that it did not happen on the schedule I had in mind," Perle said, adding that he did not deny that the administration had made mistakes in Iraq.


But, Perle added, "I will be surprised, yet again, if we do not see a square in Baghdad named after this president." He did not specify a time.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/02/18/national/a010825S15.DTL

Did it hit him? I hope it did.

It'd be like John Prescott and the egg incident, only with a shoe (cackles insanely)

Anyone remember the Glorious Pieing of Ann Coulter?

throw shoes at all nazi's :D

Did it hit him? I hope it did.
me2-its also a shame others didnt follow her glorious example

Anyone remember the Glorious Pieing of Ann Coulter?
yes that was a shining moment in history Id like to see duplicated a billion times over

Right...and this proves nothing except the fact that she was unable to reason out an argument, and thus resorted to a stupid and immature act of violence. I really can't believe that any same person could rationalize this act. It accomplishes nothing, says nothing, and will in no way attract converts to her cause.
Translation: She couldn't come up with a response to his argument, so she hit him instead.
Wouldn't the world be a great place if everybody thought like this? *sarcasm*.

throw shoes at all nazi's :D
people shouldnt tolerate the presence of neoconservative vermin in their midst

Right...and this proves nothing except the fact that she was unable to reason out an argument, and thus resorted to a stupid and immature act of violence. I really can't believe that any same person could rationalize this act. It accomplishes nothing, says nothing, and will in no way attract converts to her cause.
Translation: She couldn't come up with a response to his argument, so she hit him instead.
Wouldn't the world be a great place if everybody thought like this? *sarcasm*.
it was a rational response to pure evil. I applaud the actions of this woman and hope it serves as a role model for everyone

Oh, you mean the crazy bitch.

Right...and this proves nothing except the fact that she was unable to reason out an argument, and thus resorted to a stupid and immature act of violence. I really can't believe that any same person could rationalize this act. It accomplishes nothing, says nothing, and will in no way attract converts to her cause.
Translation: She couldn't come up with a response to his argument, so she hit him instead.
Wouldn't the world be a great place if everybody thought like this? *sarcasm*.

I believe you mean 'sane' and you make a good point, but it certainley illustrates her feelings. Sometimes, the shoe is a mighter sword than even the pen

Oh, you mean the crazy bitch.
the Founding Fathers embrace this woman as a Real American

No, a rational response would be to argue, to use facts to get to the truth. Anybody, right or wrong, can yell and act immature. Only the person with the truth on their side can use facts.

No, a rational response would be to argue, to use facts to get to the truth. Anybody, right or wrong, can yell and act immature. Only the person with the truth on their side can use facts.
facts and truth dont work against a monster who knows hes lying anyway

//facts and truth dont work against a monster

Um...yes they do, actually.
Did you see the presidential candidates (ever) stand up and throw shoes at each other?
The founding fathers petitioned the king numerous times to lower taxes. Thomas Paine wrote "Common Sense". They did not stand up and throw shoes at people. They gave facts, and then let the people decide who was right and who was wrong.
This woman acted on faith, not facts. Anybody could convince themseles of anything based on faith alone. The person who finds a rational response is the one who is correct.
She should have engaged him in actual discussion, and let the others see that he is wrong when he was unable to respond properly.

the Founding Fathers embrace this woman as a Real American
No, they'd put her in the crazy bitch category as well.

//facts and truth dont work against a monster

Um...yes they do, actually.
Did you see the presidential candidates (ever) stand up and throw shoes at each other?
The founding fathers petitioned the king numerous times to lower taxes. Thomas Paine wrote "Common Sense". They did not stand up and throw shoes at people. They gave facts, and then let the people decide who was right and who was wrong.
This woman acted on faith, not facts. Anybody could convince themseles of anything based on faith alone. The person who finds a rational response is the one who is correct.
She should have engaged him in actual discussion, and let the others see that he is wrong when he was unable to respond properly.
reasoned debate only works when accompanied with shoe throwing

No, they'd put her in the crazy bitch category as well.
only neoconservative worshippers of the death cult put her in such a category

//reasoned debate only works when accompanied with shoe throwing

I really hope you're joking. I really, really, really, hope so.

Screaming "Liar, liar, liar, liar" does not count as "reasoned debate".

Actually, she was throwing it a Howard Dean, but had incredibly bad aim.

reasoned debate only works when accompanied with shoe throwing

then perhaps we should all start throwing shoes at you

How was this woman supposed to use reason and logic when she was in a crowd of people listening to the debate? Was she supposed to walk on stage and tell her ideas? I don't think they would have let her... Given the circumstances, it was the best way for her to express her opinion.

But you see, I don't care about her opinion. I care about the facts behind her opinions. And there was no way that she would be able to have time to express those, anyway.
Moreover, she interrupted others who were on the stage. She had not earned her right to be on that stage; the people who were there were there because the people supported them, and chose (indirectly, at least) that they go up there. Maybe the only way for you to express your opinion is to graffiti my garage door, but you still have no right to.

How was this woman supposed to use reason and logic when she was in a crowd of people listening to the debate? Was she supposed to walk on stage and tell her ideas? I don't think they would have let her... Given the circumstances, it was the best way for her to express her opinion.
I agree

Silence=death

But you see, I don't care about her opinion. I care about the facts behind her opinions. And there was no way that she would be able to have time to express those, anyway.
Moreover, she interrupted others who were on the stage. She had not earned her right to be on that stage; the people who were there were there because the people supported them, and chose (indirectly, at least) that they go up there. Maybe the only way for you to express your opinion is to graffiti my garage door, but you still have no right to.
this is elitist BS--everyone has an equal right to speech

Yeah, everybody has a right to speech. However, if I owned a newspaper, I would not be forced to print your opinion. You, however, are perfectly free to create your own newspaper and publish your opinion in it without anybody stopping you.
Nobody is stopping her from talking when she provides her own medium for speech. But she can't leech off of other peoples' materials (conventions cost money) like a parasite to have her speech heard.

Yeah, everybody has a right to speech. However, if I owned a newspaper, I would not be forced to print your opinion. You, however, are perfectly free to create your own newspaper and publish your opinion in it without anybody stopping you.
Nobody is stopping her from talking when she provides her own medium for speech. But she can't leech off of other peoples' materials (conventions cost money) like a parasite to have her speech heard.
I disagree--it was a public forum and assembly. She had a right to express her dissent in such a patriotic manner

this is elitist BS--everyone has an equal right to speech

If you let everyone voice their opinion at once in one place EVERYTHING is lost in the noise. Besides, there is a place where every moron with an opinion (myself included :D) can express their opinion whether it has any basis in reality or not. THE INTERNET. Interrupting the debate was wrong on her part. If she wants to voice her opinion she could have gone to some website or voiced her protest OUTSIDE the building. Besides the disruption being rude to every reasonable person who wanted to LISTEN to the debate did you consider the rights of the speakers and listeners?

Money, money, money... So only people who cannot afford to pay to express their opinion should just shut up? This gives a whole new dimension to "free speech".

Money, money, money... So only people who cannot afford to pay to express their opinion should just shut up?

If we don't prevent people from interrupting each other we just end up with a mass of noise and nothing gets done or heard. Are you that much in favor of childish tantrums where people can scream and throw things over an orderly debate? Since the woman couldn't behave like an adult she deserved to get thrown out on her ass.

I'd be saying the same thing if the shoe were thrown at Dean by the way.

If you let everyone voice their opinion at once in one place EVERYTHING is lost in the noise. Besides, there is a place where every moron with an opinion (myself included :D) can express their opinion whether it has any basis in reality or not. THE INTERNET. Interrupting the debate was wrong on her part. If she wants to voice her opinion she could have gone to some website or voiced her protest OUTSIDE the building. Besides the disruption being rude to every reasonable person who wanted to LISTEN to the debate did you consider the rights of the speakers and listeners?
I think what this woman did was an act of spontaneous Art and all the other listeners and speakers shouldve stood back in appreciation and awe.

No, a rational response would be to argue, to use facts to get to the truth. Anybody, right or wrong, can yell and act immature. Only the person with the truth on their side can use facts.

No doubt a person who uses reason has the moral and intellectual high ground, but throwing pies, shows and eggs at these fools is so much more fun.

If we don't prevent people from interrupting each other we just end up with a mass of noise and nothing gets done or heard. Are you that much in favor of childish tantrums where people can scream and throw things over an orderly debate? Since the woman couldn't behave like an adult she deserved to get thrown out on her ass.

I'd be saying the same thing if the shoe were thrown at Dean by the way.
real change is only accomplished when people step out of line

scumbag neocon liar from Hell

Wow, generalize much?

Wow, generalize much?
Im not generalizing. I feel this way about ALL neocons

real change is only accomplished when people step out of line

You can 'step out of line' without random idiocy, in fact it helps to get the message across and change things better if you step out of line and remain civilized about it (Ghandi, anyone?). Throwing things at people like a monkey is random idiocy.

Im not generalizing. I feel this way about ALL neocons

So its not a generalization then to say that all neocons are hellspawn. Riiiight.

Im not generalizing. I feel this way about ALL neocons

So would it be generalizing if I said that all democrats are hippy commie pinko (right order of names?) anarchists? Of course I don't actually think that but just because someone isn't on your side doesn't mean that you are right in generalizing or mistreating them.

I feel that no matter how much energy other sane people and myself throw into this message board, nobody is going to be convinced (except maybe an innocent bystander who accidentally looks in), because the person who started this debate puts faith above reason and has an incorrect view of a person's rights and responsibilities. Therefore, I leave here to do something that will perhaps actually accomplish something.

Neoconservatism is so close to Facism that the two beleifs can be hard to distinguish from eachother at times. The fact of the matter is that anyone stupid enough to beleive the trash that the neo-con demogouge leaders spew deserves to have a shoe thrown at them. The ones spewing it deserve to have the entire stock of a shoe store thrown at them.

Liberalism is so close to hedonism that the two beliefs can be hard to distinguish from eachother at times. The fact of the matter is that anyone who is stupid enough to believe the trash that the liberal demagogue leaders spew deserves to have a shoe thrown at them The ones spewing it deserve to have the entire stock of a shoe store thrown at them./sarcastic, close minded, intolerant, sensationalist generalization

Der Lieben is so close to hitler that the two people can be hard to distinguish from eachother at times. The fact of the matter is that anyone who is stupid enough to believe the trash that the Der Lieben demagogue leaders spew deserves to have a shoe thrown at them The ones spewing it deserve to have the entire stock of a shoe store thrown at them./sarcastic, close minded, intolerant, sensationalist generalization

So would it be generalizing if I said that all democrats are hippy commie pinko (right order of names?) anarchists? Of course I don't actually think that but just because someone isn't on your side doesn't mean that you are right in generalizing or mistreating them.

Yes it would. As 'democrat' covers a diverse spectrum of specific idealogies.

Skapedroe expressed an opinion about a certain specific political idealogy (neocon). Not all Republicans are neocons.

throw shoes at all nazi's :D
At all nazi's whats?

Yes it would. As 'democrat' covers a diverse spectrum of specific idealogies.

Skapedroe expressed an opinion about a certain specific political idealogy (neocon). Not all Republicans are neocons.

You're still applying on opinion to a GROUP of people, that's the problem.

Der Lieben is so close to hitler that the two people can be hard to distinguish from eachother at times. The fact of the matter is that anyone who is stupid enough to believe the trash that the Der Lieben demagogue leaders spew deserves to have a shoe thrown at them The ones spewing it deserve to have the entire stock of a shoe store thrown at them./sarcastic, close minded, intolerant, sensationalist generalization

Yay, I'm Hitler! What fun, I mean... bad, bad, why would say that about me? :D

Toaster Strudel is so close to Pop Tarts that the two pastries can be hard to distinguish from eachother at times. The fact of the matter is that anyone who is stupid enough to believe the trash that the Toaster Strudel demagogue leaders spew deserves to have a shoe thrown at them The ones spewing it deserve to have the entire stock of a shoe store thrown at them./sarcastic, close minded, intolerant, sensationalist generalization

Toaster Strudel is so close to Pop Tarts that the two pastries can be hard to distinguish from eachother at times. The fact of the matter is that anyone who is stupid enough to believe the trash that the Toaster Strudel demagogue leaders spew deserves to have a shoe thrown at them The ones spewing it deserve to have the entire stock of a shoe store thrown at them./sarcastic, close minded, intolerant, sensationalist generalization

Now I'm hungry you bastard....

You're still applying on opinion to a GROUP of people, that's the problem.

Yes they are a group, just like members of the KKK are a GROUP (please note that I am not implying any connection between the two groups other than they are both groups are the type based on chosen affiliation rather than any inherent quality - as are hippies, or greens, or moderates &etc).

Now, members of the KKK may help old ladies across the street and rescue kittens stuck in trees when they are not running around in sheets and burning crosses. Just because all of their actions are not reprehensible does not stop any member of the KKK from being, in my opinion, a scumbag. Same with neocons - minus the sheets and crosses bit.

I do not endorse throwing shoes or other means of violence even against scumbags, however.

Yes they are a group, just like members of the KKK are a GROUP (please note that I am not implying any connection between the two groups other than they are both groups are the type based on chosen affiliation rather than any inherent quality - as are hippies, or greens, or moderates &etc).

Now, members of the KKK may help old ladies across the street and rescue kittens stuck in trees when they are not running around in sheets and burning crosses. Just because all of their actions are not reprehensible does not stop any member of the KKK from being, in my opinion, a scumbag. Same with neocons - minus the sheets and crosses bit.

I do not endorse throwing shoes or other means of violence even against scumbags, however.

But Neo-cons are not an organization. The KKK is, therefore it can be represented as one entity.

You can 'step out of line' without random idiocy, in fact it helps to get the message across and change things better if you step out of line and remain civilized about it (Ghandi, anyone?). Throwing things at people like a monkey is random idiocy.
no its not --its creative dissent

So its not a generalization then to say that all neocons are hellspawn. Riiiight.
no its a fact--they are the nazis of our age

So would it be generalizing if I said that all democrats are hippy commie pinko (right order of names?) anarchists? Of course I don't actually think that but just because someone isn't on your side doesn't mean that you are right in generalizing or mistreating them.
yes it does if theyre values are evil and are killing people

Liberalism is so close to hedonism that the two beliefs can be hard to distinguish from eachother at times. The fact of the matter is that anyone who is stupid enough to believe the trash that the liberal demagogue leaders spew deserves to have a shoe thrown at them The ones spewing it deserve to have the entire stock of a shoe store thrown at them./sarcastic, close minded, intolerant, sensationalist generalization
Hedonism is good and should be worshipped

You're still applying on opinion to a GROUP of people, that's the problem.
yeah--a group of people who are trying to takeover and enslave the world

Can I get a definition of a Neocon? I want to see if I fall in that category.

facts and truth dont work against a monster who knows hes lying anyway
Reminds me why it's useless to try facts with Skapedroe/MKULTRA/RedArrow.

Can I get a definition of a Neocon? I want to see if I fall in that category.
Dick Cheney is the classic neocon. Bush is just an evil clown.

I think what this woman did was an act of spontaneous Art and all the other listeners and speakers shouldve stood back in appreciation and awe.
The crazy woman used the typical Lefty mode of argument, which is to yell insults whenever they have nothing to back them up. I think Mr Perle should take it as a badge of honor to have a crazy lefty throw a shoe, just like Ann Coulter takes the pie (which never came close to her) as a badge of honor.

no its not --its creative dissent
No, it's stupidity, but I wouldn't expect you to understand the difference.

Can't people just be happy with showing their moral superiority over their opponent in head-on-head debate (or wrestling cage matches?) I mean, making yourself look like a moron isn't going to help your cause in the slightest.

Can't people just be happy with showing their moral superiority over their opponent in head-on-head debate (or wrestling cage matches?) I mean, making yourself look like a moron isn't going to help your cause in the slightest.
Then what would the Libs, Jabba the Moore and Count Chocula Soros be left with??

Then what would the Libs, Jabba the Moore and Count Chocula Soros be left with??
Well, Mikey boy would have his chili-cheese fries and Soros could go and bathe in his billions.

Who throws a shoe?! You fight like a woman...ow!

I love it here in Canada, where politicians can expect to get pied.

I like the *former* traditional form of political protest they had in venezuela. Banging pots and pans together...











When I say former, it's because Chavez has banned it.

Well, Mikey boy would have his chili-cheese fries and Soros could go and bathe in his billions.
And the Libs would have...uh...hold on...I am sure they would have something...

And the Libs would have...uh...hold on...I am sure they would have something...
pieces of paper?

pieces of paper?
They would have all of the media, other than talk radio and Fox News.

Thank you all. I haven't laughed so hard since Jesussaves' last thread.

Thank you all. I haven't laughed so hard since Jesussaves' last thread.
Anytime!

patriotic woman throws her shoe at a scumbag neocon liar from Hell
I would just like to say that's one of the best titles for a thread I have ever seen.

patriotic woman throws her shoe at a scumbag neocon liar from Hell
I would just like to say that's one of the best titles for a thread I have ever seen.
I'd have to agree.

The crazy woman used the typical Lefty mode of argument, which is to yell insults whenever they have nothing to back them up. I think Mr Perle should take it as a badge of honor to have a crazy lefty throw a shoe, just like Ann Coulter takes the pie (which never came close to her) as a badge of honor.
Richard Perle should be grateful it was only a shoe
He deserves to be shot before a Firing squad

No, it's stupidity, but I wouldn't expect you to understand the difference.
The Founding Fathers might disagree

Richard Perle should be grateful it was only a shoe
He deserves to be shot before a Firing squad
Lot's of people deserve lot's of things.

Who made you the person to dish it out?

Can't people just be happy with showing their moral superiority over their opponent in head-on-head debate (or wrestling cage matches?) I mean, making yourself look like a moron isn't going to help your cause in the slightest.
people shouldnt concern themselves with appearances.
Embarrassment is bourgiouse

They would have all of the media, other than talk radio and Fox News.
the myth of the liberal media has been discredited a million times already here

people shouldnt concern themselves with appearances.
Embarrassment is bourgiouse
I'm not talking about embarrassment (which, I might add is a natural emotion. Hell, we see it in all sorts of other primates) I'm talking about being the "better" person. If you can destroy someone with logic and wit, you are a far more notable and worthy victor than a shoe tossing moron.

the myth of the liberal media has been discredited a million times already here
The myth of a media that is to the left of you has been discredited...

But, as I have always said, there is very little media bias either way, just a drive to get more viewers.

patriotic woman throws her shoe at a scumbag neocon liar from Hell
I would just like to say that's one of the best titles for a thread I have ever seen.
great is the power of truth that speaks with its own force

I'm not talking about embarrassment (which, I might add is a natural emotion. Hell, we see it in all sorts of other primates) I'm talking about being the "better" person. If you can destroy someone with logic and wit, you are a far more notable and worthy victor than a shoe tossing moron.
that was the most compelling argument she couldve made from an audience position

The myth of a media that is to the left of you has been discredited...

But, as I have always said, there is very little media bias either way, just a drive to get more viewers.
neocons subverted the media as part of their war against the american culture

How silly! Richard Perle as pure evil? Saddam Hussein is evil, Osama Bin Laden is evil, Adolf Hitler is evil, Josef Stalin is evil, Idi Amin is evil, Mao Tse Tung is evil... but Richard Perle? That is laughable. The only reason that you liberals hate Richard Perle is that he is very clear what he believes and he sticks to it. Another reason could possibly be because he is... Jewish. There is a lot of anti-semitism that lies just below the surface of the Democratic party. Instead of "Kike", the new catch-phrase is "neocon." If you ask a liberal who the "neocons" are, they'll be sure to tell you that Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, David Frum, Ben Wattenberg and Doughlas Feith are the "neocons." Coincidentally or not so coincidentally, all of these "neocons" are Jews which gives rise to the thought that anti-semitism plays deeply into the deep malice that many of you have for "neocons"

This woman was far from patriotic. In your estimation, anti-war hippies who have done nothing but bitch are more patriotic than our soldiers who are fighting the war and the civilians who are planning the war. This woman is an idiot. She is no patriot. Her idea of the United States is a complete distortion of what the U.S. is and what it stands for historically and currently. So, whether you like it or not, the Bush administration and those dreaded "neocons" will continue to defend America. Sure, you hippies can throw shoes at those that defend America, but it won't change anything. It will only continue to show America why you don't deserve the job of being in charge of this nation.

that was the most compelling argument she couldve made from an audience position
By looking like a moron and alienating people? No, a person can make a good arguement as an enlightened heckler. By actually challenging the person to a question they cannot answer. Make them act embarrassed, out of step and awkward. That's how to make a point, not tossing a shoe.

neocons subverted the media as part of their war against the american culture
Neocons never subverted the media. The overzealousness of Rather and the Bush memo's ought to stand as a point in fact. Or the papers across the nation that endorsed Kerry, or all sorts of things. I believe that these forums have only proven that the media has minimal bias.

Neocons never subverted the media. The overzealousness of Rather and the Bush memo's ought to stand as a point in fact. Or the papers across the nation that endorsed Kerry, or all sorts of things. I believe that these forums have only proven that the media has minimal bias.

I completely agree. You couldn't have said it better.

They would have all of the media, other than talk radio and Fox News.
... and the corporate news stations, the national newspapers...

I guess all they don't have is a mind boggling capacity for that orwellian doublethink that allows conservatives to think that any trait that people they disagree with is evidence of moral inferiority even when it is the prime trait demonstrated by their own heroes.

"don't listen to George Soros, he's a rich guy. Don't vote for Kerry he's a rich guy. I'm glad Clinton is gone, he was a hillbilly. I'm glad we have Bush because... Um... rich hillbilly... does not compute reboot rich=good smart=bad politician=good?"

I believe you mean 'sane' and you make a good point, but it certainley illustrates her feelings. Sometimes, the shoe is a mighter sword than even the pen
not too mention it was worth a good laugh. The idea of people on a mass scale throwing shoes at Necon Nazi pricks makes me giggle like a school girl. Hurray for her a real and true comedian ieven if that was not her intent. Of course she will probably be prosecuted to the max and made an "example of"

by hte way there is no reasonable way to talk to a conservative. They are beyond reason that is why the quote the bible so much.

I completely agree. You couldn't have said it better.


oh but lets not mention the Bush administration paying off members of the press to speak well of "no child left behind" BAh

lets face it neither side has moral high groudn they both went too low depths trying too win in november. Lying bribing and cheating. If you ask me the enitre politcal system needs an enema. Lets get special interests out and the voices of the consituents in . Cut the pork and corruption and get big business back on wallstreet not in the capital building. Oh wait the American people do notahve acess to Canidates who are not on the take. Because only those on the take are allowed on the ballots.

WAKE UP AND SMELL THE BULLSHIT!!!

I'm not talking about embarrassment (which, I might add is a natural emotion. Hell, we see it in all sorts of other primates) I'm talking about being the "better" person. If you can destroy someone with logic and wit, you are a far more notable and worthy victor than a shoe tossing moron.
only your own side ever believes you've destroyed your enemy with logic, the other side generally believes you've just babbled empty rhetoric and actually lost the debate...

now if you destroyed them with a martyrdom operation involving a large truck bomb, the entire world will agree they have been destroyed...

of course a shoe is not a truck bomb no matter what they told that richard reid character.

not too mention it was worth a good laugh. The idea of people on a mass scale throwing shoes at Necon Nazi pricks makes me giggle like a school girl. Hurray for her a real and true comedian ieven if that was not her intent. Of course she will probably be prosecuted to the max and made an "example of"

by hte way there is no reasonable way to talk to a conservative. They are beyond reason that is why the quote the bible so much.

"Thou sell not throw shoes at thy neighbor."
Crapisis 8:31 :D

I know plenty of conservatives who aren't even religious at all. Plenty don't even believe in God. You're the one who is acting without the reason, I'm sure you're capable of. Come on, you can do better than this. I have faith in you.

Hi Skapedroe
Bushs ancestors caused the earth to shift on its axis by trying to direct a ray from a giant crystal thru the center of the earths core

No, a rational response would be to argue, to use facts to get to the truth. Anybody, right or wrong, can yell and act immature. Only the person with the truth on their side can use facts.
I haven't read the rest of this, and I have no time to, so I apologise if I am duplicating others, but it would seem to be obvious that hers was the only possible response - do you really think she would have been given a chance to debate with him? Come on, a member of the government talking to an ordinary person!?

yes that was a shining moment in history Id like to see duplicated a billion times over

Those hippies missed her with a pie at such short range. Yeah real glorious.

the myth of the liberal media has been discredited a million times already here

I didn't know NS was a international media watchdog. Well people like you do tend to "discredit" it, but then again you use democracy now as your main source.

great is the power of truth that speaks with its own force
You're a funny wee fellow Skape, but one of the few ppl on this forum I'd be happy to have a drink and chat with down at the local.

Dick Cheney is the classic neocon. Bush is just an evil clown.

Thats not a definintion, that would be an example. I'm looking for a definition, which would include what a Neocon believes in, how they act, and what their policies are. TRY to use some facts. I see too much slander and other crap thrown about on this forum and very little actual facts to back it up.

He fucking thinks the Iraqis are going to name a public square after President Bush? God, this is one of the reasons why I live in America yet really hate it sometimes too. What a fucking idiot! That would be like the Polish putting "Hitler Square" in the center of Warsaw or the the Taiwanese naming a park after Mao. What and IDIOT!

And thank god the dems have someone in charege who will actually stand up for what he believes in and not be bought off by special interests like that asshole Terry McAuliffe (sp?).

As for that woman who threw the shoe, man I wish I could meet her. She threw her shoe at a Pentagon official! How cool is that?