NationStates Jolt Archive

http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9647

IMO, nothing short of brilliance.

http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9647

IMO, nothing short of brilliance.

yeah IMHO calling your opponents nazis or nazi appeasers is a 9.0 on the zero-credibility scale

Oh Neo-cons will you never learn?

Oh Neo-cons will you never learn?

nope they stay the course, like a herd of buffalo being forced off a cliff by neanderthals...

Wost. Word. EVER. But to be honest, killing off innocent *insert generic other guys here* is just stupid. The patriot act was true evil.

yeah IMHO calling your opponents nazis or nazi appeasers is a 9.0 on the zero-credibility scale

A 10 is using NASCAR in an argument.

Wost. Word. EVER. But to be honest, killing off innocent *insert generic other guys here* is just stupid. The patriot act was true evil.

Yes. The Patriot Act must be embarrasing to a nation that considers itself "Leader of the Free World."

Yes. The Patriot Act must be embarrasing to a nation that considers itself "Leader of the Free World."

To say the least.

Oh Neo-cons will you never learn?


They consider learning "being taken in by propaganda."

yeah IMHO calling your opponents nazis or nazi appeasers is a 9.0 on the zero-credibility scale

As proven by Godwin.

As proven by Godwin.

Godwin should so apply to real life.

When the Bushians call bin Laden a "fascist," the only proper response is, Look who's talking!

There is a fascist threat to America, all right, but it isn't coming from overseas. It isn't hiding in the caves of Wahhabistan, but lurking in Washington's corridors of power. The same people who warn us of a "fascist" threat coming from abroad are the main purveyors of authoritarianism on the home front. And that is what life is like in the Bizarro World of America in the year A.D. 2006, where the most militant fascists of all style themselves the leaders of a new "anti-fascist" popular front.

Kudos.

A 10 is using NASCAR in an argument.

ROFL

How ever can you go worse than that?

To geniuses like Justin Raimondo, 1939 never happened.

Yes. The Patriot Act must be embarrasing to a nation that considers itself "Leader of the Free World."

The latter is starting to become more embarrassing.

We're fighting the religious faithful, not any sort of 'fascists.'

This is obviously a problem for a party's whose strongest base consists of the religious faithful.

Yes. The Patriot Act must be embarrasing to a nation that considers itself "Leader of the Free World."

You'd think so, wouldn't you?

Oh Neo-cons will you never learn?

I think you mean to say, "Oh Neo-cons will you ever learn?"
Your statement implies that they are learning now and you would prefer to see them stop (learning).

This bit of pedantry proudly brought to you by Demented "Grammar-Nazi" Hamsters.

I think you mean to say, "Oh Neo-cons will you ever learn?"
Your statement implies that they are learning now and you would prefer to see them stop (learning).

This bit of pedantry proudly brought to you by Demented "Grammar-Nazi" Hamsters.

HEIL SPELLCHECK!

I think you mean to say, "Oh Neo-cons will you ever learn?"
Your statement implies that they are learning now and you would prefer to see them stop (learning).

This bit of pedantry proudly brought to you by Demented "Grammar-Nazi" Hamsters.

ACHTUNG GRAMMARJUDEN!

You are going to the camp, scum.

No mercy for editors after-a-fashion and lets-pretend grammar police.

"will they never..." not only makes clear sense, but is common in formal written english.

"Will we never find a final solution to the grammarjuden problem?"


From our friend google:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,1605802,00.html

6 Results since 1981 and 31 previously in the NYT archive search.

ACHTUNG GRAMMARJUDEN!

You are going to the camp, scum.

No mercy for editors after-a-fashion and lets-pretend grammar police.

"will they never..." not only makes clear sense, but is common in formal written english.

"Will we never find a final solution to the grammarjuden problem?"


From our friend google:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,1605802,00.html

6 Results since 1981 and 31 previously in the NYT archive search.

Not funny. At all. Maybe you should edit that again?

Not funny. At all. Maybe you should edit that again?

Yeah, my german ist nicht sehr gut and all. In retrospect it should be 'grammatik' not 'grammar,' or so says DAS BUCH

Yeah, my german ist nicht sehr gut and all. In retrospect it should be 'grammatik' not 'grammar,' or so says DAS BUCH
Yes. That. And that your post is highly offensive. Which is what I was getting at.

Yes. That. And that your post is highly offensive. Which is what I was getting at.


Not as offensive as making false corrections to english grammar though.

Like the bible and the constitution says, "no right not to be offended."

Not as offensive as making false corrections to english grammar though.

Like the bible and the constitution says, "no right not to be offended."
Whatever. I just thought your post was inappropriate. Calling someone a grammar-nazi is very different from your choice of words and bad taste.

Whatever. I just thought your post was inappropriate. Calling someone a grammar-nazi is very different from your choice of words and bad taste.

Wow. I thought my post of "HEIL SPELLCHECK!" would be called bad taste.

And 'neo-con' is somehow more credible than 'islamo-facist'?
Please, theyre both stupid political buzzwords made up to appeal to the lowest common denominator of their respective political parties. They are the bastard-child prostitutes of the English language, like 'Synergy'.

Harmonia Mortus Redux;11648216']And 'neo-con' is somehow more credible than 'islamo-facist'?
Please, theyre both stupid political buzzwords made up to appeal to the lowest common denominator of their respective political parties. They are the bastard-child prostitutes of the English language, like 'Synergy'.

Ze train is packed tonight herran und damen, ze train is packed tonight...


Neocon is short for "neoconservative" which is how the architects of the war in iraq and the 'war on terror' SELF IDENTIFY.

Bill Kristol, paul dundes wolfowitz, richard perle, &al

Beyond this self-identification, it is FACTUALLY accurate where "islamofascist" is NOT factually accurate.

This breed of "big government" "new conservative" in the government is just that - neo-conservative.

Ze train is packed tonight herran und damen, ze train is packed tonight...
Careful, buddy.

They are the bastard-child prostitutes of the English language, like 'Synergy'.

What have you got against the word 'synergy'? That's always been a legitimate word as far back as I can recall.

Careful, buddy.

don't rise to the bait, let the troll dance around in his lederhosen...

Wost. Word. EVER. But to be honest, killing off innocent *insert generic other guys here* is just stupid. The patriot act was true evil.
In the long run, Bush's damage to our civil rights will probably turn out worse than September 11th. If America, the alleged bastion of freedom and liberty and all that jazz, gets turned into the sort of state Bush wants, that is far worse than 3000 dead.

In the long run, Bush's damage to our civil rights will probably turn out worse than September 11th. If America, the alleged bastion of freedom and liberty and all that jazz, gets turned into the sort of state Bush wants, that is far worse than 3000 dead.

agreed. But loss of human life is concrete, and carries a lot more emotional capital than loss of something abstract like liberty or individual rights. The masses are just to stupid and think too much in absolutes and statistics...

Careful, buddy.

As long as unclean hands stay away from English, ze vill be no need fur ze grammatikschutstuffel to intervene

What have you got against the word 'synergy'? That's always been a legitimate word as far back as I can recall.

Yes, but these days Synergy is a corporate whore.

To geniuses like Justin Raimondo, 1939 never happened.

No, he just recognizes, as anyone with the slimmest grasp of history does, a bullshit argument when he sees it.

In 1938, Germany had the second largest economy in the world and the most powerful military. The US had the largest economy, and their army was smaller than Finland's. Nazi Germany was a threat, and it was really not much of a surprise when they were able to swallow much of Europe in 18 months. Had they not overextended, they might never have been beaten back.

Osama bin Laden, by comparison, apparently lives in some caves in northern Pakistan, where the Taliban is reconstituting itself and Pakistan either can't or won't do anything about it. The biggest dog in the area is Iran, which isn't even in the top 20 in the world economies, and has a military that doesn't even strike fear into its neighbors. Iraq is a disaster, and none of the other Arab states could even begin to mass an attack against the US, or Europe, for that matter.

And yet this "threat" is what has you and those like you hiding under your rhetorical beds at night, pissing your underoos and calling for Daddy Bush to save you. It's pathetic. It's sad.

Bush is still at it today.
Today's paper carried a speech he made recently, actually quoting Bin Laden and comparing Laden to Lenin and Hitler.

Funny, but I thought just a few months ago Bush was on record as saying Bin Laden isn't a threat anymore and he doesn't spend any time thinking about him. Yet here he is now, summonding up the Bin Laden Bogieman and comparing him to Hitler and warning us that Bin Laden won't stop until the West is destroyed.

Not wanting to get into conspiracy theory territory here, but one wonders whether the Bush admin have been secretly happy to have Bin Laden still at large. Always handy to have a convenient punchbag to drag out and point the bone at in order to scare the local yokels with the short attention-span whenever the polls dip or, in this case, time moves into election season.

In the long run, Bush's damage to our civil rights will probably turn out worse than September 11th. If America, the alleged bastion of freedom and liberty and all that jazz, gets turned into the sort of state Bush wants, that is far worse than 3000 dead.

I would be interested to know what civil rights of yours have been curtailed. It's quite simple to make that statement; however, in doing so it is incumbent upon you to identify the basis for your statement. I would hope, and beleive, that the seperation of powers would vitiate any such diminishment in the rights we enjoy in America. To say that the "damage to our civil rights will probably turn out worse than 9/11" is not only a sweeping statement, but compares apples to oranges. Not only is it nearly impossible to quantify the effect of either; and thus make any comparison impractical, the diminishment of our civil rights would necessarily, following your logic, be a result of 9/11.

Finally, in a forum such as this, are grammar or spelling any real concern when it is the exchange of ideas and opinions which drive the forum?

After reading the article, I have to wonder if the author knows what the definition of "neoconservative" is.

I'm tired of these Pots calling the Mother****ing Kettle Black!

Still this writer confuses me, does he claim that the maniacs in Iran, Who want religion to control every aspect of the Government, are NOT facist??, but claims that the current maniacs in office are Facists for trying to set up the same sort of Government??

They are either Both facists or neither.
Maybe I read it wrong, but for my opinion.
I'm going for both being Facists.

Yes the Current US government is a Facist Government, out to destroy the middle class and return it to the Middle Ages:
The CEO Elites, the Serfs, and the 'Moral' Inqusition.
Interestingly Iran has similar Goals:
The Cleric Elite, the Serfs, and the "Moral" Inqusition.

Take from it what you will next election season.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v488/derek45/funny/strangelove_rumsfeld.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v488/derek45/funny/strangelove_rumsfeld.jpg Uncanny Resemblance...

I'm tired of these Pots calling the Mother****ing Kettle Black!

Still this writer confuses me, does he claim that the maniacs in Iran, Who want religion to control every aspect of the Government, are NOT facist??, but claims that the current maniacs in office are Facists for trying to set up the same sort of Government??

They are either Both facists or neither.
Maybe I read it wrong, but for my opinion.
I'm going for both being Facists.

Yes the Current US government is a Facist Government, out to destroy the middle class and return it to the Middle Ages:
The CEO Elites, the Serfs, and the 'Moral' Inqusition.
Interestingly Iran has similar Goals:
The Cleric Elite, the Serfs, and the "Moral" Inqusition.

Take from it what you will next election season.
Personally I'm tired of knee-jerk reactions by idiots who don't even bother reading articles before attacking it, but still they continue.
*sigh*

Mind pointing out where exactly in the OP article the author defends Iran?
Indeed, mind pointing out in the OP article where the author even mentions Iran?

But hey! Why buck the trend by using facts to defend the current Admin, huh? Just stick to name-calling. Much easier that way.

No mercy for editors after-a-fashion and lets-pretend grammar police.

"will they never..." not only makes clear sense, but is common in formal written english.

"Will we never find a final solution to the grammarjuden problem?"


We'll have to send them to a conjugation camp.

Funny, but I thought just a few months ago Bush was on record as saying Bin Laden isn't a threat anymore and he doesn't spend any time thinking about him. Yet here he is now, summonding up the Bin Laden Bogieman and comparing him to Hitler and warning us that Bin Laden won't stop until the West is destroyed.

What Bush meant by "not that big a problem... don't spend much time thinking about him," was that there wasn't a big election coming up in the next couple of weeks. The upcoming mid-term elections promise to be a big problem for the Republicans, and so Bush now must bring up Bin Laden, who isn't a problem the rest of the time.

Personally I'm tired of knee-jerk reactions by idiots who don't even bother reading articles before attacking it, but still they continue.
*sigh*

Mind pointing out where exactly in the OP article the author defends Iran?
Indeed, mind pointing out in the OP article where the author even mentions Iran?

But hey! Why buck the trend by using facts to defend the current Admin, huh? Just stick to name-calling. Much easier that way.

1. I'm not attacking it, I'm just questioning on if he was claiming that.

2.Suffice to say that the modernist vision of a super-centralized corporatist state, secular at its core, that constitutes classical fascist ideology is in many ways the opposite of the Islamist vision, which is supranational, not super-nationalistic, and nowhere commands state power. I see no difference between the two versions, despite the author's claim but like I said before, I might have just read it wrong. Besides he touched a nerve by comparing FDR to Bush.

3. Defend Bush and his cronies? Now did YOU even read my post, look in my past posts, I'm agaist that moron and everything he stands for. No let me guess you just saw, "I'm against part of the article," then went
"OMG BUSH SUPPORTER!!!" you fit your title alright.
Read over my post again, I don't like Bush, I've never like this adminstration, but nope you're too stupid to to even put that together.

2. I see no difference between the two versions, despite the author's claim but like I said before, I might have just read it wrong. Besides he touched a nerve by comparing FDR to Bush..
Apologies then. It just seemed like you were defending Bush.
I can't see him comparing FDR to Bush. The OP article makes the point that FDR was fervently against US involvement in WWII (initially), which makes him one of the 'Hitler-appeasers' bogiemen that Bush et al are currently conjuring up in their twisted analogies in order to attack and smear opponents of their (failed) Iraqi/terrorism policies.

It feels like we're reading two different articles here.

Bleh...some people just like in 1939...never smell the toast burning until the bombs land in their coffee .

go figure .

Bleh...some people just like in 1939...never smell the toast burning until the bombs land in their coffee .

go figure .

Rather than cut and paste my reply, I'll just link it (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11648721&postcount=36). It fits you as well.

Bush is still at it today.
Today's paper carried a speech he made recently, actually quoting Bin Laden and comparing Laden to Lenin and Hitler.

Funny, but I thought just a few months ago Bush was on record as saying Bin Laden isn't a threat anymore and he doesn't spend any time thinking about him. Yet here he is now, summonding up the Bin Laden Bogieman and comparing him to Hitler and warning us that Bin Laden won't stop until the West is destroyed.

Not wanting to get into conspiracy theory territory here, but one wonders whether the Bush admin have been secretly happy to have Bin Laden still at large. Always handy to have a convenient punchbag to drag out and point the bone at in order to scare the local yokels with the short attention-span whenever the polls dip or, in this case, time moves into election season.

taking advantage of his inability to get bin laden by dragging him out as the boogey man every national election season isnt the same as being happy that he is out there

a successful politician takes advantage of everything he can to win elections. its not his fault that those who vote his way dont notice that binladen is out there because bush has failed to get him. that would be like blaming mcdonald's for my decision to supersize my frenchfries.

taking advantage of his inability to get bin laden by dragging him out as the boogey man every national election season isnt the same as being happy that he is out there

a successful politician takes advantage of everything he can to win elections. its not his fault that those who vote his way dont notice that binladen is out there because bush has failed to get him. that would be like blaming mcdonald's for my decision to supersize my frenchfries.

McDonald's doesn't have the supersize anymore. :p

McDonald's doesn't have the supersize anymore. :p

Well, then Ronald deserves praise for being at the forefront of the battle against obesity in this country. By not offering to Supresize fries McDonalds has done more to combat obesity than all those hypocritical crybaby vegans at PETA and the American Heart Association combined. We should turn over all fat-busting initiatives to McDonalds. They're the only one's really doing anything to make us thinner.

I would be interested to know what civil rights of yours have been curtailed.

The right to make a God dammed phone call without the government listening and recording it. The right to keep my bank records my own. The garentee of the right of due process.

See Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, and Bush's executive orders for a more complete list.

We'll have to send them to a conjugation camp.

That is the first thing on the internet that accully made me laugh out loud in a while, congradulations :)

Well, then Ronald deserves praise for being at the forefront of the battle against obesity in this country. By not offering to Supresize fries McDonalds has done more to combat obesity than all those hypocritical crybaby vegans at PETA and the American Heart Association combined. We should turn over all fat-busting initiatives to McDonalds. They're the only one's really doing anything to make us thinner.

That makes no sence. McDonalds was offering something that damaged your health if you ate it. They then removed the largest quantity, but still offers you a product that damages your health of you eat it. And they're *fighting* obesity? More then that, they're fighting obesity more then the AMA, an association that spends billions in treatment and reaserch, and is accully making strides to help people's health? I'm sorry, your logic is flawed.

This group finds solutions to health problems and educates the public. This group offers you food that damages your health, but they don't have the biggest size anymore. The second group is obviously the one that is figting obescity! (sarcasm)