OT: Political dead horse

It is so interesting that you protest so strongly.

Your love is actually quite misguided. You are the kind of person who apparently believes in 'tough love' against our country (the US.) You'd obviously like to see a few serious failures with the GOP in control -- so that would 'teach' the country a lesson that the totally ineffective demoncrat leadership is better than the activist anti-Islamist GOP.

There is A LOT of similarity between the Islamist way of doing things and the American leftist way of doing things. Truly, the overly religious Islamists and the overly religious US left wing are likely constituted of the same kind of emotionally defective people.

John

Take it easy on that weed; too much can cause paranoia.

John

"...overly religious US left wing..."

???

Neville Chamberlain was the prime minister in the UK at the start of World War II. He was a fairly good peace-time leader, but a poor war-time leader. He tried hard to keep the peace and avoid war with Germany - inevitably, he failed. He wasn't particularly leftist, nor a "weenie". In contrast, Churchill replaced him and was a very successful war-time leader, but a terrible peace-time leader after the war.

Given that Chamberlain was a good politician and leader in his time, and avoided going to war and condemning millions to their deaths until it was clearly unavoidable (and until Britain was in a better position to fight such a war), I'd say being called a modern-day Chamberlain was a compliment, although I'm guessing it was not meant as such.

David Brown wrote in news:43b1162c$ snipped-for-privacy@news.wineasy.se:

Most straight-speaking people make poor *politicians*.

The proper term for use with "Neville Chamberlain" is APPEASEMENT. And his name is hardly a compliment.

Yes, your own comments have been showing that.

American leftists do seem to show behavior that could very easily result from mean spiriteness.

The 'Lefties' are those who are more likely to help the horrible terrorists (or try to impede the proper response to terrorists.) The 'Lefties' are much less likely to be supportive of a productively 'working' person, but are more interested in supporting the rights of Islamist terrorists or people who illegally enter the country (practically the very first action in the country that they enter is illegal.) The mean spiritedness of the left is mostly related to true meanness (in the sense of evil, but I tend to stay secular) and hate. Islamist terrorists and American leftists seem to result from similar basic personalities, but very different environments. It is probably the environment that does moderate the behavior of the leftists to the level of Al Franken, Al Gore or John Kerry. The basic 'hate filled' personalities of the leftists do seem to be similar in some basic sense to the Islamists.

So, when I see the nonsense (mean spiritedness) from the left, it is much easier to understand when recognizing the similar support of chaos as from the Islamists. It is much easier to understand the leftist (secularly evil) mind when using the Islamist terrorists as yet another exemplar of evil.

John

When you recognize that 'leftism' as practiced by the American leftists (e.g. Al Franken, Al Gore, etc) is indeed a corrupt and disgusting religion, then their misguided behavior becomes much easier to understand. A large part of the American left and the wakko Islamist movement are both a form of 'religion gone wild'.

The problem with such defective religions (like the American leftism) is that they have too much religious zeal and the American left is based only on faith and not reality. So, our (US) own version of the extreme Islamist movement, full of nutcases, is definitely the American leftist movement... The mainstream of the American Islamist equivalent would be Al Franken, Al Gore, John Kerry, etc. (The Clintons nor Lieberman would be included in that corrupt movement, but the Clintons come close.)

John

Well, the war-worshipers hate the peace-lovers, and the peace-lovers hate the war-worshipers; what we should do is find some uninhabited planet to send all of the war-worshipers to, so they can kill each other off, and we peace-lovers can get on with our lives.

Thanks! Rich

Uh, that war causes nothing but pain, suffering, death, and destruction?

Thanks, Rich

Come on, Jim. If you're going to bait me, you'll have to do better than this. In fact, this just barely qualifies you as an apprentice baiter.

So, if you're going for the master...

;-) Rich

You have no idea how insane this really is, have you?

He's just another neocon tape player.

Thanks, Rich

No, it's only the peace lovers who hate.

I hear deep space is pretty peaceful. Why don't you go, instead of trying to fit the rest of the species into your tiny little mold?

Sometimes it ends pain, suffering, death, and destruction too. History shows that appeasement never will.

Yes, that's what you're programmed to believe. But all you're really seeing is your own hatred being reflected back to you.

Good Luck! Rich

Nope, I'm not the one who wants to see anyone ('W") dead[*]. That's your kind. You have a lot of company here though (Win, Sloman, et. al).

We can rarely count on finding much truth in your posts. Bill Sloman and myself certainly don't wish anyone dead. Take George W Bush, please. :-) We merely wish to see him out of his present office.

I'll second that. Political assasination is a very bad idea. No matter how mean and rotten the man you take out, the replacement is always worse.

Sort of like the U.S. intervention in Iraq - nobody could imagine that getting rid of Saddam could make things worse for the Iraqis than they were under Saddam, but reality has surpassed our imaginations, as it so often does.

The tone and posting history doesn't agree with you. Actually, Howard Dean (the leader of your kind, that is Demoncrats) is prototypical of the lies and mischaracterizations.

John