A columnist from a Chicago suburban paper has equated smoking to abortion in order to explain away her support of an abortion mill struggling to open in Aurora, Illinois. Saying that since smoking is legal, and it “kills” people, why shouldn't abortion be legal, we find her reasoning is strained and absurd. If there’s a more ridiculous comparison out there, I'd like to see it. Following her tortured logic, we should outlaw everything that might kill someone if we also outlaw abortion -- which WILL kill someone.
There are so many specious arguments that this supporter of infanticide tries to use in this article to support abortion that it must spin the head of most readers. The whole thing has a feel like the author of the column, Joni Hirsch-Blackman, is throwing just about everything she can think of against a wall to see what sticks quite regardless of any logic or sense to it all.
After simple-mindedly explaining that "Tobacco kills," which in reality is not a literal truth because often times it does not, Hirsch-Blackman explains that, while she "sneers" at smokers, she would never protest against it because it is legal.
It's tempting, but I'd never harass the people who go in there or try to have the store shut down -- even though the whole purpose for the place being there is to sell something that eventually will kill whoever is using it.
Tobacco is legal and the store has a right to be there. So instead, I, and others who feel the way I do, try to educate people about the dangers of tobacco.
Really? She and her fellows would never harass smokers and try to get their right to smoke taken away from them? Odd, since she and like-minded friends in the state have succeeded in getting the State of Illinois to pass a smoking ban in public places that starts just this year.
Why is it OK to protest and use the courts and the coercion endemic with the law to ban smoking which only might cause varied health problems yet we should leave the faux right of abortion alone merely because it is "legal?"
Talk about tortured logic. And her lack of sense gets worse as the article progresses.
Hirsch-Blackman praises a website put up by Planned Parenthood because they claim they wish to "protect the community."
From Planned Parenthood's Aurora location Web site: "At Planned Parenthood, we believe the preventative services this health care center will offer will do more in one day to promote responsible family planning and prevent the need for abortion than our opponents will do in a lifetime of protests."
I wonder if there is anywhere on the PP website where they admit to the proven fact that they tell under-aged, young girls who have been raped not to report the attack just so PP can get in another abortion statistic?
My guess is no.
Next our intrepid reporter goes all a’gush over a recent Daily Herald advertisement supporting the opening of the abortion that was ostensibly placed by a gaggle of wayward pastors and ministers.
Perhaps surprisingly, this ad was placed by a long list of religious leaders. Yes, religious leaders supporting a Planned Parenthood clinic. Some would have you believe that anyone tolerant of such thing must be a heathen.
Her reductionist hyperbole aside, it is well known that thousands of religious Christians support the death cult of abortion. Did Hirsch-Blackman, a purported reporter, just discover this fact?
But, here is another factoid that Hirsch-Blackman tries not to make much of: the ad was bought and paid for by Planned Parenthood. It wasn't an unconnected and disinterested group of local ministers that rose to the debate and contracted for the ad at all.
Does Hirsch-Blackman not suspect a bias?
Apparently the "reporter" in her was untouched by the obvious conflict of interest with this advocacy ad.
Then Hirsch-Blackman flies off on an odd tangent. She seems to imagine that abortion supporters who have been known to mount giant protests as well as unwanted lawsuits that really represent no one's interest directly are managing to "co-exist peacefully" but that religious people against abortion are bigots who are somehow destroying our communities.
People whose religious beliefs differ are often able to co-exist peacefully. Mormons who don't drink alcohol don't harass bar owners or patrons. Jews who keep Kosher don't picket or protest places that sell cheeseburgers. Muslims who fast during Ramadan do not attack those who eat. It's not for them, but it's legal. Why can't religious people who oppose abortion behave in the same way?
Hows does that old saying go? "The pot calling the kettle black?"
Then she amusingly equates the silence of local support for this baby killing mill to an apparent support of the place.
Our community. Two things have surprised me: how much press and interest this has generated outside of our community and how little I hear people in our community talking about this issue.
Community members should speak up. Don't let extremists from around the country make decisions in your neighborhood.
Well, Mrs. Hirsch-Blackman, couldn’t it be that no one in the community is opposing those who are protesting this abortion mill because they don't want it there in the first place? Couldn’t it be that they agree with the protests so they see no reason to get involved further? How does local community silence somehow mean that they want it there or that they want the protests stopped?
One amusing thing about this whole column of hers, however, is her claims that abortion protesters don't speak for "the whole community." Yet, she arrives to the rescue and imagines that she, herself, somehow does speak for the community even as she admits it is largely silent on the whole mess!
Wow is THAT an argument the logic of which will cause whiplash!
Lastly, it is telling that Hirsch-Blackman ignores the lies Planned Parenthood told so that they could open the thing in the first place. If this abortion mill was such a great idea and Planned Parenthood was so proud of its black art, why did they have to hide behind false front companies and misleading claims to the city in order to get their "clinic" opened?
It’s another sad attempt by the MSM to turn logic on it’s head and paint people who want to save the lives of millions of children as the evil here.













Comments Policy
The last time I checked,
September 24, 2007 - 11:20 ET by HypocriteHaterThe last time I checked, smoking was a voluntary act that you took up at your own risk. No one asks the fetus whether or not they'd like to be aborted.
And along that same line, anti-smokers want to ban smoking in public because they claim the secondhand smoke is harmful to other indivduals. Gee, isn't abortion harmful to other individuals as well? Oh, that's right. As long as you don't call the fetus a person or an individual, it doesn't count.
thank-you libs
September 26, 2007 - 14:55 ET by TruthMonger...sounds to me like she's using the liberal smoking-ban logic to inadvertently justify the banning abortion:) - liberals are always doing this to themselves...
i do agree with her on that...
lib "logic"
September 24, 2007 - 12:25 ET by Conservative_in_mass."Community members should speak up. Don't let extremists from around the country make decisions in your neighborhood."
How disingenuous of her. Thats exactly what we conservatives are up against every day Ms. Hirsh-Blackman. On one hand libs want to control every aspect of my life. However if my position differs from yours (such as with the abortion issue), then it is incumbent upon me to just shut up. Not gonna happen.
As for your crusade against tobacco, I have just one small question for you. If you do get your wish to outlaw cigarette smoking all together, how are you going to replace the billions of dollars in tax revenue tobacco sales generates? <chirp.....chirp>
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. ~ Unknown
"Why can't religious people
September 24, 2007 - 12:31 ET by Ruths husband Ben"Why can't religious people who oppose abortion behave in the same way?" For the same reason that religious people who opposed slavery couldn't behave in the same way. Because we are called to stand against evil where ever it is found and not go quietly into the darkness. There is a world of difference between allowing someone else to not eat Kosher and advocating the murder of innocent children. One would think that would be obvious.
"We just can't trust the American people to make those types of choices.... Government has to make those choices for people" -HRC
This woman's
September 24, 2007 - 12:52 ET by ckc1227This woman's simple-mindedness is a perfect example of why liberals should never gain power, as far too many of them feel the same way. Their severely flawed, one-size fits all logic will be the end of us yet.
"The ultimate Democrat constituent would be a public schoolteacher on welfare who needed an abortion and was suing her doctor."
Ann Coulter
Okay, if you want to equate
September 24, 2007 - 12:53 ET by WhoIsJohnGaltOkay, if you want to equate the two; smoking and abortion, using her twisted-beyond-recognition logic...
Since smoking is legal and she feels the same treatment should be given abortions, then she must feel that taxes on abortions would be fair at the same exhorbitant rate that are applied to cigarettes, right? What is the current tax rate on Cigarettes in NY? Somewhere around 400%?
Sure, make taxes on abortions 400% or what the clinic charges and see the wailing begin!
Hold on now
September 24, 2007 - 13:07 ET by cleverpigHows does that old saying go? "The pot calling the kettle black?"
Okay, I agree with most of your article-- the column sounds stupid. But here I have to argue.
I don't know of any pro-choice activists who felt the need to shoot doctors, or bomb anything. Asking abortion opponents to try to behave more peacefully is not the pot calling the kettle black.
I understand why there is more violence on your side of the argument-- it is because you believe the pro-choice position is itself violence. We don't see it that way. I think there is a difference between terminating a pregnancy and shooting someone in the head. So I don't think there is any hypocrisy in asking for more peaceful interactions between pro choice and pro life camps.
cleverpig:
September 24, 2007 - 13:24 ET by QueenMum" I think there is a difference between terminating a pregnancy and shooting someone in the head."
Oh, really? Care to point out the differences?
Power to the people!
QM some bad humor--
September 24, 2007 - 13:28 ET by misterbillA terminated pregnancy-- an innocent baby dies.
Someone shot in the head- Perhaps one of the baby killers dies!!!!
I choose neither.
the only difference is that
September 26, 2007 - 14:57 ET by TruthMongerthe only difference is that the child is always innocent and the doctor is always guilty...
"I don't know of any
September 24, 2007 - 13:37 ET by ckc1227"I don't know of any pro-choice activists who felt the need to shoot
doctors, or bomb anything. Asking abortion opponents to try to behave
more peacefully is not the pot calling the kettle black."
Just because you don't know about them doesn't mean they don't exist. By the way, when was the last time an abortion clinic was bombed, or an abortion doctor shot for his actions? 10 years ago?
Yes, it has happened, and I don't approve at all. But let's compare the number of abortion doctors who have been killed/injured by these activists with the number of innocent babies killed minutes before birth by one doctor in Kansas alone. It's not even close.
"it is because you believe the pro-choice position is itself
violence. We don't see it that way. "
See, that's part of the problem, and sounds eerily like something a wife beater or a child molester might say in their own defense. Just because you're willing to buy into the lie that you tell yourself doesn't mean rational-thinking people have to.
"I think there is a difference
between terminating a pregnancy and shooting someone in the head."
Try telling that to the baby who has his brain sucked out after getting his skull punctured. Oh, wait, you can't, because he's dead.
People like you feel that the location of the baby makes a difference; people with a working brain know better.
Sheesh, talk about a suspension of disbelief.
"The ultimate Democrat constituent would be a public schoolteacher on welfare who needed an abortion and was suing her doctor."
Ann Coulter
Ow
September 24, 2007 - 21:22 ET by cleverpigI should, perhaps, have known better than to get involved in an abortion debate here! I'm not going to try and explain why I think abortion isn't murder, that's just way too much to go into-- our comments would undoubtedly become unreadably narrow as we pen pages of useless argument... My point is that if you look simply at how the two sides of the argument pursue their agendas, the most violence has historically been perpetrated by the pro-life camp. So I think it is perfectly reasonable for an otherwise annoying commentator to ask for a little more calm and civility. That said, I also realize, as the author obviously does not, that part of the reason why the pro life side of the argument can be calmer is because we currently have the law on our side. The tone might not remain so civil if that changes.
Abortion is murder.
September 24, 2007 - 21:38 ET by bigtimerAbortion is murder.
}}---> Right bt Abortion is murder
September 24, 2007 - 21:46 ET by Cool Arrowand now, thanks to his holeyheadedness so is Driving a car.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Stupidswine,
September 24, 2007 - 21:43 ET by Dave R..the most violence has historically been perpetrated by the pro-life camp.
When was the last time a pro-lifer took forceps and literally ripped the limbs, one at a time, from an abortion doctor?
You don't think abortion is murder? Suppose you were suddenly having your arms, legs and even your head pinchced off. Would you think you were being murdered then?
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
...the American pro-choice
September 26, 2007 - 15:01 ET by TruthMonger...the American pro-choice crowd alone kills 3000 kids a day and wounds 3000 mothers and the PRO-LIFERS ARE SAID TO BE MORE VIOLENT?!?!?
simply amazing
Stupidswine,
September 24, 2007 - 21:36 ET by Dave RI think there is a difference between terminating a pregnancy and shooting someone in the head...
That depends on who it is that is getting shot. If it's a thug committing a crime against an innocent person gets his brains splattered in the process, who really cares?
Only bleeding-heart criminal-coddlers like yourself care.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
His mom?
September 25, 2007 - 02:29 ET by cleverpigHis mom?
Life Chain is on Oct 7
September 24, 2007 - 14:29 ET by Hoosier DaddyGo to http://www.lifechain... and find a group that's local to you.
Please think about this. The life you might save is precious in God's eyes.
Evolutionists have heard of Darwin; Creationists understand Darwin.
Smoking is not completely legal
September 24, 2007 - 15:20 ET by NiftySwellI think we should fully support her analogy. Since smoking is only legal for those 18 or older, in other words, you must wait to be 18 before killing yourself. Then abortions need to be postponed until the baby's 18th birthday. If we use the same analogy then it is only fair to take it to its logical conclusion, right?
Sure!
September 24, 2007 - 16:52 ET byOr wait until they are 18 and send them off to war. Not a justifiable war; not defending their own country; no, but a war that no one can even remember nor agree on it's reasons for starting in the first place.
It's amazing how many people can justify the deaths of their country's young adults just for false politics, so I don't feel bad about being pro-choice.
It is a volunteer army
September 24, 2007 - 17:06 ET by bigtimerIt is a volunteer army eye.
Twy weally weally hard to remember that.
Exactly, BT. They have a choice.
September 24, 2007 - 17:29 ET by RJBut the babies don't....
No they do not
September 24, 2007 - 17:31 ET by bigtimerNo they do not RJ.
Despicable isn't it?
Eyecare doesn't feel
September 24, 2007 - 21:16 ET by SportPoliticsbad about it though, because they can't grow up to be service men and women he despises, who are big enough to make their own choices, that Eyecare can't control, but he can support those adults being murdered by terrorists. The "post abortion justice" for he and mikey the freedom fighters.
Good thing the idiots like Eyecare only get away with calling adults "children", and not "babies", or they might want all our military slaughtered as well.
}}---> Correction Sporty
September 24, 2007 - 21:23 ET by Cool Arrow"Feel" is always spelled with more than 2 e's when a liberal is involved. As in:
Feeeeeliiings, wo wo wo feeeeeliiings.
OK?
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
maybe eye care can just
September 26, 2007 - 15:05 ET by TruthMongermaybe eye care can just consider it an abortion of saddam hussein...
its about 40,000,000 kids a year aborted worldwide - so what's one more, really...
It's like a WAR ON BABIES - un UNJUSTIFIABLE WAR ya know...
So it's only justifiable when your ass is at risk?
September 24, 2007 - 17:34 ET by c5thenUsing your "logic" WWI was not justifiable because the US was not at risk. Korea was unjustifiable because the US was not attacked. VietNam was unjustifiable, Kosovo and Bosnia were not justifiable...
You also equate the choice of 18 year-olds to join the armed forces with the killing of an innocent child. Amazing, the world that you must live in. What is the color of the sky?
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
Probably the same colour as
September 24, 2007 - 17:54 ET byProbably the same colour as your sky. I'm just saying that abortion is always wheeled out because it is so easy for a simple audience.
The people against it are usually the most in favour of; Capital Punishment, Guns, War, "Eye for an Eye etc" but they can only ever separate Abortion as an unjustifiable form of killing.
I've also never met an anti abortion person who had actually been in the position.
As for the earlier comment about the military being volunteers, that's what is so sad about it. That's why I support the troops, and nut jobs on NB say that I cannot.
The troops volunteer in good faith, and they faithfully and loyally do their job, and they have my admiration. They DON'T have the admiration of the voters who send them to places for the wrong reasons, just because of misguided politics, and egos, and invisible friends, and a "mine's bigger than your's" mentality.
It's also because of the VOLUNTEER nature of the forces, that no politicians' kids are getting killed, so it will go on, and on, and on.
Eye,
September 24, 2007 - 18:05 ET by BlondeYou and I have had the abortion debate ad nauseum. Believe what you must.
But I'd ask you to keep your euro-sensibilities about OUR troops, and our voters, out of your posts.
Why don't you try to "prove" that They DON'T have the admiration of the voters who send them to places for the wrong reasons, just because of misguided politics, and egos, and invisible friends, and a "mine's bigger than your's" mentality.
The last I checked, there was overwhelming support and admiration for the troops by the American people. So put up or shut up. Prove it.
I'm calling you out, right here and now, eye.
Don't even try to turn the argument around on me. As we used to say around here....link or slink.
<edit> P.S. Quoting cut & run democrat congrescritters not allowed.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Blonde
September 24, 2007 - 18:44 ET byGenerally, I don't respond to your posts any more because they resort to old worn out simple falsehoods. However, I won't let you twist arguments when it comes to the troops.
Yes, the troops are admired in all of the coalition nations. Again, don't try your jackboot censorship on me like you always do, by trying to say we don't stand behind the same troops. WE DO. It's just that I care about them getting killed for oil. You are cool with it.
I think Afghanistan is more justifiable than Iraq. You don't. I'd like to see our troops in Sudan. You don't. I'm in favour of the UN. You're not. I think Iraq is just another Vietnam. You are happy about Iraq being another Vietnam.
We have different opinions. Deal with it. Stop trying to tell me I can't say "Our Troops". They are "our troops". If you can't deal with that, you are simply proving my point; that we all live in this world.
Ironically, this was the message peddled by that troll US, Not U.S.
PS I notice you are fond of the "euro sensibilities" thing. Does this mean;
1 I'm Australian? (and that's a crime)
2 I care about people? (and that's a crime)
3 I know stuff. (and that's a crime)
etc etc
No, No, No, Eye.
September 24, 2007 - 19:03 ET by BlondeMy challenge to you was to prove that the "VOTERS do not support the troops". Not your voters, my voters. In the U.S.A. That was the context of your original post....try to deny it and everyone here will know what a fakir you truly are.
So keep twisting. You're attempting to draw out what you originally said into something else. Arguments of someone flailing around with no point, Oblio.
Back to the drawing board time for you, Eye.
Instead of trying to disprove my original challenge to you, Eye....you just thrashed around with a bunch of silly new accusations.
So, more homework for you in this little debate:
I think Afghanistan is more justifiable than Iraq. You don't.
Prove my position on Afghanistan, if you can. In my own words. I'll wait. You're not allowed in a debate to put words in my mouth.
I'd like to see our troops in Sudan. You don't.
"Our Troops", Buckwheat? What troops are those? Again, prove in my own words what troops I am or am not for being in the Sudan. Burden of proof is on you, since you ascribed those words to me.
I'm in favour of the UN. You're not.
Well, you got one right. But that had nothing to do with my original challenge to you. But I thought the rest of your argument was so pathetic that you needed a little cheering up. So that's a gimme. I'll agree I'm not in favor of the U.N.
I think Iraq is just another Vietnam. You are happy about Iraq being another Vietnam.
Again, prove it. Using my own words.
As for your (3) Questions....non-responsive, Eye. I know all about you. Remember, you pm'd me and fessed up. Care to rethink your "troll" remark, Eye? I know who you are....care for everyone else on the board to hear it publicly?
Finally, I just noticed this final little gem of yours:
It's just that I care about them getting killed for oil. You are cool with it.
Again....prove my position....in my own words. I'll wait.
No more prevaricating or changing topics, Eye. You've been caught fair and square acting like a plusperfect liberal. Tossing around lies and aspersions. Yes, I am calling you a liar to your face. Prove what you've said I've said, or everyone here will know what a euro-trolling-liar you really are.
Tick Tock, Eye. Tick Tock.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Blonde
September 24, 2007 - 19:07 ET by Free StinkerBlonde,
Now you're a censor too! I didn't know you were so versatile! ;-)
. . . and no matter how horrific the terrorist attack, it's conducted by losers. Winners don't need to hijack airplanes. Winners have an Air Force. --P.J. O'Rourke
Hey free,
September 24, 2007 - 19:10 ET by BlondeCensor the Trolls!
Sheesh!
These euro-trolls are rather tiresome, what?
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
As if the American Trolls
September 24, 2007 - 19:12 ET by Free StinkerAs if the American Trolls weren't enough! :-)
Eye spy with my little eye
September 24, 2007 - 19:03 ET by botgan eye who has lost logical sensibilities.
Blonde used jackboot censorship? I read your comments therefore that allegation is a flat out lie eye.
You support the troops yet oppose their mission? Can't do it eye, it's like saying i'm for Manchester United but want them to lose.
Lastly you call USnot a troll and yet eye is not? The law of non-contradiction "A" can not be "not A". Or as Shakespeare put it so well "A troll by any other name would smell."
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Jack Boots
September 24, 2007 - 19:13 ET by BlondeHey, B.
Guess this means I'm a Nazi....a la Tumbler, huh? Oh brother....these trolls never give it up.
I am very proud of myself for ignoring his "jack booted censorship" garbage.
My takedown is on facts only, tonite. Easy, with such a simpleton.
I had a tedious Monday, but not one where I care to eat red meat....yet.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Achtung Fraulein
September 24, 2007 - 19:21 ET by botgspell check would be nice
do you think the Eye realizes that PMs are the property of the receiver and are subject to publication?
Quite the irony that he continues to be wrong on the same point??? Huh?? Can anyone 'splain his logic??
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Sorry B.
September 24, 2007 - 19:25 ET by BlondeThere is no such thing as liberal logic.
Only liberal leaps of illogic.
That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
Funny how Eye just kind of shagged a**, isn't it.
BTW, I had a long, tedious day, but I'm in a great mood. I'm going to quit replying to the trolls, well, unless they actually try to engage (as if....cowards!).
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Missing an Eye
September 24, 2007 - 19:29 ET by Conservative_in_mass.Well if eye's gone too long we'll get the picture of him out on some milk cartons and see if we can locate him then...
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. ~ Unknown
you'll need his avatar
September 24, 2007 - 19:42 ET by botgIt's I-gor actually
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Go on then..... Educate
September 24, 2007 - 19:52 ET byGo on then.....
Educate me about PMs and spell check.
Did I actually spell something wrong, or was it just unAmerican?
EYE
September 24, 2007 - 19:58 ET by botgthinks youse being paranoid the spell check was for my spelling fraulien
you, for a while, only PMd me without responding on the threads
and here i thought that we had developed a completely endearing love-hate relationship and you call me annoying why eye am mortified!!
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Go and learn to speak. Then
September 24, 2007 - 19:48 ET byGo and learn to speak. Then learn to write. Yes, you are even more annoying than Blonde.
Eye yi yi
September 24, 2007 - 19:50 ET by Free StinkerUh, we have at least 8 other people that are more annoying than Blonde.
Such as me.
Eye
September 24, 2007 - 19:52 ET by botgthink that the eye sees but wishes not to be confused by
the
truth
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
and botgo would know what that is
September 24, 2007 - 19:56 ET byBottom Go!
Who collects tolls for you
September 24, 2007 - 19:58 ET by Free StinkerWho collects tolls for you at your bridge when you come here?
Free
September 24, 2007 - 20:00 ET by botgthe eye seems upset today, please be easy on him the meds are in the mail
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Yes, but will he take them?
September 24, 2007 - 20:02 ET by Free StinkerYes, but will he take them?
Notice that Eye has avoided the Challenge
September 24, 2007 - 19:58 ET by BlondeTick tock, Eye.
pm's do not count.
This is a public forum in which I challenged you.
Waiting.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Aye predict a long wait
September 24, 2007 - 20:00 ET by Free StinkerAye predict a long wait
Wow, there's suddenly a lot
September 24, 2007 - 20:06 ET byWow, there's suddenly a lot of talk about PMs.... Hmm..... I wonder..... Frankly, what is the point of trying to answer any one of you individual critters on NB? You don't even speak the same language as each other. Blonde, deal with it. I say what I say. If it makes more sense than what you say, then that's understandable. Night!
Don't go away angry. Just go away.
September 24, 2007 - 20:09 ET by Free StinkerFrankly, what is the point of trying to answer any one of you individual critters on NB?
Then leave, and don't come back Troll.
Como se dice? Supreme
September 24, 2007 - 20:15 ET by botgComo se dice?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Cut & Run, Eye.
September 24, 2007 - 20:19 ET by BlondeOh, how utterly typical.
"Deal with it?"
BAWAHAHAHAH.
What a prototypical little eurolib you are...running away from a girl with nothing other than "deal with it". Who started sending pm's to the regular posters, here, Eye? Hmmmm?
To my friends here, I almost had a heart attack....one day a pm from LEON....the next day one from EYE....I thought I was in the twilight zone.
Answer the points in my post, Eye.
If you dare.
I'm betting (alot, actually) that you are too much of a sissified euro to even try. Natch. Sheesh...laughing at your cut & run euro sensibilities.
Next time you're in a debate with someone, Eye, let me know....I will be happy to help you out with something you are totally incapable of doing.....make a point.
Your entire bunch of ranting on this thread is hillarious.....lies, misdirection, and subterfuge.
Nighty night, Eye. But know this, you are not getting off Scott free.....you must answer for your most libelous allegations about my positions on this war.
Run away, little troll.....run, run, run.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Hey Blonde
September 24, 2007 - 20:27 ET by botglike my new tag? i'm thinking maybe with some red pumps and pearls I'll have an outfit
Yes, you are even more annoying than Blonde. the EYE
Oh, man, B.
September 24, 2007 - 20:29 ET by BlondeI'm going to have to print that out in 48 point typeface and present it to my boss tomorrow.
And then be ready to call the ambulance.
I love it!
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
}}---> botg
September 24, 2007 - 20:35 ET by Cool ArrowYou rook mahvellous
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Wow!
September 24, 2007 - 20:30 ET byIt's after 1 am here. Not my fault if you're behind.
I doubt it will change when I reply.
PS If PMs are a bad thing, then your site should have some kind of "danga dang dang" warning on it. I use PMs to bypass all the inbreds, on the assumption that there might be a few braincells at the end of it.
Sorry about that!
I Love America. We Have Dentists!
September 24, 2007 - 20:32 ET by Free StinkerBack again already?
So, why do you answer us?
Hmmmmm?
Hey Trollish
September 24, 2007 - 20:32 ET by BlondeToo bad for you, you aren't clever enough of a euro-troll to figure it out, eh?
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
euro-troll
September 24, 2007 - 20:56 ET by MightyMouthBlonde,
I still can't believe we saved their sorry asses....TWICE ...and they still act like we owe em!
Next time eyesore, you euroweenies can do your own heavy lifting!!!!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Hey MM
September 24, 2007 - 21:00 ET by BlondeMust agree with your basic sentiment.
But you notice how much lying and prevaricating the euro-troll has done to move this thread sooooo far over to the right...to make it skinny and unreadable.
Losing euro-trash troll couldn't respond to one point of mine, hmmmm......I think Free had it right the first time...."baaaah"....and "who's minding your bridge"?
Maybe we need to get back to basics.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Translation
September 24, 2007 - 21:57 ET by UnsaneTranslation: "I (Eyecare)use PMs because I hate getting my ass kicked on the boards publicly."
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Eyesore, You don't know sh*t.
September 24, 2007 - 21:50 ET by Dave RIf it weren't for the United States of America, the residents of your continent would be living on streets named Tojo Avenue, Hirohito Street & Yamamoto Way.
Who knows, perhaps next time we'll just mind our own damn business.
And given the blatent ineptitude of the EU, somehow I think that time may be coming sooner than you realize.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
short memories
September 24, 2007 - 22:20 ET by Conservative_in_mass.Dave; You are oh so correct.
IMO, I think it's because its been 60 plus years since people like my dad were bobbing around the Pacific, driving off the Imperial threat that the Aussies & others faced. I would hope there are many down under that do not share Eyes views.
I don't think educators today remind our young people of that sacrifice, of how close that entire theater was to total collapse. I'm really at a loss sometimes in trying to understand this type of resentment harboured against our great country.
I do know that given the same set of circumstances today, pops would get right back on that CVL flattop and do it all over again.
No doubt about it. <off the soapbox>
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. ~ Unknown
Cim,
September 25, 2007 - 01:21 ET by Dave RI don't think educators today remind our young people of that sacrifice, of how close that entire theater was to total collapse.
It's like I have often said here, WW II was not the slam-dunk many think it was. We came damn close to losing that conflict several times. In both theaters.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
Not for the first time.....
September 26, 2007 - 13:57 ET byNot for the first time, I remind you all that I have no problems with your much needed help in the World Wars. I'm saying that Iraq sucks. I can disagree with US foreign policy right now, without insulting past campaigns.
Seriously, your argument is about as simple as those videos on Utube, comparing Iraq with WWII.
Get over it!
Blonde, I retract whatever got your back up. It's always hard to tell, but easy to do. Perhaps I should have said "Blonde's attitudes towards the world outside the US, suggests that;" rah rah, etc etc.
That said, you have never held back in telling everyone here what you think my opinions are, and you've never been right yet.
Whomever suggested that I use PMs because I'm scared of a fight.... well you just go back to sleep. Everyone knows I'm not afraid of an argument.
Botg, I definitely did PM you for a while, because I found you capable of conversation for that short while. Same with Blonde. If I think a person actually shows a spark, then I try to communicate without all the usual interruptions from the lunatic fringe.
If PMs are breaking the rules, I'll stop. They are standard on message boards. This is the first message board I've found, where they are not considered "above board".
Simple does not equal brevity.
September 26, 2007 - 14:40 ET by Conservative_in_mass.Eyecare: "I'm saying that Iraq sucks."
"Seriously, your argument is about as simple as those videos on Utube, comparing Iraq with WWII."
And we are the ones being "simple"? The struggle in Iraq is quite similar to that of the last World War. Sure, tactics are different.Todays enemy actively includes innocent civilians as targets, and hides themselves by blending in with the population. That's real heroic of them.
They are also very skilled at employing the rabid left in this country as accomplices. This makes the job much more difficult. Still it does not blur the fact that the complete destruction of this enemy is paramount to our security...much as it was 60 plus years ago.
The goal here is straight forward, destroy our enemy before they can destoy us. Do not confuse brevity with simplicity.
The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. ~ Unknown
For Eyewhiner
September 24, 2007 - 22:17 ET by UnsaneYes, the troops are admired in all of the coalition nations. Again, don't try your jackboot censorship Eyewhiner, we can't if we wanted to. The Australian schools must really suck. We can't because we are not the government. No one has any freedom of speech here. I can be kicked off NB at ANY moment. on me like you always do, by trying to say we don't stand behind the same troops. WE DO. You do not. I demonstrated that above. It's just that I care about them getting killed for oil. Again, eyewhiner, if this were remotely true, then why am I not in Edmonton RIGHT NOW, forcibly occupying the place? Why aren't we taking over Mexico? Why is Hugo Chavez NOT taking a dirt nap RIGHT NOW? There are SO MANY MORE HEMISPHERIC sources we could be taking over right now, but are NOT. Why? You are cool with it. Your spoiled, pampered ass is too. Trust me, if you were paying A$20 a litre for gas because your Mideast sources got cut off, you would be SCREAMING for someone to die for YOUR oil then!
I think Afghanistan is more justifiable than Iraq. You don't. Both are the same front in the same war. Next. I'd like to see our troops in Sudan. Why, whiny baby? They'd be fighting for oil there too, only that time, the oil would be going to China!!! You don't. I'm in favour of the UN. You're not. I'd prefer the UN get the hell over to Geneva permanently. I think Iraq is just another Vietnam. You are happy about Iraq being another Vietnam. This is because when it comes to history, you are an idiot. The United States EASILY would have won Veitnam, if it were not like whiners like you running about. There were too many restrictions on combat, thanks to people like McNamara. Study your history sometime. Also, if things in Iraq are going SO POORLY, then WHY are some logistical officers and presonnel getting dropped IN-COUNTRY? WHY are their logistical bases NOT getting overrun right now?
The problem is, Eyewhiner, is that YOU DON'T THINK. You WHINE from the hip, and do not for one second THINK about what you are saying. At all. You are 100% pure emotion and whining. Perhaps you need to leave the foreign policy of the world, and much else, to us adults.
Qui deisderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
Seriously, Uns.
September 24, 2007 - 22:21 ET by BlondeThat was nice, but do you think Eye would respond to me & not you?
He's a lilly-livered euro-troll.....
Annoying.
If you get a reply....you know where to find me...and vice-versa.
Such a bunch of blather.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Well...
September 24, 2007 - 22:56 ET by UnsaneWell, let's see if the pampered crybaby DOES respond. It should be fun if he does.
Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
See above.
September 26, 2007 - 13:59 ET bySee above.
Whine from the hip....
September 24, 2007 - 23:14 ET by JPR1That is too f'n good! Perfect!
Another item, "...the United States EASILY would have won Vietnam, if it were not for whiners like you running about."
That... is the only legitimate/significant parallel which will ever be made between these conflicts.
Well said.
Unsane,
September 25, 2007 - 01:25 ET by Dave RTrust me, if you were paying A$20 a litre for gas because your Mideast
sources got cut off, you would be SCREAMING for someone to die for YOUR
oil then!
Exactly. If it were to really hit the fan and the price of a loaf of bread hit $7.00, $5.50 of which is what it cost to just get it there, most people in this country, and probably Eyesore's as well, would be clamoring for a fight.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
Eyecare you fool
September 24, 2007 - 21:21 ET by SportPoliticsDuncan Hunter, republican Presidential candidate's son has done two tours in Iraq, I think he's going back for a third one.
Michael Moore's movie was a lie, you should pay attention.
I believe there is at least one other congressional offspring in Iraq, perhaps several, and there are many more at the State level.
In a force of 150,000?
September 26, 2007 - 14:05 ET byIn a force of 150,000?
I nominate eyesore for the
September 26, 2007 - 14:10 ET by MightyMouthI nominate eyesore for the most "lame comeback of the day" award.
Your trophy room must be full in the short time you've been here.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Actually...
September 24, 2007 - 22:03 ET by UnsaneActually, eyewhiner, as you have demonstrated on here time and time again that you truly believe freedom is free, and that Australia and the United States exists just because of really big-hearted people, you DO NOT support me or my troops.
It's because of the volunteer nature of the forces that you get to sit on the Circular Quay and cry, whine and howl all day and all night about how much life sucks, while the whole time you suck the tit of luxury. Too bad you never realize that if not for those of us who fight to protect that tit, you'd REALLY have something to cry about for the first time in your spoiled, pampered life.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
I do support you. I respect
September 26, 2007 - 14:18 ET byI do support you. I respect the fact that you don't like my kind of support. In that case, you can justify it by thinking to yourself, that while you are risking your life to defend us, that you are not defending me, or people who think like me. I respect that too.
I don't know how else I can say it. I disagree with the politicians; not with you. I disagree with your president (assuming you are in the US) and my prime minister, and Britain's former prime minister. I am allowed to do that. It has nothing to do with my respect for anyone who jo