Leave a comment

Comments 11

tyrell October 18 2006, 07:12:37 UTC
*Reads the article*

*Reads it again with an air of somewhat stunned disbelief*

Yeah, I think you summed it up accurately, there.

Reply

unnamed525 October 18 2006, 20:36:21 UTC
Did you hear about the other one? The one where the US won't enter into any more arms reduction treaties ... and keep people out of space who don't conform to what his regime wants.

Reply

tyrell October 18 2006, 21:16:25 UTC
No, I believe I was too busy looking for another planet to live on.

Reply


duriyah October 18 2006, 13:10:30 UTC
A better victory than they ever hoped for.

Reply


fractaltime October 18 2006, 13:47:56 UTC
What scares me is that not only is the US government tipping into a kind of government that makes me rather nervous, but it also has half the military spending on the planet, and the power to take anyone out if they tip so far that they care for conquest only and not for ruling the already existing civilians. The US would have won the Iraq qar hands down if it had been ruthless and just slaughtered anyone in its way. It didn't. But the way things are tipping, maybe it will in 20 years' time when the next country is invaded. Much like when Djenghis Khan's nephew invaded Baghdad and killed all its 800,000 inhabitants. And ... well, read your old testament to see how God commanded the jews to fight: Total annihilation of the enemy. A Christian nation on the rise, and so militarily powerful ... scary!

Reply

toku666 October 18 2006, 18:51:29 UTC
"A Christian nation on the rise, and so militarily powerful..."

?

No. The people at the top pay lip service to this being a Christian nation, but the Christians to whom that is directed are starting to not buy it. On the other side of that equation, people are getting sick and tired of hearing about how the fantastically wealthy, hugely populated conservative Christian churches are, y'know, "under attack."

The USA might be able to claim that level of military power if the military weren't spread so thinly and ineffectively in two Middle Eastern countries. We didn't need to be "ruthless" to "win" this go-round in Iraq. We just needed somebody better at their job than Donald Rumsfeld. We needed troop commitment that would have made this the "quick" job the administration was expecting. Rumsfeld decided to do it on a skeleton crew. Oops ( ... )

Reply

unnamed525 October 18 2006, 19:05:22 UTC
November 8th, the bums will be out, and 6166 will be like a bad nightmare that we will have thankfully woken up from.

Unfortunately, I'm not so confident of that, particularly when talking about States that use Diebold-manufactured electronic voting machines ... you know, the one we both live in.

Reply

toku666 October 18 2006, 22:41:57 UTC
You can't have a race where there is a double-digit deficit (and Blackwell majorly fucked up in the last debate, bringing up the staffer, something his PR guy had stated he would not do) and then have a miraculous victory, in OHIO, when your name is KEN BLACKWELL, without EVERYBODY then realizing that something is, in fact, up.

My prediction: Dems sweep, Governor Ted sends Diebold packing at some point. Otherwise, it's time to booze up and riot. Literally.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up