OT: Oil Profits

still just me

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:28:04 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.
com> wrote:

>"still just me" <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:cbcg54tcumf14j1tlc3178i402erpb6jr8@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 20:23:47 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.
>> com> wrote:
>>
>>>I'm not suggesting that Bush II has been a great President. In fact he's
>>>been so Liberal that we may not recover in my lifetime.
>>
>> Liberal? He hasn't been a liberal. Neither is he a conservative. He's
>> a puppet for the neo-cons who value dollars over country. The don't
>> care much about principles, only dollars.
>
>I suggest that fools should remain silent. How is it that in a country where
>nothing can be kept secret you're telling us that there are secrets? Man!
>What a dork.

Perhaps you trimmed too much there, but your response makes no sense
as a follow on to the quoted text. There's nothing about "secrets"
above.

>> As for the oil... it's helped out only the (new) vendors who now get
>> to disperse the oil as opposed to the vendors Sadaam was working with
>> or planning to work with. See a document from the Cheney Energy Policy
>> secret meetings entitled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oil" for more
>> information.
>
>Ahh, yes, the old "someone other than me is getting rich" excuse. I'm always
>amused at how much people like you know.

I have no problem with people getting rich. I kind of enjoy the
process myself. It gives me time to trifle with brainwashed fools like
you in the newsgroups.

I do have a problem with the perversion of the US Government and the
Constitution and the spending of MY tax dollars for the personal
enrichment of a chosen and influential few. That's fascism, not
democracy.

>> The Democrats are apparently going to continue to nominate ideological
>> fringe candidates and will never have a practical approach. The
>> Republican party is now owned by the neo-cons who don't give two hoots
>> about the country as long as they fill their pockets.
>
>And you believe that the Democrats are ideological idiots? I suggest you
>read your own writings sometime.

Your head is so far up the butt of the neo-cons that you are incapable
of even reasoning at this point. I support some very liberal ideas as
well as some very conservative ideas. But, that runs counter to your
brainwashing. you're the stereotypical case of "when all you have is a
hammer, everything looks like a nail".

>>>The only real disagreement those two have is in staying in Iraq for the
>>>long
>>>term or handing it over to the Muslim Extremists.
>>
>> The extremists who were a danger to us weren't a problem until GWB
>> went in.
>
>Maybe you missed a couple of buildings in New York.

My statement was clearly a reference to Iraq. Perhaps you should
re-read what YOU posted. The FACT is that there was no terrorist
problem in Iraq until we invaded.

Also, if you'd pull your head out of that neo-con butt you have it
stuck in, you'll note that I strongly supported the invasion of
Afghanistan and have repeatedly commended GWB for his ability to draw
together an incredible international coalition. We were kicking
terrorist butt and had the entire world mobilized against terrorists.
It was the opportunity of the century.

However, since I am not an brainwashed mouth piece for the neo-cons
(like you) and incapable of rational consideration and thought (like
you), I was still able to recognize that Iraq was a mistake from the
time GWB started rattling his saber and has been the, or at least in
the top three, biggest foreign policy blunders in history.

>I hate to point this out to you but it wasn't "terrorists" but Muslim
>extremists. Maybe you believe that "terrorists" will commit suicide for
>their cause but the fact is that only real religious extremists are likely
>to do that.

You're playing foolish semantic games.

>Most Muslims are no worse than anyone else but the fact remains that they
>themselves are frightened silly of the 10% extremist branch of their own
>religion. So frightened that they won't even mention it even when they know
>that these extremists are going to commit gross acts of sacrilege to their
>own religion.

That still doesn't make discriminatory statements like your against
all Muslims valid.

The group that committed the largest act of terrorism on US soil
before 911 was a radical bunch of Christians. That doesn't make all
Christians terrorists.

You're acting as a clear bigot when you discriminate against all
Muslims in the way that you do.