Is this really fair?

Does anybody else think it's rediculous that bush is convinced that no one but the u.s should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. I mean, we have more nuclear weapons than anybody else, but he thinks that no one deserves that power and is able to handle it except for us. Plus, bush really shouldn't have any access to any kind of weapon. would you give a retard a tomahawk missile? i think not.

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/index.php?e=sovereignty.mov

What I find funny and retarded at the same time is the web site you posted! Its a freaking humor web site. The site has J-O-K-E-S!

:screwy: I've got this bridge to sell you....













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Does anybody else think it's rediculous that bush is convinced that no one but the u.s should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. I mean, we have more nuclear weapons than anybody else, but he thinks that no one deserves that power and is able to handle it except for us. Plus, bush really shouldn't have any access to any kind of weapon. would you give a retard a tomahawk missile? i think not.

http://media.ebaumsworld.com/index.php?e=sovereignty.mov


i don't think NORTH KOREA, IRAN, SYRIA, AND LYBIA should have them. these people want to kill us. do you not understand that.

plus, it's not about being fair. it's about PROTECTING OUR LIVES.

"fair" people need to go live in france with all the other "fair" people. so al queda will have a place to bomb that won't stike back.

first of all, it doesn't matter if it's a humor website, it's still a real clip

and second, the only reason other countries want to kill us is because of what we've done to them.

and second, the only reason other countries want to kill us is because of what we've done to them.


i agree with you. it's the u.s.a's forgien policies that have helped countires to hate us. and no matter what any one thinks WE ARE NOT THE FUCKING WORLD POLICE. it is not our job or our duty to tell people in other countries what they can and can not do or have or make or use. We need to worry about our own country first and not worry about the others.

i agree with you. it's the u.s.a's forgien policies that have helped countires to hate us. and no matter what any one thinks WE ARE NOT THE FUCKING WORLD POLICE. it is not our job or our duty to tell people in other countries what they can and can not do or have or make or use. We need to worry about our own country first and not worry about the others.

The US takes care of the US and its allies period!

The US takes care of the US and its allies period!


the same allies who where against the iraq war? how is this taking care of them? and you know it's still our aggressive forgein policies that have casued all of this.

The US takes care of the US and its allies period!

Bullshit. Tell it to Madrid, or Kuta Beach.

The other nations brought in to lend credibility to Bush's private crusade are just as expendable in Bush's eyes as the average Iraqi kid.He doesn't give a fuck as long as he gets re-elected.

i don't think NORTH KOREA, IRAN, SYRIA, AND LYBIA should have them. these people want to kill us. do you not understand that.

plus, it's not about being fair. it's about PROTECTING OUR LIVES.

"fair" people need to go live in france with all the other "fair" people. so al queda will have a place to bomb that won't stike back.
Last I heard, the Libyans were behaving themselves.....

You don't become the world power by trying to please everyone. Besides it would be impossible to please everyone. If you want to be a pushover, MOVE TO ANOTHER FUCKING COUNTRY.

You don't become the world power by trying to please everyone. Besides it would be impossible to please everyone. If you want to be a pushover, MOVE TO ANOTHER FUCKING COUNTRY.
And this would be America's......freedom of speech?

Sure, there's freedom of speech, indyram, but if someone disagrees with you, then they should get the hell out of the USA?

Gee, that sounds more typical of.....Iran or North Korea to me.

You don't become the world power by trying to please everyone. Besides it would be impossible to please everyone.

Nice line,Goebbels would have been proud of it.

Tell me, just when did it become imperative that America had sovereign rights over the whole world?

Nice line,Goebbels would have been proud of it.

Tell me, just when did it become imperative that America had sovereign rights over the whole world?

And Stalin would be proud of yours.

America doesn't want sovereignty over the rest of the world. The UN does.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

er...the UN is the rest of the world,Yogs.If your president listened to it occasionally,he might not have to go crawling to it for help when his territorial aspirations leave him in a hole.

I wish the US would leave the UN. The entire UN wasn't opposed the to the US position. The entire UN didn't support the US either. The fact you'll pick and chose which countries you'll believe of that corrupt organization is your choice, but pretty meaningless. Considering the number of time the UN has come hat in hand to the US, its long past time to cut the chord and let it lapse into oblivion.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

ditch the frikin u.n are you nuts?

no, he's not, he's right. the UN is a waste of time and resources that can be better spend elsewhere.

its quite bovious the UN is impotent in keeping people from unilaterally attacking soveriegn nations, and incapable of carrying out its founding mission.

therefore, it should be abolished. if nothing else, its time for the US to leave.

ditch the frikin u.n are you nuts?

The UN is a clossal failure. Read up on the league of nations. The UN is just another pass at it.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Upon reading all these posts I am left to wonder that so many have mentioned in the past that the US should leave the UN and have the Un disbanded altogether. But wouldn't that be worse. Wouldn't we be risking the chance of one nation (be it China, Russia, or the US) becoming too big and arrogant and try to force themselves among other nations. Wouldn't that lead us closer to a world war? I don't know, but I do believe the UN does serve a purpose. But it shouldn't be situated in the US. It should be in a neutral country, not one with special interests.

TS out

uhh...ok.
1.When your the super-power of the world, you tend to be more advanced in fields such as military, economy etc...
2.Theres a fine line when it comes to protecting your citizens. Invading another country that poses no threat to you, is passing that line.
3.Just because people don't have the same goals and thoughts, does not mean they have to leave your country. Wait, it's not your country so you don't get to decide who stays or leaves

TS - I don't think any of us (and certainly not I) are suggesting that diplomatic contact be abolished by disbanding the UN. Working with other nations does not have to be through the bureaucratic underpinnings of the UN. Many say the US is to big and arrogant, so I submit, what is the UN doing about it now? What is it doing about China? Where did it step in with India and Pakistan? It didn’t and won’t because of it inherit structural failure. Lastly, all countries have special interests. Though it may not be on that you have an opinion about doesn’t mean they don’t have one.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

first of all, it doesn't matter if it's a humor website, it's still a real clip

and second, the only reason other countries want to kill us is because of what we've done to them.
Actually I think that most of the people/countries that "want to kill us" are run by dictators or are militant muslim. Big suprise huh? Those types want to kill everyone. Then you have the French who kind of want to kill us but don't seem to be able work up the nerve to do it.

YES! lets blame it all on a certain religion. There are far more various people that hate the States.

Actually I think that most of the people/countries that "want to kill us" are run by dictators or are militant muslim. Big suprise huh? Those types want to kill everyone. Then you have the French who kind of want to kill us but don't seem to be able work up the nerve to do it.


how informed. you come up with that all by yourself or just repeating what you here the guys in white hoods saying. religion has very little to do woth why that hate america. and no they don't hate our freedom either. they feel that they have been wronged by america. the cia helped saddam gain power in iraq. their country hasn't been there's in god knows how long.

and i am pretty sure that america is more likely to use nukes and biological weapons then any other counrty in the world. and if it weren't for the america chances are these other countries wouldn't have nukes.

the bottom line is no one needs a nuke or a biological weapon. i doubt we even need guns.

whats wrong with a sword. it requires skill to use. less likely an innocent live will be taken by it. and we would remove all these gun happy morons that shoot at anyone that looks different. plus death becomes more real in a way having to watch the opposition take it's last breath.

Thats it - from now on all conflicts will be settled by thumb wrestling.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

:rofl: war mongers always make me laugh. if this war were on american soil then it would be different story. that won't happen though will it?
because you are a fair and just people trying to help the small opressed iraqi people. just like veitnam. i wonder how they feel about having chemical weapons dumped on there head for their own safty?

the fact is that america is a war hungry tyrant that seems to be in a constant state of war. they produce WMD's and use them. if it weren't for america having these WMD's and being willing to use them then i am sure some one would stepped up and tried to stop them. but since they are such a huge threat to safty of world, what can they do?

i personally want a world that is safe to raise my kids in. not sure about you guys.

Perhaps we should all join in the countries that use ethnic cleansing. Perhaps running some tanks over protesters would be a good idea. Definately, throw journalists in jail and have government cencorship. Make sure women are treated as property and steal the property of people because at some point your ancestors may have been wronged by one of their ancestors. Supress religous expression instead of promoting their diversity. Join those countries that boldly expect someone else to foot the bill.

Yup. We need to be more like Bosnia, Rwanda, Iraq, Iran, China, Russia, India, France, Cuba, Columbia, Sudan, Ivory Coast, Indonesia, Sweden and Belgium among many others. Yup - its all because of the warmongers in the US. :rolleyes: Sometimes, I think to many parents took to many illicit drugs and stunted their baby's intellectual development.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

please don't speak ill of my parents or me.

my point was that america has nukes and chemical weapons and has used them in war. if america wants other nations to disarm then maybe they should lead by example. rather then securing their place as the largest nuclear power.

Make sure women are treated as property and steal the property of people because at some point your ancestors may have been wronged by one of their ancestors.

and i am pretty sure that happens in america aswell. and everywhere else in the world. it's a fact of life. but the money spent trying to hold iraq would much better served protecting americans from an internal threat don't you think?
after all it's not like amierca is the safest place in the world.

please don't speak ill of my parents or me.
Yogs did not speak of your parents or you specifically. He was talking about parents in general. :nono: Please re-read the post.

Yup. We need to be more like Bosnia, Rwanda, Iraq, Iran, China, Russia, India, France, Cuba, Columbia, Sudan, Ivory Coast, Indonesia, Sweden and Belgium among many others. Sweden? Belgium? Enlighten me, I thought they were nice quiet countries. Are they that bad Yogs?

TS out

driftu, what makes you think that the US is willing to use their WMDs? If our WMDs were used in a case that did not completely and I mean completely warrant it, I am pretty sure that there would be riots in the streets here in the US

cause they used em in the past.
two H bambs on japan after they were all but beaten.

agent orange in veitnam.

depleted uranium in iraq.

none of these required that kind of fire power.

god forebid what they would do if there was a chance they could lose.

i could be wrong of course and they may never use a wmd again. you never know

All of those are true and you have a point that they could be used in the past. The difference between the US having WMDs and countries like Syria, Iran, and Libya having them is that while the US will only use them in an extreme case, those countries have shown by human rights records that they are likely to use them.

For depleted Uranium I am curious how this can be classified as a WMD when it releases very little radiation and is only dangerous when introduced to the human body?

a little radiation is still radiation. fire enough of it and you get fall out thats people sick and deform the children for years to come.

cause they used em in the past.
two H bambs on japan after they were all but beaten.
Those actually SAVED lives. The Japanese would not have surrendered if it had not been for those bombs.

agent orange in veitnam.
That was a defoliant. It was to get rid of vegitation and make it impossible for the VC to hide in the undergrowth. It was NOT a WMD.

none of these required that kind of fire power.
god forebid what they would do if there was a chance they could lose.
i could be wrong of course and they may never use a wmd again. you never know

You speak of something you know absolutely nothing about.
Oh...and I think depleted uranium is NOT WMD.

True a little radiation is still radiation however the radiation emitted from depleted uranium is mostly alpha and beta particles which our skin and clothes will block. There is a little gamma radiation emmited as well however it is only about the strength of being out in the sun for a day.

As far as the H-Bomb theories (bearing in mind that I hold my own extremely anti-bomb feelings) there really will never be any hard and fast answer. The fact is, NO ONE can say for sure that they definately saved or cost lives. For every pro-bomb person who claims that their use demonstrated to the Japanese that the U.S. had in its power a devastating tool for ending the war, and that it was apparently effective, one can launch a counterpoint to that by simply asking "Then why did we use two, in a mere three-day span, when just the first could have probably made the point?" I've included two opposing articles about the H-Bomb issue

http://www.lewrockwell.com/raico/raico22.html
http://hnn.us/articles/6597.html

This being said, I'm of the opinion that every nation on earth should either all be allowed to have nuclear weaponry, or no one should. Either way, the problem reaches a conclusion. In the first scenario, everyone has a finger on the button, so if one country launches, successive countries will follow suit, and maybe, just maybe, mankind will finally get its self-spawned apocalypse that we seem to just be ignorantly rushing toward. In the second scenario, everyone is banned from nuclear weaponry, so no one is able to do it. Of course, this would require a massive worldwide cooperative effort, and heavens forbid the nations of the world try to put their differences aside and friggin' grow up. :rolleyes:

Is it "fair"? no. But then, is life "fair"? no. I'm just hoping society either moves on and realizes there are better and loftier things to strive for than stupid religious crusades, ridiculous political coups, warmongering for profit and personal gain, ethnic cleansing, and any other numbskull, shallow-end of the gene pool aspirations. Or just gets it over with and wipes itself out.

Where's that armaggedon asteroid when it's needed :sly:

YES! lets blame it all on a certain religion. There are far more various people that hate the States.

Not blaming it on the religion. I'm blaming it on the militants.
Hate is different than wanting to kill.

how informed. you come up with that all by yourself or just repeating what you here the guys in white hoods saying.
You have no clue what I know and what I've heard and seen.
You sound somewhat racist.
religion has very little to do woth why that hate america. and no they don't hate our freedom either. they feel that they have been wronged by america. the cia helped saddam gain power in iraq. their country hasn't been there's in god knows how long.
It's easy to blame all Christians for all the ills in the US but when someone says muslim then it's "They aren't all like that". Besides I didn't blame the religion. I blamed the militants in that religion.
Who is this they you speak of? Iraq in general? So all Iraqis want to kill Americans? That's putting them all in a nice neat little package isn't it?
Do you always put out generalities like that when talking about an entire country of people? That sounds very bigoted.

and i am pretty sure that america is more likely to use nukes and biological weapons then any other counrty in the world. and if it weren't for the america chances are these other countries wouldn't have nukes. "Pretty sure", "if" , "chances are". You sound like you know what you are talking about.

[/QUOTE] the bottom line is no one needs a nuke or a biological weapon. i doubt we even need guns.

whats wrong with a sword. it requires skill to use. less likely an innocent live will be taken by it. and we would remove all these gun happy morons that shoot at anyone that looks different. plus death becomes more real in a way having to watch the opposition take it's last breath.[/QUOTE]
Point?

You have no clue what I know and what I've heard and seen.
You sound somewhat racist.

true i don't know you or what you been through and if said anything to offend you i am sorry. if you think this being a racist then you haven't seen what i have seen.

It's easy to blame all Christians for all the ills in the US but when someone says muslim then it's "They aren't all like that". Besides I didn't blame the religion. I blamed the militants in that religion.
Who is this they you speak of? Iraq in general? So all Iraqis want to kill Americans? That's putting them all in a nice neat little package isn't it?
Do you always put out generalities like that when talking about an entire country of people? That sounds very bigoted.[\quote]

iraqis militants want to kill americans right. they want to kill them because they want their country back.

it's bigoted only when you add your twist.

[quote=dbg454]"Pretty sure", "if" , "chances are". You sound like you know what you are talking about.

i may or may not. i don't know what is going through other peoples minds. so how could i say for sure. if i said it was a guarantee you would be all over me on that.

Point?

warfare is far to advanced and the chances of humans blowing are self and everything else on this world all to hell is way to high.

true i don't know you or what you been through and if said anything to offend you i am sorry. if you think this being a racist then you haven't seen what i have seen.


Fair enough.


warfare is far to advanced and the chances of humans blowing are self and everything else on this world all to hell is way to high.


I agree totally on that one.

Just for the whole H-bomb in Japan thing. It was an A-bomb. I know that some people don't really care but its just been bugging me lol.

Oh yeah, I didn't even catch that I was writing Hydrogen bomb, as opposed to Atom bomb. BIIIIIGGGGGGGGGGGG difference between the two.

those countries have shown by human rights records that they are likely to use them.
And the U.S. has shown that it has actually used them. Further based on our past, what country wouldn't expect us to use them again in the future?
Those actually SAVED lives. The Japanese would not have surrendered if it had not been for those bombs.
SAVED? As usual I must ask myself (and this time also openly to you) What the hell are you talking about?
Japan's industrial base was destroyed, it's natural resources (including people) were practically depleted - they couldn't have have continued for much longer even if they really really wanted too (of course some did, this is true). But for all intents and purposes the war really was over, the United States could have sent in the Boy Scouts and conquered them if they wanted to. So they choose not one, but two atomic bombs to cause not only hundreds of thousands of deaths then and there - but hundreds of thousands more to come in the years after.
IN FACT thanks to those bombs, thousands continued to die, due to the war, for decades after the war ended - all those bombs did was extend the horrors of the war for many years after it ended.
The use of atomic weapons on civillains can never be justified. Two bombs were two too many.

You speak of something you know absolutely nothing about.
Oh...and I think depleted uranium is NOT WMD.


Either you are ignorant, or inhumane.

http://www.web-light.nl/VISIE/extremedeformities.html

Depleted Uranium is not considered a WMD, however when the bullets are used they create an extremely fine powdered uranium which when breathed is highly hazardous. So while they aren't considered a WMD they can still be extremely harmful.

Yes I know that this contradicts my last post in this thread, however doing some more research led me to a new conclusion.

That was a defoliant. It was to get rid of vegitation and make it impossible for the VC to hide in the undergrowth. It was NOT a WMD.Oh...and I think depleted uranium is NOT WMD.
Tell you what, I am completely stepping-out of my moderator skin, and saying FUCK YOU - TWICE.

This proves you will say ANYTHING, to justify your candidate, because I HIGHLY doubt you will step this low if this current "war" was started by Bill Clinton.

You have ANY fucking clue what Agent Orange did, and is still doing to the people affected by it?

Here's a Vietnamese child, deformed by Agent Orange...
http://www.aref.de/kalenderblatt/2002/pics/agent_orange_kind.jpg

Read the article at the bottom of this.
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/southeast/03/06/vietnam.us.orange/vert.agent.orange.jpg
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/southeast/03/06/vietnam.us.orange/

Agent Orange has been proven to have caused chronic lymphocytic leukemia in Vietnam Veterans - including some of my father-in-law's personal friends and acquaintances.
http://waroncancer.us/ao/agentorange.html

Here, buy a shirt: http://womenveterans.homestead.com/AOshirts.html

Read this funny story: http://www.homestead.com/quilt_of_tears/files/story.htm

As for the DU, feel free to browse these pics, while you eat lunch, or something:

http://www.tetrahedron.org/images/image001.jpg

http://www.tetrahedron.org/images/image002.jpg

http://www.tetrahedron.org/images/image003.jpg

More pics here: http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/gulf_war_syndrome/uranium_infanticide.html

http://www.denverspiritualcommunity.org/AmericanFreePress/DeformedUSVetBaby2.gif


This is the best picture of them all:
http://rogueimc.org/img/2003/03/389.jpg

Depleted Uranium is not considered a WMD, however when the bullets are used they create an extremely fine powdered uranium which when breathed is highly hazardous. So while they aren't considered a WMD they can still be extremely harmful.

Yes I know that this contradicts my last post in this thread, however doing some more research led me to a new conclusion.


i stand corrected.


That was a defoliant. It was to get rid of vegitation and make it impossible for the VC to hide in the undergrowth. It was NOT a WMD.

yup did really nice work on those jungles and soooo safe for the people exposed to it aswell. :shakehead

yup did really nice work on those jungles and soooo safe for the people exposed to it aswell. :shakehead
Agent orange was a chemical that shouldn't have been used, but it has to be understood that at the time it was used no one was really certain of the effects it would have on people. It was just in the prototype stage. Which in my opinion is more reason not to use it than anything but what can I say some politicians are morons.

Depleted Uranium is not considered a WMD, however when the bullets are used they create an extremely fine powdered uranium which when breathed is highly hazardous. So while they aren't considered a WMD they can still be extremely harmful.

Yes I know that this contradicts my last post in this thread, however doing some more research led me to a new conclusion.


still disagree.If someone dropped a load of that shit on an Americankindergarten,you'd be outraged.It's time to step back and look how far down the track the demonisation of the civilian population of Iraq has gone,and be very ashamed.

Tell you what, I am completely stepping-out of my moderator skin, and saying FUCK YOU - TWICE.

This proves you will say ANYTHING, to justify your candidate, because I HIGHLY doubt you will step this low if this current "war" was started by Bill Clinton.

You have ANY fucking clue what Agent Orange did, and is still doing to the people affected by it?

Yeah thanks for the lovely photos! AND FUCK YOU TOO! You are WAY out of line.

THAT was totally uncalled for!

Agent orange was NOT designed to use on people! People were indeed effected and it was a chemical agent that was a mistake. I NEVER said it wasn't.

This is the best picture of them all:
http://rogueimc.org/img/2003/03/389.jpg
Between you and taranaki...I don't know who is the most anti-american. This is assinine!

Between you and taranaki...I don't know who is the most anti-american. This is assinine!

LOL, you're a swift one...

If you equate being anti-Administration being anti-American, what would you call the Republicans that were trying their hardest to bring down the last one?

If you equate being anti-Administration being anti-American, what would you call the Republicans that were trying their hardest to bring down the last one?
Smart!

I am not talking anti-administration. I am talking about your constant anti-AMERICAN\socialist\communist\disgusting drivel!

I am not talking anti-administration. I am talking about your constant anti-AMERICAN\socialist\communist\disgusting drivel!

Oh?

Care to quote me, old man?

How about this one?: http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2045929&postcount=4

I will always respect the office of the POTUS.

When I first joined the service, GWHB was President. I would have instinctively, gave-up my life to protect who, and what he is, personal feelings non-withstanding, same as I would have done for Clinton, and if I were in the position, I would do the same for the current President.

How I feel about man, does not have anything to do with how I feel about what he represents.

As a matter of fact, it's my respect for the position he holds that makes how Bush is treating it more abhorrent for me.

Same as how appalled I was with how Clinton treated the Greatest Office in our country.

SUCH anti-Americanism, huh?

Like I said, feel free to quote me yourself.

Senility is amusing, but sad...

You are truly a piece of work.

Your disgusting rants are so typical of many liberal fools who would love to see the nation fail in Iraq just to further your anti-Bush agenda! This is anti-american enough for me.

Bush is a great man and a president who deserves more support than the slams and mischaracterizations that you continually spew. Your man McCain would be nauseated by your crap!

You know, I was listening to a late night radio show a couple weeks back, and the host (Jay Diamond) raised an excellent point. He asked WHY, anyone who isn't a fan of the current administration , is labeled anti-AMERICAN\socialist\communist It is a sad day indeed, when so many of those who don't follow Bush and Co. in their particular agenda (or merely even parts of it) are automatically labeled Socialist, Marxist, anti-Amerixan, etc., by the conservative right (in particular.) Wake up, DOLTS, it's called "opposing viewpoint," and it's what has been behind so much of this country's progress. Was the Civil Rights movement borne out of conservative, majority America? HELL NO. Was women's rights trumpeted by conservative, majority America? HELL NO. So I'd just like to send a big "Helloooooo ignorance" out to anyone who even begins to try and shoot down viewpoints that aren't the conservative norm they happen to agree with. Just because someone doesn't believe in the war, doesn't make them a Socialist anti-American (just the fact that people would automatically link Socialist ideas with some sort of anti-American scheme to bring down the system is ludicrous in itself.) Just because someone feels that perhaps the healthcare system (in dire need of restructuring) should consider Socialization as a facet of its practice, doesn't make them a Pinko-Commi-Red scoundrel.

It's not as simple as those who agree with you are good-hearted patriots, and those who don't agree are no-good Communists. And those who DO feel it is that simple, are the REAL danger to democracy. Grow up.

:iagree:

I know many who are not fans of this administration who are NOT anti-american.

I know many who are not fans of this administration who are NOT anti-american.

Like I said, quote me, gramps.