My Confined Space

tl;dr
4 now

Comment by TrikYodz — May 7, 2008 @ 3:08 pm

Ike was the freaking man.

Comment by Sticky — May 7, 2008 @ 3:30 pm

The UN wasn’t formed until 1945…

Comment by slakinator — May 7, 2008 @ 3:46 pm

Slakinator: No, but a bunch of NATIONS were UNITED against the Third Reich.

Comment by Sticky — May 7, 2008 @ 3:57 pm

Here’s a second amazing letter:

Eisenhower’s letter to the troops written in case D-Day FAILED!

“Our landings have failed and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based on the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.”

http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/d-day-message/images/failure-message.gif

Comment by HappyPig — May 7, 2008 @ 4:00 pm

He was assuming full responsibility for it if it collapsed…I’m stunned. Where has this sense of personal responsibility gone these days?

Comment by slakinator — May 7, 2008 @ 4:20 pm

That’s my schools golden boy!

Comment by njch412 — May 7, 2008 @ 4:46 pm

Ah, the good old days of politics.

Comment by reptilecobra13 — May 7, 2008 @ 4:52 pm

Fuck the Nazi’s, your asses got served when we pushed back. Also, your “great” leader? Killed himself as a cowards way out, fucking pitiful. Then again, I’m drunk, so still, fuck the Nazi’s

Comment by MrPsychic — May 7, 2008 @ 9:46 pm

^^

lol, thats funny, even though the war was pretty much over a year before the allies invaded…

Comment by Nemesis — May 8, 2008 @ 8:54 pm

OH YEA!!!

Comment by tenthletter — May 7, 2008 @ 5:26 pm

Awwwww =’[

Timmay needs hug, metinks.

(>^.^)>

Comment by Pants — April 15, 2008 @ 12:03 am

eeeeeemmmmmmmmoooooooooo

Comment by TrikYodz — April 15, 2008 @ 12:22 am

Actually being stung be a tarantula wasp is worse than this. I know because I’ve had both happen.

Comment by reboot — April 15, 2008 @ 12:25 am

What prissy fucking emo bullshit.

If someone who you care about doesn’t want to hear your bullshit anymore, it’s probably because nobody wants to be around a crybaby bitching about how sad they are all the time.

Comment by Caio — April 15, 2008 @ 12:33 am

I immediately thought of this xkcd comic.

http://xkcd.com/377/

Also, i liked this post. It may be as emo as razor cut girl pants but it did spark some deep thought in me. *hugs timmy*

Comment by thelotuseater725 — April 15, 2008 @ 1:03 am

Who cares if it’s emo? wtfe? It’s cute and warrants a hug! *hug*

@thelotuseater725
OMG i wondered why that guy came back for his hat! lol musta missed that one :p

Comment by Pants — April 15, 2008 @ 1:13 am

Seconded #4. This is the lamest thing I’ve seen on this site in a long time. Someone needs a punch in the face. Fucking pussy.

Comment by vonDread — April 15, 2008 @ 1:25 am

Worst feeling is being kicked in the balls.

Comment by Ando — April 15, 2008 @ 3:52 am

I agree with vonDread and then follow through with what Ando said. Kick him in the balls! He’ll forget all about the other bullshit! Get a fuckin’ hobby or adopt an abandoned puppy!

Comment by coolghoul — April 15, 2008 @ 9:10 am

I guess some of these people haven’t ever had someone they love forget them, like their own child. Whatever, I guess you guys are tougher than I am(yea right!!)…

Comment by tenthletter — April 15, 2008 @ 9:15 am

Um…I actually thought of some of the people I’ve known who developed Alzheimers and couldn’t even remember who their spouses and children were.

Comment by reptilecobra13 — April 15, 2008 @ 2:22 pm

@ thelotuseater725

I liked the follow-up:

http://xkcd.com/405/

Comment by wookie_x — April 15, 2008 @ 3:26 pm

He musta really liked his hat…

Comment by Phyreblade — April 15, 2008 @ 6:12 pm

Boobies…are the best things in life.

Comment by CMoorehead — February 26, 2008 @ 5:06 pm

Boobies…on a 72 inch LCD HD-TV?

Comment by LordPartyTime — February 26, 2008 @ 5:08 pm

^ I’m gonna have to agree with my fellow lord on this one.

Comment by Lord Cocksworth — February 26, 2008 @ 6:16 pm

@LPT

only if you have a chicks to play with while watching them on the 72 inch LCD HD-TV

Comment by goforbroke — February 26, 2008 @ 6:30 pm

Or a RealDoll. (I assume.)

Comment by flintlocke — February 26, 2008 @ 6:44 pm

Well, when the chick is that freaky, then i’m playin with her, she’s playin with the doll, we’re all watchin the TV, it just goes on and on…. Ever had a threesome with a blowup doll? Kinda … weird.

Comment by LordPartyTime — February 26, 2008 @ 6:57 pm

I MUST KNOW
HOWS IT END
IT DOESN’T RHYME!!!

Comment by TrikYodz — February 24, 2008 @ 7:22 pm

GREEN LANTERNS LIGHT

Comment by BelowFrosty — February 24, 2008 @ 8:53 pm

thank you

Comment by TrikYodz — February 25, 2008 @ 12:43 am

I’m never baby-sitting again.
~
I keep hearing that cat from Pokemon saying “Meow, that’s right!” right after “No evil shall escape our sight.”

Comment by Paul_Is_Drunk — February 25, 2008 @ 3:43 am

I lol’d.

Comment by Frank McColbert — February 24, 2008 @ 5:13 pm

Genius. An instant classic. I’ll say that if I play that game again.

Comment by Samael — February 24, 2008 @ 5:44 pm

haha I remember this game…

Comment by casemods — February 24, 2008 @ 7:41 pm

http://youtube.com/watch?v=p4OmQrzyLlE

Comment by slakinator — February 24, 2008 @ 11:05 pm

Sometimes i worry myconfinedspace has lost its touch, but posts like these bring me right back. rock solid.

Comment by johnnybazookajoe — February 25, 2008 @ 1:16 am

’shopped.

Comment by Phyreblade — February 25, 2008 @ 1:49 am

He seriously said?
.
Damn it’s too bad he’ll never win.

Comment by Caio — February 7, 2008 @ 10:08 pm

pshhhhhhh he’s got as much chance of being elected as billary every did

Comment by tiki god — February 7, 2008 @ 10:16 pm

hes got a great chance of winning. he is barely behind her in the number of delegates

Comment by RPTM6 — February 7, 2008 @ 10:52 pm

Wow, that is pretty awesome. Imagine actually having a President that is tolerant of other religions… Certainly nothing like Bush who said ‘fuck you’ to atheists.

Comment by jasonp — February 7, 2008 @ 11:07 pm

He has a serious gift with words…I hope he wins.

Comment by wolfbainx — February 7, 2008 @ 11:21 pm

He must have like 100 lips to be kissing that much ass all at once.
.
This kind of faux love for all is laughable. He should be running in Canada. His whole can’t we all just get along shtick is tiresome. The answer is ‘no’… because we’re human being you fucking idiot. Until you change the nature of the universe then in order for your country to win you have to make someone else lose.
.
It’s nice to be tolerant of other religions. It’s just too bad religions aren’t tolerant of each other. This guy is like a first year philosophy student. He wants to change the world but he doesn’t really know the world too well yet. Or at least that’s the image he’s working.

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — February 8, 2008 @ 12:00 am

It just kinda seems like he is trying to appeal to everyone at once.

Comment by Wisebrute — February 8, 2008 @ 3:12 am

If he keeps trying to appeal to everyone at once after he gets elected, then there’s no problem, is there?

Comment by Gilly — February 8, 2008 @ 5:28 am

Appealing to everyone? What a damned. Clever. SUBVERSION OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY.
.
Frankly the first politician to get my vote is the one who promices to genocide all those who disagree with me.

Comment by Caio — February 8, 2008 @ 7:43 am

The cult of Obama:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/greenwald/2374

Barack Obama is taking advantage of white guilt. He is the secular Messiah who can supposedly forgive us for our racist past. The Obama cult is based on anti-intellectual emotionalism. He constantly promises to bring about change. Obama deliberate avoids offering any specifics. Thankfully, this nonsense will only continue a bit longer. Soon the middle of the road voters will be much more demanding.

Comment by diabeetus — February 8, 2008 @ 8:43 am

Yeah, but absolutely everyone knows that he comes from a family of recent immigrants to Hawaii. If that argument was true, Jessie Jackson would be the most successful candidate in history behind Malcolm X and Rodney King.
.
Quadruple irony points for the phrase ‘middle of the road voters’ in an IDDQ post as if he thought that was some desireable thing.

Comment by Caio — February 8, 2008 @ 9:35 am

Oh, yeah, and when are we gonna see a Jewish candidate, damnit?

Comment by Caio — February 8, 2008 @ 9:36 am

Ya’ll know, there is a black woman running for president this year.

no shit.

http://www.runcynthiarun.org/

Comment by natedog — February 8, 2008 @ 9:38 am

Also, in order to bridge the great divide between the races, and between political parties in our country, Obama and Huckabee should reinact this legendary meeting between black and white:

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/f02d0b8cca

Comment by Caio — February 8, 2008 @ 9:42 am

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1546579-1,00.html

The article from which this quote is excerpted. An interesting read.

Comment by st_judas — February 8, 2008 @ 2:27 pm

Obama is popular because he isn’t part of the washington machine yet. Not to mention he is charismatic and friendly, unlike Hillary.

And yeah, his views on religion may not be extrapolatable, but they are his views. Religions may never get along with each other, but having the president not interfere is a step towards some sort of peace.

I like Obama because he isn’t Hillary. If I’m going to vote for a democrat, I’m voting for him.

Comment by Excelsior — February 10, 2008 @ 2:44 am

Yeah, doesn’t really impress me at all. Just more babble that won’t happen. Lets move to Canada or something.

Comment by RSIxidor — February 6, 2008 @ 9:47 am

I’d like to believe that he would follow through on his claims…would be a nice change!

Comment by tiki god — February 6, 2008 @ 9:53 am

And how exactly does he plan to do all these things? With the power of Carebear stare?

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 9:54 am

Why so incredulous?
Ending the War in Iraq, closing Gitmo and restoring habeas corpus could all be done with the signing of an order. He’s not promising rainbows and sunshine, those are all realistic expectations.

Comment by reboot — February 6, 2008 @ 10:04 am

I’m not saying his promises are ludicrous, but HOW does he plan on accomplishing these things? I can say “I will become an astronaut and fly to Mars” but when someone asks me HOW, I can say “by going to college and studying math, aerodynamics, taking pilots lessons, applying to the air force, submitting a resume to NASA, applying for the space program” and have a series of steps in order to reach my goals. How does Iraq Osama plan on doing these things? He does know that he is going to be blocked or helped by the other members of the government, this isn’t a dictatorship where HE has the power to do whatever he wants (and I’m sure this will be his excuse when he can’t deliver on some/all of his promises). I’m asking for an explanation on these promises. Also, I’m not entirely interested in the answer, because I know how false any politicians promises are.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 10:08 am

Also, “ending the war in Iraq” is a pretty stupid statement. I hate arguing politics, but, there is a reason we are there. Terrorists (Al Qaeda, and other offshoot organizations) WANT to kill Americans, and I’ve read about attacks in Spain, France, Germany, and Britain, so I’m sure those countries might want to take notice, but, even if we (America, and our allies, etc) “pull out” of Iraq/Afghanistan then there will be attacks elsewhere, because terrorists want to kill innocent people, and cause fear and terror (the goal of terrorism is to spread terror to achieve ends) by destruction. So, if we don’t fight terror in Iraq (a desert shit-hole for the most part) then where do we fight it? In the streets of America? In rural urban areas where innocent people live? Or do we let our military (our = America to me, or, the military of all countries that wish to fight terrorism, or keep terrorists out of their countries) fight them somewhere we won’t have colossal collateral damage (think back to Superman vs Doomsday, or any other massive battle where there is a ton of damage to urban cityscapes) and innocent people (people who are just going about their day and then all of a sudden blow up) die. The war on terror isn’t JUST a war against Iraq, but it sets a battleground of our choosing, a focal point to minimize losses.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 10:14 am

All Obama says is a noun, verb, and CHANGE

Comment by diabeetus — February 6, 2008 @ 10:16 am

http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Barack_Obama_War_+_Peace.htm

Obama on when he would get the troops out:
(Democratic Presidential Debate on MSNBC, moderated by Tim Russert, at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, Sept. 26, 2007)

Q: Will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term, there will be no US troops in Iraq?

Obama: I think it’s hard to project four years from now, and I think it would be irresponsible. We don’t know what contingency will be out there. I believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don’t want to make promises, not knowing what the situation’s going to be three or four years out.

….The only way we’re going to stabilize Iraq and make sure that al Qaeda does not take over in the long term is to begin a phased redeployment so that we don’t have anti-American sentiment as a focal point for al Qaeda in Iraq. We can still have troops in the region, outside of Iraq, that can help on counterterrorism activities, and we’ve got to make sure that they don’t establish long-term bases there….

Comment by natedog — February 6, 2008 @ 10:18 am

I don’t get it? Doesn’t this just prove my point?

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 10:20 am

you fuckers dont want change. AMERICAN TROOPS ARE IN 130 COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD.
WE
ARE
STILL
IN
FUCKING
KOREA!

WE SPEND, ER I MEAN BORROW, A TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR DOING THAT SHIT!

a trillion dollars is a stack of $100 bills 631.33 MILES high. and we spent that LAST YEAR killing people in Iraq.

we have lost more people in Iraq than we did on 9/11.

WE ARE SAFER ON OUR OWN SHORES. UNLESS OUR MILITARY IS STRUNG OUT ALL OVER THE FUCKING GLOBE.

what happens if we get attack and our troops are away?

wake the fuck up people.

oh wait. dont. elect a bunch of scurvy pirates.

Comment by natedog — February 6, 2008 @ 10:22 am

Obama then closed this elegant speech with yelling “get your popcorn ready!” into the microphone and then storming off.

Comment by ogie — February 6, 2008 @ 10:23 am

“what happens if we get attack and our troops are away?

wake the fuck up people.”

We won’t be attacked, because we gave them (terrorists) somewhere to go OTHER than the shores of the Great Satan. Also, we have national guard. Not all of our troops are deployed, we have a STRONG force still in country (USA). Plus, our freedoms (civil liberties that everyone is saying we are losing) prevent us from preventing an attack, because there is no way to preempt anything that we don’t know about. Unless we spy on everyone (ZOMG WE CAN’T DO THAT!?!?!?!?!?!) to figure out WHO the bad people are.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 10:26 am

the war on terrorism is a fucking joke. it’s a dick in your ass, schulzbrianr.

2/3’s of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. but we’re in fucking Iraq and Afghanistan. WTF? we just sold the Saudi’s $20 Billion worth of weapons.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/07/28/saudi.arms/index.html

it’s a scam. the private military contractors that the US taxpayer pays make 6 figure salaries while our soldiers are making dick. halliburton’s making billion$ off of genocide.

Comment by natedog — February 6, 2008 @ 10:30 am

Jesus, is that what that thing was? No wonder it was so hard to poop.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 10:32 am

yes, let us give up our freedoms so we can be safe.

give up your guns, so you can be safe. give up your privacy so you can be safe. give up your thoughts and opinions so the terrorists dont kill us.

you’re a fucking joke, schulz.

look at teh soviets. they didnt get taken over, THEIR CURRENCY WENT TO SHIT AND TOOK THEIR ECONOMY WITH IT. teh Soviets had 40,000 nukes pointed at us and we fucking made it through easy. but now people like you, are scared of uneducated, greasy, third world arabs with boxcutters who operate out of caves.

our dollar is worth 4 fucking penneis compared to when the Fed took over. but noooo, let’s borrow 150 billion dollars from the chinese to cut americans a ‘tax rebate’ check so they will go out and buy chinese shit to stimulate the american economy? fuck you, schulz. fuck you and all the other americans like you.

Comment by natedog — February 6, 2008 @ 10:36 am

natedog, if you hate America so much, then please move to Canada, Europe, or Australia.

Comment by diabeetus — February 6, 2008 @ 10:39 am

I didn’t say give up our freedoms jackass. I said that we can’t prevent horrible things in our free society, so to achieve total safety, we have to give up our freedom. I say it’s not worth it, but you asked how we could be safe, or at least implied we weren’t, so I gave a solution. If you’ve ever read any of my other posts, you’d find out I own one, and plan to own LOTS more, guns. I love guns. I would NEVER give up ANY of them. And, I’ll use one of my favorite quotes from “Sum of All Fears”: It’s not the guy with 1,000 nukes I’m worried about. It’s the guy with one.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 10:40 am

Also, diabeetus, I’d love that too, but unfortunately we can’t kick out or get rid of every idiot. Then those of us left would have an entire state to ourselves. He’s allowed to stay and be stupid, because that isn’t a crime (yet).

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 10:42 am

Post 12:
“Plus, our freedoms (civil liberties that everyone is saying we are losing) prevent us from preventing an attack, because there is no way to preempt anything that we don’t know about. Unless we spy on everyone (ZOMG WE CAN’T DO THAT!?!?!?!?!?!) to figure out WHO the bad people are.”

Comment by natedog — February 6, 2008 @ 10:43 am

diabeetus, piss off. i dont hate america, ya word twisting fag.

i love america and am pissed because the economy is going to shit because we spend too much money on the bullshit war.

i love the country. we need our troops alive and home, not dead on foreign shores because of A THOUSAND FUCKING LIES BY BUSHco.

Comment by natedog — February 6, 2008 @ 10:45 am

and? Again, I gave a scenario. I said “we can’t know who the bad people are, unless we know who EVERYONE is.” Also, I’ve asked before (to people who say our freedoms are disappearing) “name one liberty you have lost. Name one thing you used to do BEFORE 9/11 that you CAN’T DO NOW because it is illegal.” The best someone could come up with was Jose Padilla, who is a pretty lame argument, because he was a criminal in the first place, who got perhaps extreme treatment, not a total abuse of the law where an innocent man was arrested and kept in jail without a trial. So, before you think you know what I said, try and read it twice to figure out if there’s something between the lines.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 10:47 am

What a sad day when natedog is the sane one in a comment thread.
schulz, go back and read the other thread where you were empirically shown by 3 different people that war in Iraq has nothing to do with preventing terrorism.
2nd the “diabeetus, piss off”, speaking out you mind and questioning authority is the MOST AMERICAN THING YOU CAN DO, its the foundation of the country, the motherfucking first amendment.
schulz, if you spend half the time learning as you do posting, you could go read Obama’s website where he explains how he plans to do those things on practically a day to day basis. The answers to the questions you’re asking are out there, they’re just not going to spoon fed to you.
“Name one thing you used to do BEFORE 9/11 that you CAN’T DO NOW because it is illegal.”
Restrictions on chemical supplies for research, restrictions on model rocket hobby supplies, taking a water bottle onto an airplane, getting onto an airplane with ID, walking around in public without an ID. That’s just off the top of my head.

Comment by reboot — February 6, 2008 @ 11:10 am

“At least he admits to smoking crack, Vote for Barrack!”

Comment by reboot — February 6, 2008 @ 11:15 am

So you’ve been arrested for one of these things? Also, the war in Iraq does have to do with terrorism. See how our country hasn’t been attacked by terrorists since? Also, fine, if you want to get semantic, it doesn’t “prevent” terrorism, it just gives it a safe outlet.

I won’t go read Obama’s website, because I don’t care.

You had to have an ID to get on a plane before. You can take water on an airplane. I’ve done it. I never walked around in public before without an ID, and you shouldn’t either. Model rocket hobby supplies? Restrictions on chemical supplies for research? What are you ordering for? What chemicals. Also, I don’t really care. I’m just asking questions for you to think about, I don’t care about the answer.

I would go back to other threads, but Ciao gives me some thesis and I don’t feel like reading about politics all day. The internet has porn for a reason.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 11:18 am

I shouldn’t jump into this hornet’s nest, but I kinda agree with natedog.

I love the USA, but we do waste a shitload of money on wars we don’t need to be fighting, and giving extravagent gov’t contracts to Cheney’s buddies. Not to mention China and the business we give them by buying their crap.

Ya know why women were stay at home moms in the 50’s? Because the US workforce produced over 50% of the world’s goods. Those jobs are now in China.

Comment by KerryII — February 6, 2008 @ 11:38 am

@Schulzbrianr
~
2 things:
~
1) Al-Quada membership has ballooned since the Iraq war
2) Before the Iraq war, we hadn’t had a (foreign) terrorist attack since Pearl Harbor. Did going to war in Iraq pre-emptively prevent that terrorism?

Comment by Paul_Is_Drunk — February 6, 2008 @ 11:38 am

“See how our country hasn’t been attacked by terrorists since?”
This rock keeps away tigers, notice how there’s no tigers around.
“I never walked around in public before without an ID, and you shouldn’t either.”
Your papers, please. That used to be the difference between us the commies.
“I don’t care about the answer.”
If you don’t know and you don’t care, please, don’t vote.
“I don’t feel like reading about politics all day.”
Yet, here you are…

Comment by reboot — February 6, 2008 @ 11:39 am

Oh, yeah:
“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
~Benjamin Franklin

Comment by Paul_Is_Drunk — February 6, 2008 @ 11:40 am

Paul:
1) If it has, that just means we have more terrorists to kill
2) Pearl Harbor wasn’t a terrorist attack, it was a kamikaze attack by a foreign military. Also, how cheap/easy was powerful/small explosives for radical Islamists to strap to themselves prior to then, and how much of a Great Satan were we.

reboot:
good analogy. I can’t wait to see how you are when there ARE tigers around.
I wish we could go back to the days when the world was a nice(r) place too.
I don’t plan on voting.
I’m not here reading about politics. I’m here arguing about candidates, and how everything they say is meant only to get voters, because you can’t win by being the best candidate, but by being the one with the most money, or the best speeches, or charisma, etc.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 11:47 am

Also, KerryII, not to argue completely with you, but, just because a product is made in China doesn’t mean it is a Chinese product, just that it is produced there. US companies use China because of the cheap labor. Unfortunately, women are now empowered, and we can’t pay them shit wages. And as far as “wars we don’t need to be fighting” that could be argued about WWII as well, or WWI, or something. We could remain isolationist, or whatever, but, look what happens when we do. Unfortunately, the UN won’t step up and police the world, so we have to spend money ourselves to do it. It may not always be the best thing, or the right thing, but at least it’s something.

Oh, and Paul:
There has to be a balance. I’m sure even Ben would agree with me on that.

And reboot:
This site isn’t 100% politics all day. I’ll comment on images (or in this case words) that I have an opinion on. If it was my site, I would run it differently. It’s not, so I go with the flow as best I can.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 11:51 am

@Shulzbrianr
O_O?
Seriously, does cognitive dissonance ever affect your brain, or you truly that oblivious?
Point 1 completely contradicted what you previously said, that going to war in Iraq helps prevents terrorists attacks, and then you embrace the fact that it makes us less safe because it gives us, “…more terrorists to kill?”
~
I don’t even know how to respond to your second point. It starts out with semantics, then begins a sentence with a question that devolves into I don’t know what.
~
dl;tr - I would keep away from serious debates if I were you.

Comment by Paul_Is_Drunk — February 6, 2008 @ 12:01 pm

You’re right, I’m complicated. Let me try to ’splain.

1) If someone joins Al-Qaeda, then it is someone who wants to attack America, and wants to seek the means to do so. If they are in Al-Qaeda, it gives us (The US) justification for aggression against them. It also makes it easier to categorize, because they are a member of a group who’s motives we have established, and we don’t need to spend more time/money (resources) to figure out the motives of a NEW group (which ultimately has the same goal). In this way, it helps us combat terrorism by minimizing the effort we need to expend, and more rapidly ending the war on terror. Got it?

My second point is just that. The fact that it is now cheap and easy to make a bomb, and get people into America to blow it up is why there have been terrorist attacks. Not for lack of will, but lack of means.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 12:06 pm

Wow. I should leave this alone, but two points are just to tempting to point out:
1)”because you can’t win by being the best candidate, but by being the one with the most money, or the best speeches, or charisma, etc.”
_Then explain how McCain took the lead in the Republican nomination, when his campaign was broke one month ago.
2)”I wish we could go back to the days when the world was a nice(r) place too.
_You mean pretty much the non-stop war that took place in the world before the Cold War? Let’s see… the Napoleonic Wars, the Armenian genocide, France’s war against Prussia, the Hundred Years war, the Spanish American war to name less than 1%?

Comment by Paul_Is_Drunk — February 6, 2008 @ 12:10 pm

@shulzbrianr - Post 30

Well put, brother. I agree with you. My point is that the jobs being shipped overseas is hurting our economy.

War is a complicated subject. George Washington warned us of “foreign entanglements”.

Comment by KerryII — February 6, 2008 @ 12:14 pm

Because he wasn’t broke? Or, he got more money? I’m a PI in my spare time.
No, I mean the days when there was no internet, and stupidity was limited to a far smaller circle. Also, the days when we didn’t need to worry about being slaughtered in the streets, or where THE WORLD WAS A NICER PLACE. I’d say the 50s, like you see in sitcoms, where everyone was happy. I guess the fact you cited all those times was because you were there, and it was nicer? Or were you making a point that the world has never been nicer? Then what does the war on terror have to do with anything? If the world has always been this way, then why bitch about it being this way NOW?

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 12:14 pm

KerryII:
Well, if it was hurting our economy, then why would countries ship their labor/factories/whatever over there? Because I’m sure they’ve had people analyze the cost of it, and it ends up being cheaper. Meaning they can make their products cheaper (which means that people will more likely buy it over a more expensive product with the same function) and makes them more money. Which in turn helps the economy.
Its either a win/win, or a lose/lose. Also, I read recently (or maybe I heard on the radio, or TV, I don’t know) that companies like Dell and Cisco that were hiring people for helpdesk and customer support in India were losing/firing because of the fact that everyone I know (which means more that I don’t know) hate dealing with someone they can’t understand who just reads from a checklist to resolve a problem with their computer. I will say it is frustrating to find a solution.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 12:18 pm

“I’d say the 50s, like you see in sitcoms, where everyone was happy.”
Okay, I get it now. You’re very convincing. Enjoy your trolling.

Comment by Paul_Is_Drunk — February 6, 2008 @ 12:22 pm

Well, I’m basing my idea of “when the world was a better place” on a time I don’t really know, but have been shown examples of in fictional settings. Enjoy your jackassery.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 12:24 pm

as to post #21, you said name ONE liberty lost, and i cited an american citizen who was denied his right to Habeus Corpus.

he may be a scumbag, but until he is convicted, he has rights. or he should have had a right. any american deemed an ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ loses their rights of habeus corpus, a speedy trial, due process, free speech, etc…

other examples:

First amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
free speech zones
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

The Fourth Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REAL_ID_Act

Sixth Amendment
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.”

Now think back to Jose Padilla. oh wait, he is a scumbag, so fuck him.

Fifth Amendment:
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime… …nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.”

again, Jose Padilla was and still is being deprived of his life and liberty and property. he didnt get due process either. and how often do you hear about people’s property getting confiscated by the police department without being compensated?

Second Amendment:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,192347,00.html
http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=198836

Eighth Amendment:
“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”

so now pay no attention to the police state tazer happy assholes or the torture at abu graib or gitmo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh#Capture_and_interrogation

Comment by natedog — February 6, 2008 @ 12:31 pm

“I don’t plan on voting.”
Thank you and have a great day. Looking forward to your comments on a pic with more lulz.

Comment by reboot — February 6, 2008 @ 12:36 pm

THAT IS OVER HALF OF THE 10 AMENDMENTS THAT MAKE UP THE BILL OF RIGHTS.

and who the fuck is safer now?

more troops are dead from Iraq than from 9/11.

Comment by natedog — February 6, 2008 @ 12:38 pm

Once again, you don’t cite yourself. You use rare extreme examples to prove my point.

“any american deemed an ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ loses their rights of habeus corpus, a speedy trial, due process, free speech, etc…”

ANYONE deemed an unlawful enemy combatant should lose their rights. You don’t give a Russian in this country American rights do you? Or maybe you do, I don’t know. But, if you are no longer an American, why should you be afforded American rights? The Geneva Convention affords rights to prisoners of a foreign, organized army. If you aren’t part of a nation that abides by the same laws of warfare, then why should you be afforded those rights by us? It’s time to quit playing nice with terrorists, they don’t play nice with us. Also, if you call what was done at Abu Ghraib torture, I think you need to go back to that argument of what torture is. If it doesn’t leave a mark, it isn’t torture, it’s just uncomfortable for a while. But way to cite the Bill of Rights as a defense for criminals. You would think that after you break the law, and are caught on it numerous times, you might want to rethink breaking it again, because since you have a history of being a douchebag, people might not think you suddenly became an angel of peace, and “innocent until proven guilty” becomes “he’s been guilty a half dozen times before, looks like he’s just a fucking chronic idiot.”

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 12:39 pm

Yeah, troops. Not innocent civilians. Troops risk (and give up) their lives so that innocent people don’t have to worry about being blown up while they are going about their day. You’re welcome.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 6, 2008 @ 12:40 pm

I was just going to leave this be and maybe I’m being trolled but:
“You don’t give a Russian in this country American rights do you? Or maybe you do, I don’t know”
The constitution only mentions “citizen” as the requirements for office and voting. All other rights are fo