OT - For INVAR and his fellow Clinton haters

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Hey INVAR, did you miss this post by @ on the Clinton is the new Hitler thread?


"Dual loyalist officials who dominated intelligence operations and strategic planning in Washington under both the Reagan and Bush administrations apparently played a key role in this "historic betrayal" of American defenses, as Nurminen put it."

Get it yet big guy?

-- a (a@a.a), April 19, 1999


we have a one party system disguised as two party system BIG money rules this country and dupes whine constantly about clinton getting his d*** sucked,get over it,why are you not happy that we have a presidend that can matain a stable erection?we've let ourselves be turned into a nation of corporate slaves all in the name the newest happy meal,blissfully tuning into COPS every night to get the latest update on the progress of the worlds largest prison state...in the words of Mohandis K. Gandhi..."the slave owners victory is complete when the slaves take pride in their chains."reagan,bush,clinton,kennedy....they're just puppet figureheads look at where the money is flowing.... read NOAM CHOMSKY,read MICHAEL PARENTIE kill your television...wake up!

-- zoobie (zoob@aol.com), April 19, 1999.

For the sake of you revving up your search engines, I believe it is "Parenti." He is somewhat left of center in his orientation, but we can all learn from eachother. Not all right-wingers are facists; not all left-wingers are commies. Both usually have good reasons for thinking the way they do; both usually have good motives.

I agree totally with "a" - they have us hamstrun on false divisions and emotionally charged issues. We need to follow the money and keep our eye on the ball.


-- Dano (bookem@blacksand.srf), April 19, 1999.

Way to go, Dano! Not torching zoobie for his bad syntax and run-on everything. Too bad that when somebody comes on that pretty much speaks for me, he sounds like someone the right can easily label as a raving lunatic.

Unfortunately, most of us have had to stay -- and feel -- at least a little bit crazy to keep our minds somewhat our own territories while living in this mad, mad society.

Dano's right -- everyone has felt his piece of the elephant -- we're all blind and groping toward a whole truth. I've seen MORE of it put together on this forum than just about anywhere else. Smart conservatives fascinate me. Stupid "liberals", well.... y2k may relieve me of more than a few of them.

If I could program in one word to eliminate threads from my browser, it might be "Clinton" -- what a distraction to focus ANY attention here on that name (usually it's someone calling another a "Clinton- lover" -- DUH! have you heard ANY of that anywhere NEAR here?)

He is irrelevant.

(Unless, of course.... Oh, but he wouldn't.... Oh no, he's going to.... @#*$*&*##)

Perhaps we should have offered him a SUITE of imperial concubines, a harem, upon entering office? And a Medal of Honor for his war heroism. Keep him from proving himself in dangerous ways.

Isn't BJC sounding a lot like LBJ these days? Hanoi/Belgrade. HOT DAMN! VIETNAM!

-- jor-el (jor-el@krypton.com), April 19, 1999.

Jor-el .... Isn't it amazing how what goes around comes around?? I can just see myself replaying the March on Washington soon against LBJ, oops, I meant Bill.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), April 19, 1999.

You Clintonistas are amazing. What you won't do to exhonorate your king. You'll stick to a tactic even though we're wise to your spin tools.

The tried-and-true tool Clinton and his goose-stepping brownshirts continue to employ (as --a posts above) is the: "Hey, they did it first!" routine.

Clintonistas then expect the rest of us to absolve Clinton of any judgement because hey, Reagan and Bush did it first.

It's as childish as this president himself is.

Sorry --a, your king is running the show now, and therefore is accountable for what HE does on his watch, regardless of the so-called failings of others. Unfortunately your king spends his time in deny mode, then claims ignorance followed by shift blame motif. When that doesn't work to quiet the questions, your king then resorts to trashing the questioners and/or trashing history and comparing himself with the failings of others.

You'd think the reality of his continuous lies and cover-ups would make you people skeptical to anything he says.

But no, you goose-stepping asswipes continue to cover for him, seeking ANY way to absolve your king for the sake of your ideology.

BIG difference though as I've said before is the fact that the ChiComs had to STEAL the technology under Bush, whereareas Clinton SOLD it to them for campaign bucks and covered it up.

Thanks to the lack of security under Bush, China obtained w-88 technology. But thanks to your king, China can now hit us with it.

And --a, a Clinton hater YES I AM.

I HATE what he has done to our nation. I HATE his lies. I HATE his coverups. I HATE his shameless use of class-warfare. I HATE his scapegoating. I HATE his demouguoging. I HATE his abuse of women. I HATE his corruption of every independent agency in the Federal Government. I HATE his corruption of NATO. I HATE his abuse of those who are his detractors. I hate his abuse of our military. I hate his wonton disregard for our Constitution and the rule of law. I hate his traitorous coddling of avowed enemies of the United States.

I hate what he says, what he has and is doing and what he stands for.

I hate him as president OR king.

Other than that I probably love his passion for sports.

You and your shameless ideological ilk have condemned us as a nation to death.

You will one day be held responsible.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), April 19, 1999.

INVAR is an asshole. And, he has no idea what he's talking about.

-- . (.@...), April 19, 1999.


PROVE me wrong dipshit. You've resorted to insult because you don't have a debatable leg to stand on.

What I've said about your king is undeniable, fact and widely known by even those whom admired him.

Name ONE thing I stated about your king that is FALSE, and provide FACTS to back it up.


-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), April 19, 1999.


>Name ONE thing I stated about [subject matter] that is FALSE, and provide FACTS to back it up.



-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), April 19, 1999.

Imagine that.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), April 19, 1999.

Whiiiiiirrrrr -click- rrrrrriiiiiiihw rrrrrrriiiiiihw rrrrrrrrrriiiiiihw

The sound of a Republican backpedaling...

-- a (a@a.a), April 19, 1999.


I think you have it about right except for one thing:

Clinton's passion for sports is phony!!

-- Bill S. (arlene@inreach.com), April 20, 1999.

Invar, Invar Invar... to call a, zoobie, Dano, jor-el, Big Dog "Clintonistas" is pretty stupid. I'm sure that based on their previous posts and upon the worldviews which they demonstrate, that these guys would have very few positive things to say about WJC. To correctly point out that most of the previous recent presidents have an equally crooked record, is not to attempt to exonerate WJC for his many many failings. It is to recognise that corruption and, well..EVIL, are inherent within the U.S. and global political order, and that the presence of a donkey or an elephant in the whitehouse has very little baring on the overall outcomes.

Clinton's presidency has come under unprecednted scrutiny, not because of some "vast right-wing conspiracy", but because of the internet. Now, with the net, there is an outlet for news about each an every scandal to be analysed and promoted. Had such an outlet been available during the Bush/Reagan years, then I'm confident that many more people would be aware of their scandals and crimes, which I would guesstimate to be on a par with Slick Willie's, (unless he keeps up with this Kosovo idiocy.)

But maybe you're right, and Clinton is notably more crooked than his immediate predecessors. SO! It isn't because he's a left-winger (ROTFLMAO). It's because he's the kind of guy who's got the wherewithall required to defeat all the other immoral assholes who would be prez.

I wouldn't call you an "asshole" Invar, but you are abrasive. No matter. While you quite often get it quite right and have good info, I think that your mind is still trapped in the left/right Democrat/Republican false dichotomy, and that this leads you astray quite often.

-- humptydumpty (no.6@thevillage.com), April 20, 1999.

Clinton is a lying social misfit. Nothing any other president has done in the past comes even close to his mental state of mind, not even Nixon. Hillary once said, "The problem back then, you'll remember, is that documents were destroyed, tapes were missing. The White House was not cooperating. I think the contrast is so dramatic." She was comparing Whitewater to Watergate. She's absolutely right about the contrast, Clinton combines all the worst in all other presidents, the devious Nixon, the philanderer Kennedy, the attacker Reagan. Nothing compares to Clinton.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), April 20, 1999.


Was referencing --a, in my description of "Clintonistas". I am well aware that Jor-el, Zoobie and especially Dano are as apart ideologically speaking from Clinton as night is from day, if not further. I was referring to the idiot morons that troll around here dressed as pollyannas, touting the miracles of their savior and king WJBC and espousing the superiority of the status quo over common sense.

Sorry you interpreted my post as such.

As far as my mind being "trapped" in ideology; I do not see the world in greys. To me it is black and white, right and wrong, life and death. I know that doesn't sit well with most conditioned folk nowadays...but I don't give a rat's ass. I got the Almighty's Word to back up my position and I can care less about how I'm perceived by the deluded masses.

BTW, to equate the character of Carter, Reagan or Bush to this evil tyrant currently occupying 1600 Pennsylvania is an aggregious insult.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), April 20, 1999.

It continues to amaze me the extent to which "a" GETS Y2K and DOESN'TGET Klinton.

How does such a cerebral short circuit come about?

Even if his position is really that both parties are equally corrupt, why does he always come in here as a Klinton apologist instead of merely trying to balance the scales?

And never in the course of this specific debate has he answered the simple argument that secrets were stolen during the Reagan and Bush administrations but were given away/sold under Klinton. It's a simple argument but "a" does not seem to GI.

If you really want to balance the scales, "a", then try to prove that Reagan and/or Bush knowingly betrayed the U.S. to the ChiComs. That's the allegation (with plenty of evidence to back it up) on the table against your hero.

-- Jovial (noone@nowhere.xyz), April 20, 1999.

INVAR --- Ouch. It's my own fault for being so irenic on this forum most of the time. Put me down with you when it comes to ideological distance from Slick ....

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), April 20, 1999.

BigDog.....Welcome my friend, but I gotta warn ya, it gets lonely here at times when it appears the zombied masses are singing hosanna's on high for their majesty; the Slick.

But if you enjoy cold-hard truth, perhaps you can help me wield it against emotionally-hot rhetoric in this debate for our national soul.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), April 20, 1999.


You have bought into the Illuminati media distraction plan, hook, line, and sinker. It is precisely because of people like you who are more concerned about Clinton's penis than anything else, that we now find our country in a position where we must spend billions of extra taxpayer dollars, increasing the power and presence of UN forces, enabling the Illuminati elite to achieve their ultimate goal of global facism. Talking about NOT GETTING IT! You have been baited like the moron sheeple that you are and you are too dumb to even see it!!

-- @ (@@@.@), April 20, 1999.

I think a lot of people here need to do two things: One, read the book on the Cola Wars. Two, rent the video on the Great Rock & Roll Scandal. This ought to provide a wonderful allegory-education to what is going on in our government.

PJ in TX

-- PJ Gaenir (fire@firedocs.com), April 21, 1999.

Zoobie you are right. Corporations rule this country. And all those worrying about Clinton's sex life are sexual voyeurs. The corporations are thrilled with Clinton's groping, because then the spotlight isn't focused on them and their buying, and gutting and polluting of the U.S. for 2 cents on the dollar.

"In the Soviet Union, government controls industry. In the U. S., industry controls government. That is the principal structural difference between the two great oligarchies of our time." E. Abbey

a@a. how dare you suggest that Reagan/Bush and Co. played a role in a "historic betrayal." of our defenses. Such gods as they, who never dabbled in sex, were pure as the driven snow. Would they do that?? Thanks for the link.

Big boy get it? Hahahahahahah His glasses are so fogged from panting and fantasizing over Clinton's sexual romps that he can't see anything.

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), April 21, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ