War Protestors and Politicians PUT UP OR SHUT UP

Heres is your chance take it please

Published on January 26, 2005 By Moderateman In Politics

For all the whining crybabies protesting the war and bemoaning the treatment of the poor terrorist here is a great idea.

All you have to do is get a new bill together saying NO MORE FUNDING OF WAR>> THATS all

then sign your names to it, get on television and get together a coalition of the weak and cowardly to have petitions signed.

Its very simple really all you have to do is come out and tell america "we will not have part in the greater war on terror"

But of course then you have to live with all your neighbors knowing who you are.

The politicions knowing there re-election is in risk of failing WILL NOT HAVE THE BALLZ to do this.

If your so sure this war is a bad war, wrong war, wrong time, wrong reasons, step up to the national plate and take your swings, out front in view of everyone.

But since you value your jobs and eating at the public troth YOUR not going to do this, your just going to cry, and whine in the background, take sneak shots at the President.

Comments (Page 1)

Dr Guy

on Jan 27, 2005

All you have to do is get a new bill together saying NO MORE FUNDING OF WAR>> THATS all

then sign your names to it

Actually, if they did that, they would not be cowardly. Foolhardy perhaps, but not cowardly.

Moderateman

on Jan 27, 2005

Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005All you have to do is get a new bill together saying NO MORE FUNDING OF WAR>> THATS allthen sign your names to itActually, if they did that, they would not be cowardly. Foolhardy perhaps, but not cowardly.

If the reason they do not do it is because of their clinging on to a job then its cowardly..

Myrrander

on Jan 27, 2005

What's the "public troth?"

Are we getting engaged?

Moderateman

on Jan 27, 2005

Reply By: MyrranderPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005What's the "public troth?"Are we getting engaged?

um nope that would be pigame if we married lol and its what the pigs eat at even if I misspelled things as usual.

drmiler

on Jan 27, 2005

Reply #4 By: Moderateman - 1/27/2005 12:58:51 PM
Reply By: MyrranderPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005What's the "public troth?"Are we getting engaged?

um nope that would be pigame if we married lol and its what the pigs eat at even if I misspelled things as usual.

Nope just a dyslexic finger. It's "gh" not " th".

greggbert

on Jan 27, 2005

Ah yes. Here is that wonderful old republican junk argument:

If you're against this war, then that must mean you're against all wars.

The lunkhead Republicans love to use this one as well as the ever famous:

If you think this war was a stupid idea, then you love terrorists and saddam.

I like the way the original poster spun this one, it is even more clever:

If you are against this war, then you must want the troops to run out of equipment and funding so they all get killed.

When republicans can't win an argument, like for example the argument that "this war was a stupid idea, look at how it has turned out...." They always try to get into some different debate, that would be easier for them to win, like whether or not liberal senators should propose a resolution that would dissolve the armed forces, or whether or not french intelligence thought there were WMD in Iraq. IRRELEVANT!!!!

TOO BAD THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE!

Dr Guy

on Jan 27, 2005

If you're against this war, then that must mean you're against all wars.

I dont recall anyone saying that. I also dont recall anyone calling names until you did. And isnt it the mantra of the left that he who resorts to name calling has lost the debate?

Seems you just cost your team a touchdown, and probably the game.

whoman69

on Jan 27, 2005

You just need to go back to the original post for the name calling. Weak, cowardly, whining crybabies.

You want us to stop talking about the war and Dubyah. Show me that he has a plan in Iraq to end it. He hasn't up to now, just wishful thinking. He thought he could come into Iraq with insufficient troops because they would not have to act as police in the post war. They thought everyone would forget they have no food, power as long as they had freedom and gotten rid of Saddam. Another way to get us to stop talking about the war is to find one reason originally presented that is even valid anymore. Put up or shut up.

sandy2

on Jan 27, 2005

Umm.. mod, the war against Iraq is NOT a war against terror.

And actually we have stood up and said we are against the War in Iraq.

So you put up or shut up.

Suspeckted

on Jan 27, 2005

This really is a silly argument. Petitions have been signed and sent to the President with thousands of names. The antiwar movement would LOVE some tv exposure but they can't get it. But you are right about one thing, just about every national office holding politician is spineless, and the main one who sticks out in my mind who wasn't died in a plane crash in Minnesota.

And let's be clear as sandy just pointed out. Iraqi insurgents and foreign terrorists are quite different things. Last time I recall we invaded Iraq.

I also dont recall anyone calling names until you did.

And clearly from the beginning of this grammar error ridden rant there was name calling.

eating at the public troth YOUR not going to do this

YOUR = "You are" OR "You're"

Sorry man, I hate to nitpick but it's a pet-peeve of mine,
Suspeckted

drmiler

on Jan 27, 2005

Reply #9 By: sandy2 - 1/27/2005 5:53:34 PM
Umm.. mod, the war against Iraq is NOT a war against terror.

And actually we have stood up and said we are against the War in Iraq.

So you put up or shut up.

And just what would you like him to put up?

Moderateman

on Jan 27, 2005

Sorry man, I hate to nitpick but it's a pet-peeve of mine,SuspecktedBonus Rating: Trolling Insightful

um know yur not ifin ya was yer wuldnt pik nits

Moderateman

on Jan 27, 2005

Nope just a dyslexic finger. It's "gh" not " th".

thanx doc

Moderateman

on Jan 27, 2005

Reply By: greggbertPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005Ah yes. Here is that wonderful old republican junk argument: If you're against this war, then that must mean you're against all wars. The lunkhead Republicans love to use this one as well as the ever famous: If you think this war was a stupid idea, then you love terrorists and saddam. I like the way the original poster spun this one, it is even more clever:If you are against this war, then you must want the troops to run out of equipment and funding so they all get killed.When republicans can't win an argument, like for example the argument that "this war was a stupid idea, look at how it has turned out...." They always try to get into some different debate, that would be easier for them to win, like whether or not liberal senators should propose a resolution that would dissolve the armed forces, or whether or not french intelligence thought there were WMD in Iraq. IRRELEVANT!!!! TOO BAD THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE!

The ISSUE is we are fighting, wrongly or rightly, you get a grip,,, and stop crying all over my blog, btw would you like some cheese with your whine?

Moderateman

on Jan 27, 2005

Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Thursday, January 27, 2005If you're against this war, then that must mean you're against all wars. I dont recall anyone saying that. I also dont recall anyone calling names until you did. And isnt it the mantra of the left that he who resorts to name calling has lost the debate?Seems you just cost your team a touchdown, and probably the game.

and here I thought i was being well behaved, oh well.. let the flaming begin anew!!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!