Play the word game anyway you want. The fact is that you would not go to your local gathering hole and say what Murdoch said. Hell, you probably wouldn't say the same thing in front of friends or family. So don't try your little dumbass games with me, ok. If any Democratic or someone you thought was liberal had said the same thing, it would have been made into a movie of the week, then turned into a commercial and repeated every 30 seconds by Fox News telecaster readers.
At least stand by your damn convictions.
I discuss the fact that we've only lost 3,000 soldiers over the last 3 years of fighting with my family and friends regularly. All of my friends are Liberals, though I'm fairly certain each is more intune to the political airwaves than you. If you knew history as well as you love to rip Rupert Murdoch and the Fox News Channel, you'd realize that 58,000 U.S. soldiers lost their lives during the Vietnam war ('64-'73).
Now your math lesson:
3,000/3yrs=1,000 deaths per year
58,000/9yrs=6,444 death per year
So, in review... Murdoch was correct. We're losing exactly 15.5% of the soldiers, per year, than we did during the Vietnam conflict. Maybe you should send him a thesaurus if you don't like the words he chooses.
Or maybe your intelligence needs to reestablish itself with your haste?
"Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
I discuss the fact that we've only lost 3,000 soldiers over the last 3 years of fighting with my family and friends regularly. All of my friends are Liberals, though I'm fairly certain each is more intune to the political airwaves than you. If you knew history as well as you love to rip Rupert Murdoch and the Fox News Channel, you'd realize that 58,000 U.S. soldiers lost their lives during the Vietnam war ('64-'73).
Now your math lesson:
3,000/3yrs=1,000 deaths per year
58,000/9yrs=6,444 death per year
So, in review... Murdoch was correct. We're losing exactly 15.5% of the soldiers, per year, than we did during the Vietnam conflict. Maybe you should send him a thesaurus if you don't like the words he chooses.
Or maybe your intelligence needs to reestablish itself with your haste?
You know and I know and anyone who has read the thread, knows it's not about the numbers. Your little tricks don't work with me. Murdoch was wrong for making the statement.
But then again, why don't you just make a post titled -The Death of U.S. Soldiers in Iraq are "insignificant" - and make your case by stating that you think the death of U.S. soldiers in Iraq are "insignificant" because compared to the "number" of U.S. soldiers that died in Vietnam, Korea, WWI and II, they are such a "tiny" number of people. Do those words work better for you?
Then tell me if the "numbers" out weigh the fact that Murdoch was speaking about soldiers.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
You know and I know and anyone who has read the thread, knows it's not about the numbers. Your little tricks don't work with me. Murdoch was wrong for making the statement.
But then again, why don't you just make a post titled -The Death of U.S. Soldiers in Iraq are "insignificant" - and make your case by stating that you think the death of U.S. soldiers in Iraq are "insignificant" because compared to the "number" of U.S. soldiers that died in Vietnam, Korea, WWI and II, they are such a "tiny" number of people. Do those words work better for you?
Then tell me if the "numbers" out weigh the fact that Murdoch was speaking about soldiers.
I don't believe any U.S. service member's death is insignificant.
A man with an agenda. Atleast you're devoted.
"Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
No agenda. It's been interesting, enjoy your evening.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
I can't tolerate Rupert Murdoch, and given that he already has more than enough opportunity to get his point across to the world one really has to wonder why he has come out with his current statements. And if you think they are just mild, truthful little comments and not anything more sinister, then you are grossly underestimating the man. As to the Dixie Chicks, was never a fan until they came out and made their comments! Now I say power to them. Rupert has more than enough opportunities to say what he thinks and mould the world to his warped image. Dixie Chicks have gone up ten fold in my estimation now I know where they are coming from! Can't help wondering if the reason he is applauded and they are vilified is because they are girls and are supposed to be pretty and pliant and he is a man and so we are supposed to hang of every stupid word that comes out of his mouth!
AND the MOST IMPORTANT POINT of this whole thread is you can sprout statistics till the cows come home, you can make little, you can make light, BUT those people are dying over there for OIL and other WARPED F***ED UP reasons!!! Nothing to do with democracy!!! AND THAT IS WRONG!!! PLAIN WRONG!!! And I don't care what bloody channel you watch it on!
Comments
Keep telling yourself that, and keep watching FOX news. Sounds like you live in sweet ignorant oblivion.
I will. have you ever watched Fox? the answer is no. wait who is ignorant?
I discuss the fact that we've only lost 3,000 soldiers over the last 3 years of fighting with my family and friends regularly. All of my friends are Liberals, though I'm fairly certain each is more intune to the political airwaves than you. If you knew history as well as you love to rip Rupert Murdoch and the Fox News Channel, you'd realize that 58,000 U.S. soldiers lost their lives during the Vietnam war ('64-'73).
Now your math lesson:
3,000/3yrs=1,000 deaths per year
58,000/9yrs=6,444 death per year
So, in review... Murdoch was correct. We're losing exactly 15.5% of the soldiers, per year, than we did during the Vietnam conflict. Maybe you should send him a thesaurus if you don't like the words he chooses.
Or maybe your intelligence needs to reestablish itself with your haste?
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
FOX is that bad. mind numbingly giving one opinion everyday.
Add this guy to the list.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
and CNN, MSNBC, NYTIMES, LATIMES arent doing the same thing?
You know and I know and anyone who has read the thread, knows it's not about the numbers. Your little tricks don't work with me. Murdoch was wrong for making the statement.
But then again, why don't you just make a post titled -The Death of U.S. Soldiers in Iraq are "insignificant" - and make your case by stating that you think the death of U.S. soldiers in Iraq are "insignificant" because compared to the "number" of U.S. soldiers that died in Vietnam, Korea, WWI and II, they are such a "tiny" number of people. Do those words work better for you?
Then tell me if the "numbers" out weigh the fact that Murdoch was speaking about soldiers.
I don't believe any U.S. service member's death is insignificant.
A man with an agenda. Atleast you're devoted.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
Thank you.
No agenda. It's been interesting, enjoy your evening.
Every evening I'm breathing is an evening I enjoy.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
AND the MOST IMPORTANT POINT of this whole thread is you can sprout statistics till the cows come home, you can make little, you can make light, BUT those people are dying over there for OIL and other WARPED F***ED UP reasons!!! Nothing to do with democracy!!! AND THAT IS WRONG!!! PLAIN WRONG!!! And I don't care what bloody channel you watch it on!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift