New Rule (Torog you should love this one)

[XTC]

New Rule: Republicans need anger management. You know, I talk to young people all the time, and over and over again, they have the same complaint: that I'm out of Schnapps. But their other big gripe is that there's really no difference between the two parties. Not true. The Republicans are much more pissed off.

Look at John Bolton, if you can. Now, I don't know if this man has human relationship issues, but I do know two things. One, his hair is not speaking to his mustache. And, two, the Republicans actually like the idea of our most sensitive diplomatic post being helmed by a raging psychopath. Asking John Bolton to represent you at the U.N. is like asking R. Kelly to chaperone the Miss Teen USA Pageant. You know someone's going to get pissed.

Now, like Mr. Bolton, what Republicans need is to find a channel for their anger. And I mean a channel besides Fox News. In the last ten years, they've taken the White House, the Congress, the courts and what's left of Zell Miller's mind. And it's just made them madder.

Therefore, tonight, as a solution, I would like to suggest that, as a national policy, we encourage the re-establishment of the old Soviet Union. Now, sure, it was an evil empire, but at least it kept the Republicans busy! Who has time for gay marriage or activist judges or brain-dead bulimics when you've got a real boogeyman to freak out about?

The problem with American politics today is that one party has the monopoly on all the anger. To be a Republican is to walk around all day madder than Paula Abdul with a fistful of Vicodin and nothing to wash it down with.

And to be a Democrat means...I don't know. Your guess is as good as mine. It seems like ever since Michael Dukakis was asked how he'd feel if his wife got raped, and he said, "Whatever," the Democrats have been the party that speaks softly and carries�Massachusetts. When Dick Cheney says, "Go fuck yourself," they say, "How hard?"

In the last election, George Bush called John Kerry "a coward, a liar, a wimp, a flip- flopper and a war criminal." And Kerry got so incensed, he almost fell off his windsurfer. It's bad when the person in your party with the biggest balls is named Teresa.

So, Democrats would do well to remember this: Anger can be good. Anger can be cleansing. Anger can be a force for change. Anger is what made America what it is in the world today: a hulking pariah whose only friends are toadies and sheiks.

[Hydrizzle]

Oh god, XTC, you are so brainwashed.....

First off, what kind of rule is,"Republicans need anger management"???? That's a statement, not a rule. What is anyone supposed to do with that rule?? Lol.

Republicans are the most angry party? Give me some examples! And I want to see the actual quote where Bush called Kerry "a coward, a liar, a wimp, a flip- flopper and a war criminal." I never heard anything about that, even on the liberal news networks.

The United (corrupt useless) Nations needs someone who is critical of them. They have utterly failed in thier stated purpose and they have been tarnished by the Rwanda massacres, the Dharfor genocide, the Oil for Food program, etc etc.... Hopefully John Bolton will kick the UN in thier silk gilded panties and maybe get them to... i dunno..... maybe stop people from killing each other like they are supposed to?

[bhallg2k]

Dude, it's a Bill Maher thing. He's quoting; lighten up.

[nuance]

i dunno..... maybe stop people from killing each other like they are supposed to?


I hope they start off with USA.

On a slightly off topic note, I fucking hate the American presidental election system. It's like two children calling each other names. Or maybe it's just one. Bush lacked any real idea of anything (well what can you expect from a 6-year-old) so he decided to concentrate his whole campaign on calling Kerry a wimp and whatnot. In the process he managed to portray himself as "a powerful ruler" since Kerry wasn't obviously that much into personal insults. Well good fucking luck power ranger. Choosing a president isn't like a boxing match. Each candidate should just concentrate on telling people what are their views on today's issues, and tomorrow's for that matter. But I guess with a dictatorial government such as yours, unfair campaigning is bound to happen. Go figure.

I'm not saying Kerry would've been anything close to perfect but I think Bush is a true prince of darkness.

[Button Basher]

My view exactly Nuance. The US election system has started to rub off over here, parties putting eachother down ahead of outlining their own policies, propoganda and ultimately, nothing but bullshit 24/7 from all sides.

It's a sad world we live in when politics is not so much about making the country a better place then power and control, appeasing as much of the public you can until your in the hot seat.
The word "sheep" seems to be chucked around a lot but to me, anyone who is drawn in to politics by all the false promises and propoganda is a sheep, and that includes both liberals and republicans. The difference I see is that liberalism appears remotely based around peace whereas Republicans are only out for numer-uno.
The scandal of the Iraq war couldn't be any more obvious, the only way I see anyone accepting otherwise is if they believe their country deserves the best (which, as everyone knows, is very common in America). Who gives a fuck about Iraq when America needs to prosper? Such is the ideology of the Republican in a nutshell.

[amsterdam]

My view exactly Nuance. The US election system has started to rub off over here, parties putting eachother down ahead of outlining their own policies, propoganda and ultimately, nothing but bullshit 24/7 from all sides.

It's a sad world we live in when politics is not so much about making the country a better place then power and control, appeasing as much of the public you can until your in the hot seat.
The word "sheep" seems to be chucked around a lot but to me, anyone who is drawn in to politics by all the false promises and propoganda is a sheep, and that includes both liberals and republicans. The difference I see is that liberalism appears remotely based around peace whereas Republicans are only out for numer-uno.
The scandal of the Iraq war couldn't be any more obvious, the only way I see anyone accepting otherwise is if they believe their country deserves the best (which, as everyone knows, is very common in America). Who gives a fuck about Iraq when America needs to prosper? Such is the ideology of the Republican in a nutshell.


iraq swears in first freely elected govt in 50 years today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

what a quagmire!LOL!

[Hydrizzle]

Nuance, I know that your deap-seated hate of America, implanted by the overwhelming liberal media in Europe, will be hard to erase, but I will try. You think the UN should start with the US to stop killing people? We went to war against Saddam Hussein.... I don't know if you knew this, but he killed about 2 million people. That is a hell of a lot more than this war will cause for a ver very very long time.... longer than it actually will. I know that most people don't care about genocide if it happens in some small impoverished nation, but I do, and so should the UN. Thier intersts lie only in.... I hate to say it but here goes.... white populated countries. They don't really do anything but a token effort in Africa, South America, and southeast Asia. If youi think that all these socialist European nations are such saints, then you are wrong. They have thier interests at heart just liek the US. We just stick out alot because we are the biggest and richest.

I assume, correct me if I'm wrong, that you got all your info on the presidential election through a newscaster, not by actually watching the debates? If you did, what you would see is Bush presenting his views in a consise and easy to understand way, then you would hear Kerry's vague comments about "wrong war wrong time", and "we need to improve the economy, get more jobs for the middle class", and "I was in Vietnam!" I don't like Bush or Kerry, but I would rather have a president who is less of a baby, and bases his election on his views and goals, rather than bashing the other candidate.

[amsterdam]

Nuance, I know that your deap-seated hate of America, implanted by the overwhelming liberal media in Europe, will be hard to erase, but I will try. You think the UN should start with the US to stop killing people? We went to war against Saddam Hussein.... I don't know if you knew this, but he killed about 2 million people. That is a hell of a lot more than this war will cause for a ver very very long time.... longer than it actually will. I know that most people don't care about genocide if it happens in some small impoverished nation, but I do, and so should the UN. Thier intersts lie only in.... I hate to say it but here goes.... white populated countries. They don't really do anything but a token effort in Africa, South America, and southeast Asia. If youi think that all these socialist European nations are such saints, then you are wrong. They have thier interests at heart just liek the US. We just stick out alot because we are the biggest and richest.

I assume, correct me if I'm wrong, that you got all your info on the presidential election through a newscaster, not by actually watching the debates? If you did, what you would see is Bush presenting his views in a consise and easy to understand way, then you would hear Kerry's vague comments about "wrong war wrong time", and "we need to improve the economy, get more jobs for the middle class", and "I was in Vietnam!" I don't like Bush or Kerry, but I would rather have a president who is less of a baby, and bases his election on his views and goals, rather than bashing the other candidate.



OR MY FAVORITE "i have a plan" or "there is a plan" or"go to my website and look at my plan!" hahaha

or what about "i actually voted for the 87 billion dollars before i voted against it."

[Hydrizzle]

I think what Kerry meant when he said that was that he would have voted for it, but then he saw all the government pork, so then he changed his mind and voted no. Either that or he's a retard and the Dem's shoudl have picked someone less crazy.

[amsterdam]

for sure he meant that,but during a presidential election you gotta think on your toes.something kerry was unable to do.

hopefully this time they will pick billary?

[Hydrizzle]

Hopefully both democrats and republicans will lose and we will elect a libertarian candidate. Then weed would be legal!

[amsterdam]

well that libertarian better have a bold foriegn policy.

did you know ann coulter was approached to join the libertarian team??

[Hydrizzle]

Ugh.... well I think Neil Boortz should be elected with just a little tweaking on his policies. He has the foreigh policy of a republican, but the domestic policy of a libertarian.

[amsterdam]

i could work with that.does he have a web-site?

[psychocat]

The one thing everyone seems to forget is that the people who are in power are as bad as each other , they all ride on the backs of the working man.In my mind there are no real differences between one party and another , they all want their pound of flesh , they all have greed for money and power as their motivation.
The US should really be cleaning up it's own backyard before it goes round dictating to others .

[amsterdam]

oh boy,here we go.

[Psycho4Bud]

The US should really be cleaning up it's own backyard before it goes round dictating to others .

Dictating to others? The U.N. passed 17 different resolutions against Iraq and demanded compliance. The problem was European countries...I.E. France and friends...making under the table deals with the food for oil program. Buy some scotch for the Republican Guard instead of buying food and medicines for the Kurds and Shiite's. Hell, Sadamms favorite son was exporting millions in dates (despite U.N. resolutions) for his own gains...maybe buying a new palace to rape school girls in!

I laugh at the bleeding heart club. The U.S. is always a ruthless war mongering country until something happens. A good example is in Suddan, by the time its done the world will be bitching that we didn't go in and do the clean up to prevent the genocide. I would love for the U.S. to go into a state of isolationalism for about two years and we'll see what happens to the world economy not to mention security. Remember, the missles of the middle east makes Europe a delightful target at the present...not the U.S. :D

[mr chinnery]

Yeah, the rest of the world would be fucked if the states were isolationist. I'm just glad we are friends...

[nuance]

Nuance, I know that your deap-seated hate of America, implanted by the overwhelming liberal media in Europe....

First of all. Fuck you with that liberal media shit. You have absolutely no idea how the news agencies here work whereas I've seen american news enough to draw conclusions. The Finnish news don't have a political stance. They just don't. Imagine that. I've seen the speeches that the candidates held and I can't say that I liked what I saw. When Bush got re-elected the news just neutrally stated that "Bush got re-elected and it was a vote of confidence to Bush's politics on behalf of the people of America", a couple of opinions from the general public and an interview with the Finnish ambassador in USA. After that, the anchors didn't drop any witty remarks or nothing like that. All nice and neutral. How is the liberal media of ours brainwashing me again? At the moment I'm watching a British documentary of a town in Texas where sexual education is banned and the church is telling teenagers that condoms come with holes right out of the package. Talk about brainwashing.

As for the Iraqi issue, I'll repeat myself from another topic. The revolution started from the wrong end of the chain and for the wrong reasons.

And to you I'll say the same thing as I said to Torog. You haven't a faintest idea what the word "socialist" means.

[amsterdam]

a british documentary examining a small texas town?thats the funniest thing i have ever heard!

[Hydrizzle]

First of all. Fuck you with that liberal media shit. You have absolutely no idea how the news agencies here work whereas I've seen american news enough to draw conclusions. The Finnish news don't have a political stance. They just don't. Imagine that. I've seen the speeches that the candidates held and I can't say that I liked what I saw. When Bush got re-elected the news just neutrally stated that "Bush got re-elected and it was a vote of confidence to Bush's politics on behalf of the people of America", a couple of opinions from the general public and an interview with the Finnish ambassador in USA. After that, the anchors didn't drop any witty remarks or nothing like that. All nice and neutral. How is the liberal media of ours brainwashing me again?

Nuance, give me some links to the news organizations you have over there, and I bet you I will find the liberal slant. Almost ALL news is liberal, even here in America.


At the moment I'm watching a British documentary of a town in Texas where sexual education is banned and the church is telling teenagers that condoms come with holes right out of the package. Talk about brainwashing.

That sounds like typical European media anti-Americanism to me....

[mr chinnery]

That sounds like typical European media anti-Americanism to me....

Unless you can show it doesn't happen.

[nuance]

Nuance, give me some links to the news organizations you have over there, and I bet you I will find the liberal slant. Almost ALL news is liberal, even here in America.


Even though I don't share your negative associations with liberalism, whatever, I'll play along. Have fun with your Finnish dictionary.

National TV/Radio -news: http://www.yle.fi/
And a couple of commercial ones:
http://www.mtv3.fi/
http://www.nelonen.fi/
A lot of the local newspapers quote Reuters on international issues, but I assume that's liberal propaganda as well cause it isn't Fox and Bill O'Reilly doesn't work there.

And what's with the attitude towards British documentaries?

[Encatuse]

Unless you can show it doesn't happen.

You mean unless Nuance can show it DOES happen.

[Hydrizzle]

Oh there is no English sites? Forget it then.

[amsterdam]

FRANCE AND GERMANY ARE JEALOUS OF THE uNITED sTATES PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

[F L E S H]

First of all. Fuck you with that liberal media shit. You have absolutely no idea how the news agencies here work whereas I've seen american news enough to draw conclusions. The Finnish news don't have a political stance. They just don't. Imagine that. I've seen the speeches that the candidates held and I can't say that I liked what I saw. When Bush got re-elected the news just neutrally stated that "Bush got re-elected and it was a vote of confidence to Bush's politics on behalf of the people of America", a couple of opinions from the general public and an interview with the Finnish ambassador in USA. After that, the anchors didn't drop any witty remarks or nothing like that. All nice and neutral. How is the liberal media of ours brainwashing me again? At the moment I'm watching a British documentary of a town in Texas where sexual education is banned and the church is telling teenagers that condoms come with holes right out of the package. Talk about brainwashing.

As for the Iraqi issue, I'll repeat myself from another topic. The revolution started from the wrong end of the chain and for the wrong reasons.

And to you I'll say the same thing as I said to Torog. You haven't a faintest idea what the word "socialist" means.
Not only do Americans not know what a 'socialist' really is, when they call democrats socialist, it's the biggest insult to socialists all over the world.

Oh, and pretty much the only place in the world where they try to run a news show as if it's a sitcom is in the US. It's all about attracting the most viewers, the actual truth of the matter is maybe second or third on the list of importance.

[F L E S H]

FRANCE AND GERMANY ARE JEALOUS OF THE uNITED sTATES PLAIN AND SIMPLE.
i'M jEALOUS OF yOUR tYPING sKILLZ.

[amsterdam]

have you watched bbc or al jazeera?same thing.

we just set the trend.