How many madjacksports.com does it take to change a lightbulb

[wareagle]

How many extreme-right hacks on madjacksports.com does it take to change a light bulb?

None.

There is nothing wrong with the light bulb. Its condition is improving every day.

Any reports of its lack of incandescence are a delusional spin from the liberal media.

There is no shortage of filament.

That light bulb has served honorably; anything you say undermines the lighting effect.

Why do you hate freedom?
:thinking:

 

[ocelot]

:mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
ohh that is so appropriate.

 

[kosar]

Good one, war eagle!

You change that bulb and you show your true unpatriotic colors. Just like back in the 70's when it took us 15 years to admit that the candle had no wick.

 

[smurphy]

Why do you hate freedom?
:thinking:

:mj07: :clap:

 

[Nosigar]

Hell, I remember in the old days when light bulbs always worked. There was no need to change 'em.
Yep, 24/7, uphill both ways!!

 

[snoopol]

LOL!!!!!!!!!!

 

[gardenweasel]

this right wing hack has no idea wtf you just said....

my guess is this "boot licker" club is every bit as confused as i am...

the only thing that seemed remotely coherent was the ":thinking:"

explain please...particularly the "why do you hate freedom" comment...

thanks..

 

[buddy]

gw,

it's easy!

just connect the dots.

 

[Master Capper]

Buddy,

You may be asking for too much to have them connect the dots since they still have not been able to connect the dots on how they were sold a bill of goods on the Iraq invasion. Whoops I forgot those WMD's were transported by truck to Syria, err make that Iran and even if we can't find WMD's we still removed a brutal dictator and were welcomed as liberators just like D-Day. Scratch that we invaded Iraq to take on terrorism since they were responsible for 9-11 and now we have all the terrorist's in the world in Iraq which makes the world a safer place.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Appears many on here prefer it when these terrorist were hitting OUR embassies-ships-and homeland --rather than being congregated in Iraq and Afgan.

Lets take a look at what their submissive approach accomplishes

No sercret that UBL started planning 911 6 years prior--so considering Bill let him off the hook on at least one occasion and GW's war on on terror that the liberals keep whining about followed--I'll submit Bill was much more responsible for 911 than GW--to think otherwise would be as foolish as Hiliarys statement saying NK got nukes 3 months into GW's term therefore he is responsible and not Bill for being duped into funding their research with our tax dollars.

A few more but not near all-- terroristic plots under Clintons watch--
During Clinton's tenure attacks on the U.S. by foreign terrorists included the 1993 bombing of New York's World Trade Center, the 1996 bombing of the military quarters at the Khobar Towers, the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the bombing of the U.S. Navy destroyer Cole in Yemen in 2000.

Hmmm Appears to me terrorist don't need to be provoked--and sitting back and doing nothing does not accomplish squat.

 

[buddy]

In regards to 9/11 and global terrorism, one might have to conclude both Clinton and Bush have done a mighty poor job in planning and preventing what could have possibly been avoided.

To debate who is worse is moot.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Depends Buddy--Which is worse -unsuccessful all out attempt to capture--or not taking when offered and doing nothing.

However I will grant you this--If 911 hadn't happened GW might have taken same approach as Bill and had 1993 attack on worldtrade been sucessful Bill might have taken same approach as GW.

However I firmly believe had the latter happened both liberals and consevatives would have stood behind Bill and troops where as now you have division.

 

[gardenweasel]

just as i thought...nobody can explain this post...or,the "why do you hate freedom" comment in particular...

i guess some sort of elitist way of couching what is considered a clever analogy on iraq?...

just a bunch of cryptic mumbo jumbo....and everyone agreeing in their own confusion...

iraq and bush...9/11 didn`t happen prior to iraq....the "93" wtc bombings...the cole...the achille lauro....bali...

this all happened in a vaccuum?..

while internet mo-mo`s carry on about iraq...conveniently ignoring all that went before...and afghanistan...should we walk away from what was the hub of the terrorist`s base of operations and hope that they will leave us alone?....

c`mon...

just ignore that radical islam is unlike any other modern religion.....imagine being afraid of someone because he had recently become a committed christian, or buddhist, or jew, or hindu? .......radical islam is a throwback to violent cults of our more primitive past.........like the aztecs cut the hearts out of young men and women as they offered them to the gods......we know that many early civilizations practiced child sacrifice.......people are evidently capable of any atrocity, provided they are convinced that the act is ordained by god ........ or some substitute for god, like nazism or communism.......

but,i thought we lived in the 21st century?


the enemy is islamism....iraq is a blip on the radar screen...unless you are just looking to bash bush... the radical interpretation of islam that sanctions violent jihad, and whose grievances include,as christopher hitchens has said, the unveiled female face, the existence of the jews, the existence of hindus, music, literature, democracy, and nearly everything we hold dear......

it`s all about iraq?.....


wake up...

 

[kosar]

GW,

It's not really 'cryptic' and at least in this 'elitists' eyes, there is no confusion about it. The 'Why do you hate freedom' part is obviously a parody of certain segments that throw that out there whenever opposition to the war arises.

While it's nice that you personally choose to marginalize the Iraq war, there are others out there who actually question the billion a week that we spend, the lives lost, the men and women maimed. Now you tell me, for what? Right, for absolutely nothing.

So if you don't think tying virtually our entire military up, along with the aforementioned results, with this nonsense is stupid then so be it. But to make it sound like everybody is talking about this minor thing like Iraq too much, well, that's ridiculous.

If 'the enemy is Islam,' as you say, then wtf are we doing in Iraq?

 

[gardenweasel]

why does afghanistan conveniently always seem to be ignored in liberal arguments?....

because,there`s no debate on afghanistan...and the last time i looked,the terrorists want us out of "the middle east"....not just iraq...

i guess that includes all the oil producing countries to boot...we might as well just blow away..

i won`t go over already tilled ground on iraq...your fixation...and i`ve always said,it is a legit debate....

but,you can`t ignore everything else...unless you are intellectually dishonest...

we walk away from iraq....right?.....is that what you want?..do you honestly think things get better?....you think we`ll be safe?...
or are the terrorist emboldened...as they were after they bitch slapped spain?

what`s the plan,kosar?....or is this just an excuse to continue your "bush jihad?"...

we`re there...you can`t change that....you can bitch about it...but,something constructive would be nice for a change....

maybe an idea would be novel...

terrorism was alive and well prior to iraq...it will be alive and well after...and we`ll still be in the crosshairs..

now the civil rights community is bitching about the mosques....the patriot act....

not about the citizens that were incinerated at 9/11 or the innocents that were bombed into pieces in britain,spain...murdered in the netherlands..

it`s not about iraq......as much as you`d like to pigeonhole the issue...it`s about the west..

it`s about modernity vs barbarism..regression...about freedom vs intolerance...

 

[kosar]

What would you have 'liberals' say about Afghanistan? It's 'ignored' because nobody has a problem with it. I don't understand your point.

I'm not ignoring everything else, i'm just commenting on things that I think are wrong.

As far as a 'plan?' Well, it goes back to the old 'we f*cked up royally and put ourselves in a situation where there is no good solution, so if you're so smart, give us a good solution.'

I guess if there was a gun to my head, I would say give it another year (without announcing it) and then start to sharply draw down our forces.

Then use some of our apparently endless money flow to shore up our borders, ports, nuke facilites, etc.

I see where the Shiites, in the argument about the constitution, are insisting that Islam be installed as the state religion, with everything that goes with it. Namely, curtailed rights for women, etc. As i've said all along, that state will become Iran-lite. That's just great.

terrorism was alive and well prior to iraq...it will be alive and well after...and we`ll still be in the crosshairs..

I couldn't have said it better myself. So wtf are we doing there?

 

[Nosigar]

?

what`s the plan,kosar?....or is this just an excuse to continue your "bush jihad?"...


now the civil rights community is bitching about the mosques....the patriot act....

not about the citizens that were incinerated at 9/11 or the innocents that were bombed into pieces in britain,spain...murdered in the netherlands..

it`s not about iraq......as much as you`d like to pigeonhole the issue...it`s about the west..

Very well said, GW. There's never a plan or any action by the Impeders.
How can anyone worry so much about one topic and never question the attempt to take over our western civilization?
I am honestly ashamed of anyone who does not at least agree to the fact that our culture has been taking major hits from the left and the real religious radicals (each with their own skewed purposes) in order to abort the most basic human instinct "SURVIVAL".
PC and dissent have been marvelous and briliant tools for the enemies of our culture.

 

[Master Capper]

GW,


I don't believe that Afghanistan has anything to do with Iraq they are two opposite extremes, as Afghanistan was the home to the Taliban which committed a act of terror on US soil and we were well within our rights to invade and attack the aggressors. Iraq is a completely different story, what does this country have to do with 9/11, Cole Bombing or any terrorist attack? As far as I know they had no involvement in any attacks against the United States and we were sold a false bill of goods on this invasion. As far as a plan in Iraq, well has there ever been one in place by the administration? Obviously we have got ourselves into a quagmire in Iraq and we are going to have to stay there for at least the next five years if we truly want to give the country a fair chance for democracy, but we should of known going in that the factions present within the country create a hostile breeding grounds for chaos and the odds of managing the different factions into a working agreement were very slim. I do agree with you on the civil rights groups are putting too much emphasis on rights of detanees and religious freedoms but you also have to keep in perspective is that we are also setting precedent for the future of our own troops by the way we are treating the detanees and if you feel that it is acceptable for a foreign nation to treat our prisoners of war in the same manner then you are right in your beliefs.

 

[gardenweasel]

and "well said" back at you,nosigar....the impeders?....i like that...

the impeders remind me of a battered woman in a co-dependent relationship....lol

now...after the london attacks...the aclu is prepared to jump all over the police doing random searches on the subway to try and prevent an attack here...when it`s purpose is obviously not to impede civil rights....but to keep american citizens alive and able to go to and from work or wherever....

they claim it may lead to racial profiling...helllooo??

maybe that`s a good idea?....lol

funny isn`t it...that the aclu is so worried about everyone`s rights....

how many soldiers did they defend at abu gharaib?....gitmo?....

btw...what are we doing in iraq?....right now?...

i`d say we`re attempting to free 26 million oppressed people.....removed the most unstable dictator in the region....one that`s invaded neighbors...burned oil fields...bombed israel without provocation.....attempted to assasinate a u.s. president...had chemical and biological weapons...attempted to build a nuclear reactor....and would have continued in that pursuit...given iran`s actions...and the u.n`s inactions......

murdered a hundred thousand of his own people(low ball estimate)....bribed the u.n......was a rest stop/hospital/training facility for terrorists includng al qaeda.....paid palestinian suicide bombers.....flouted u.n. resolutions....refused full inspections...even though the inspections were a charade....

and that`s the short list...

you can disagree with the war....can make the argument that focus should have been elsewhere......but to say there was NO rationale for removing saddam is just ludicrous...

i always end up defending the war...when my feelings on whether it was smart are conflicted, to say the least...

but,all the haliburton b.s....the "bush planned it in 1999" and crap such as that,forces someone rational to confront all the hysterical rhetoric...

the sad aspect of the issue...or maybe it`s the best aspect of the issue...depending on your point of view...is that we`ll never know what saddam might have done ...left to his own devices... and with the and complicity of the u.n....

 

[kosar]

Around the Mullberry bush we go. Every one of your 'justifications' have been rebutted a half dozen times. You're straying all over the place. You rant and rave about how people are focusing on Iraq and not on fighting terrorism, yet you have no problem throwing money and men at a war that will increase the number of terrorists and a war that will turn a secular country into a hard-core fundamentalist country. Just what we need over there.

Unstable? He was contained for 12 years, plain and simple. Surely even you can admit that. The sanctions were working fine and the inspectors that you ridicule were right. Weird thought pattern.

Freeing 26 million oppressed people, huh? I'm sure those people are just thrilled right now as they systematically get murdered and maimed. But more importantly, i'm sure they'll be simply delighted when the country collapses into civil war and they will be jumping for joy when they eventually get basically annexed to Iran.

Most importantly was the timing. This was the last thing we needed after 9/11.

It's 'funny,' I just saw on the news that we're probably gonna put more cameras in the subways around the country. I guess 9/11 wasn't enough to go with that idea. It took bombings in London. Instead of crafting a (plan?) to invade Iraq after 9/11, maybe, just maybe they could have been working on some things here that would improve our safety. And I don't mean ridiculous terror alert colors.