RadPurple

"My Karma ran over your Dogma"


Tuesday, February 28, 2006

U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006

I was very surprised to see these results.

Released: February 28, 2006

U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006

* Le Moyne College/Zogby Poll shows just one in five troops want to heed Bush call to stay “as long as they are needed”
* While 58% say mission is clear, 42% say U.S. role is hazy
* Plurality believes Iraqi insurgents are mostly homegrown
* Almost 90% think war is retaliation for Saddam’s role in 9/11, most don’t blame Iraqi public for insurgent attacks
* Majority of troops oppose use of harsh prisoner interrogation
* Plurality of troops pleased with their armor and equipment


I had an argument with my brother once where I claimed he had been brainwashed by the Army and had been turned into a 'fascist warmonger' because he supported the war in Iraq. He said those of us here at home, protesting the war, were responsible for poor morale among the troops over there.

As always, Stalemate.

Read the rest here.

Sunday, February 26, 2006

What it means to be a Republican

by Larry Beinhart

The vice president shoots you in the heart and in the face. Then you apologize for all the trouble it’s caused him. That’s what it means to be a Republican.

Despite almost hysterical warnings the president stays asleep at the wheel. He does nothing about terrorism and 9/11 happens. He responds by running away to Nebraska. Three days later he makes a supposedly impromptu speech with a bull horn on the rubble of the World Trade Center. He is universally cheered as a hero. That’s what it means to be a Republican. The president puts together false claims to go to war with the wrong country. His party universally supports him. That’s what it means to be a Republican.

Read the rest here.
The jist of it is :
What it implies is that Republicans can’t be dealt with as if reason and facts will sway them. Because it wont. It’s hard for reality based people, regular Democrats and Liberals to understand that.

What it let’s us know is that reality based people, Democrats, Liberals, real Conservatives, old-fashioned Republicans and non-profit Christians have to take more vigorous and rigorous stands. Or reality and real American values and the American landscape will disappear, not just temporarily, but forever.

Thursday, February 23, 2006

The three D's

Duhbya, Dubai, FreeDumb

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Holy Moronic Asshats Batman!!

I am having trouble believing this guy is for real. He is just TOO stupid.

I think it is a joke. If looked at that way it is a pretty funny take on the righteous Christian fascist zombie brigade.

So I'm no economist . . .

. . . but I like my free stuff.

I received an email about execs at telecoms wanting to charge for surfing, then was reminded of it while checking out another blogger.

The "internets" should remain freeware.

Go here for the info and letter(email) campaign.

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

Federal finance reform solution

10% flat tax across the board. On everything taxable. EVERYTHING. No tax breaks, no loop holes, no refunds, no IRS audits.

You earn $500,000.00? You pay $50,000.00 in tax.
You buy a $20,000.00 car? You pay $2,000.00 in tax.
You buy a $20.00 pack of MJ cigarettes? You pay $2.00 in tax.

Use the revenue to finance campaigns, no more fund-raising and lobbying. Put all political parties on equal footing. Free TV ads during election years.

It just popped into my head and I am sure it has flaws, but why wouldn't it work?

Friday, February 10, 2006

Give me one good reason . . .

. . . why pot should NOT be legalized.

I bet I can counter it.

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Jesus loves me, this I know . . .

. . . cause the Bible (and Mark) tells me so.

Does GOD exist?

Am I going to hell?

Do you give a fat hairy rats ass?

Did Jesus have any brothers or sisters or did John "forsake" Mary for her extra-marital (extremely extramarital) affair?

Trinity? Isn't that the kick-ass chick from the Matrix?

And just exactly who the hell is the Holy Ghost?

Brokeback Mountain . . .

Watch it for the hot gay sex,
Love it for the Gay Agenda.

What a crock. The "agenda" in hollywood is . . . wait for it . . . money.
*SHOCK*
Noooo
*SHUDDER*
It can't be. Say it ain't so.

I don't know about the rest of you, but when I go to the movies, I go to be entertained. I think Blue Dragon explained it very well.

Because guess what chickadees, there is NO GAY AGENDA!

I'm sorry, I know you frightwingers just turned me off with a dismissive "elitist liberal pig." come back frightwingers. Let me explain what I mean. I want you to go to IMDB. com. Go now, and if you look up 2005, you're gonna find about 4,471 entries in films made in the US. Of those 4,471 entries, we have such monikers of quality as: Are We There yet?, Assualt on Pricinct 13, Bee Season (starring Richard Gere), Beef 3, The Benefits of Drinking whiskey (and I'm just through the B's.) Of all 4,471 films, three films that deal with gay and gender issues were nominated. Brokeback Mountain, Capote, and Transamerica (Felicity Huffman is nominated, not the film). Do you know why these films were nominated, and not Beef 3? Because, maybe, just maybe, THEY WERE GOOD MOVIES! Maybe they had good characters, an interesting storyline, good cinematography, ya know, the things we're SUPPOSED to nominate movies for. Also nominated was a film about the possible destructive nature of vengeance, and a movie about standing up to our government when it dabbles in Tyranny. Why aren't you guys freaking out about Clooney's movie? That's actually got a theme that puts you in danger! That's got a theme about Americans standing up to their government when it oversteps its bounds. That may give people ideas. But no, you're eerily silent about that. Maybe because it would mean you back that drunk ass fool, McCarthy?


Do yourself a favor and read the rest here.

I don't pick movies for their supposed agenda. I just won't go see a movie if I think it is garbage, or I am afraid it will turn me gay .
(*cough* DL Fister *cough*)
Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Monday, February 06, 2006

Thanks for being SOOOO patient...ass

Our (Right)eous Christian Warrior has been posting like . . . well . . . crazy. The one post that made an actual point was from this report from the whitehouse. It may even be correct. But there is a lot to research.

So far the only thing I have found that is wrong is the unemployment numbers. Most likely the rest will be the same. Mostly correct but slightly off and a touch misleading.

From the Dept of Labor:

Clinton numbers for his 8 yrs:
He started at his highest of 7.3 and had a relatively steady drop to 3.9 with 3.8 as his lowest near the end. His average was 5.2.


Bush numbers from his 5 yrs:
He started at 4.2, which was his lowest, then began the climb to his highest of 6.3 before falling slowly back to the current 4.7. That gives us an average of 5.4. Umm thats not better than Clinton . . . is it?


For a good comparison here is the chart showing both presidencies:


As for the 4.7 million NEW jobs?

It doesn't take into account the 2.6 million jobs LOST prior to that for a net growth of only 2.1 million jobs. Clinton had over 14 million new jobs during his 8 yrs. Bush better hurry up.

Although to be fair, RVs source did say Bush's last monthly number of 4.7 was lower than the AVERAGE of EACH DECADE.
Repeat after me:
bullshit comparison.
apples to oranges.


I also have life and doing research is time consuming. I will research the rest as fast as I can.

Until then . . . questions? comments? concerns? mindless assbaggery?

Thursday, February 02, 2006

State of the Union - part 2

From factcheck.org:

"The misstatement of the union"

February 1, 2006
Summary

The President left out a few things when surveying the State of the Nation:

*
He proudly spoke of "writing a new chapter in the story of self-government" in Iraq and Afghanistan and said the number of democracies in the world is growing. He failed to mention that neither Iraq nor Afghanistan yet qualify as democracies according to the very group whose statistics he cited.
*
Bush called for Congress to pass a line-item veto, failing to mention that the Supreme Court struck down a line-item veto as unconstitutional in 1998. Bills now in Congress would propose a Constitutional amendment, but none have shown signs of life.
*
The President said the economy gained 4.6 million jobs in the past two-and-a-half years, failing to note that it had lost 2.6 million jobs in his first two-and-a-half years in office. The net gain since Bush took office is just a little more than 2 million.
*
He talked of cutting spending, but only "non-security discretionary spending." Actually, total federal spending has increased 42 percent since Bush took office.
*
He spoke of being "on track" to cut the federal deficit in half by 2009. But the deficit is increasing this year, and according to the Congressional Budget Office it will decline by considerably less than half even if Bush's tax cuts are allowed to lapse.
*
Bush spoke of a "goal" of cutting dependence on Middle Eastern oil, failing to mention that US dependence on imported oil and petroleum products increased substantially during his first five years in office, reaching 60 per cent of consumption last year.


So, nothing really new there, just more half-truths and misnomers. Hopefully the Dems will take some solid action on it, something better than "We can do better". And FUCKRYIN OUT LOUD!! stop letting the Repubs mangle, distort, and trash Dem ideas and then turn around, make minor changes, and present them as their own. Anyone remember Murtha?