Queen crest Queenzone

Bush admits secret CIA prisons, international outrage follows

49 posts Page 4 of 4
Thread

Posts in chronological order

Search forum
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mircrowave! wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]SMITTY™ wrote: [/QUOTENAME]It bothers me though how so many people who post crap about Bush around here are NOT FROM THE U.S.A. [/QUOTE]

Here Here!!!!!!

Boy, you anti-Bush people are really funny...

[/QUOTE]


yeah i have to agree with both of them
One should ANALize the Poetry on page 43, when Oedipus is rollin' in his benzo and he has to bust a cap on some flagrants in the under city http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/image/essay/1
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=orange><b>Freddies son</b> Bush is by far the worst ever American president


darren you really like to make yourself sound like an idiot a lot dont you?
One should ANALize the Poetry on page 43, when Oedipus is rollin' in his benzo and he has to bust a cap on some flagrants in the under city http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/image/essay/1
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]CMU HistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]

To go back to the kids fighting analogy, when do kids tend to have the fight end? When a third party (adult or another kid) comes in and either sugguests a compromise or ends it in some other way.
[/QUOTE]

Political parties change stances all of the time, largely due to internal pressure. Your third party analogy assumes that political parties are static organizations.

This change can be good (Democrats in the 1960s and Civil Rights) or it can be bad (Republicans in the 1970s and the Silent Majority), but it does happen.
DJ's the man we love the most
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Zeni wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]CMU HistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]

To go back to the kids fighting analogy, when do kids tend to have the fight end? When a third party (adult or another kid) comes in and either sugguests a compromise or ends it in some other way.
[/QUOTE]

Political parties change stances all of the time, largely due to internal pressure. Your third party analogy assumes that political parties are static organizations.

This change can be good (Democrats in the 1960s and Civil Rights) or it can be bad (Republicans in the 1970s and the Silent Majority), but it does happen. [/QUOTE]

Another excellent point. If change would be forthcoming in both parties, or even just in one, things would progress. However, I don't see change happening anytime soon. Or, rather, I do see change happening, but it's a bad change.
Who knows how far things will progress in this direction before we reach some kind of breaking point?
Formerly MHG