Text 18225, 175 rader
Skriven 2008-06-26 09:15:56 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
  Kommentar till text 18213 av Ross Cassell (1:123/456)
Ärende: Big Brother, I love you!
================================
 BF>> And still you agree to everything they do, that's at least the impression
 BF>> I get reading what you write in the political echoes.

 RC> I dont agree with everything they do..

You're very silent with what you disagree with.

 RC> It doesnt take much to get you to perceive an ounce is a gallon does it?

Depends on the one who's doing the pouring.

 RC> I disagree with alot of things they have done, what Bush has done, what
 RC> the Supreme Court has done, but I am not fool enough to believe that my
 RC> disagreements are universal.

Let us know what you think about the war in Iraq then.

 RC> Nor am I fool enough to think that my idealogy be guided by people such as
 RC> you.

But we should be guided by people like you?

 BF>> Maybe but we're known to share everything with NATO and CIA.

 RC> If Sweden is a part of NATO then that would explain the NATO thing.

Swedish forces are training with NATO in case you didn't know although we're
not a part of NATO.

 RC> I doubt the US holds sway over those parliamentarians that voted for it.

I'm not as sure as you are. They know that it's good to stand on a good foot
with their Big Brother and it was the right-wingers that voted for it.

 RC> Aside from that, if indeed your unfounded theory held any water, it would
 RC> have been all over the press.

Everyone here kows where their symphaties lies. No secret about that.

 BF>>>> Our "Republicans" are history in the next election. They have done so
 BF>>>> much shit to a normal Swede and (as Rep:s does) only look after those
 BF>>>> who already have so much so they can clean their ass with money. Just
 BF>>>> as it is in USA.

 RC>>> Except that they arent Repubs...

 BF>> Who? Ours? They sure are as right as it's possible to get without being
 BF>> called nazis.

 RC> Well I didnt elect your legislators..

Neither did I.

 RC> Shouldnt you be crucifying those of your country whom did?

See above.

 RC>>> You come from a place where the people expect the govt to be mother and
 RC>>> father.

 BF>> Oh...Like the Patriot Act you mean?

 RC> What you have and have had for years puts it to shame.

?

 BF>>>> And you think McCain is better than Bush.....? Yeah....

 RC>>> Where did I say that and what makes you think he will win?

 BF>> That is what you imply in the political echoes.

 RC> Am I supposed to hope that Obama wins?

Obviously not.

 RC> Why would I want a Ward Healer whose youth and inexperience will betray
 RC> him as equally well as Jimmy Carter's indecisiveness betrayed him?

See....you are a Bushbot.

 RC> I will probably vote for McCain, I will hold my nose, knowing that my
 RC> choice will represent the lesser of two evils. Who I vote for will not be
 RC> determined by the likes of you.

I never expect you to but if McCain keeps the Bush foreign politic up you will
be
even more alone in a world that already isn't a fan of USA.

 RC>>> p.s. I didnt vote for McCain in the SC primary held back in January.

 BF>> I don't think you voted for Obama or Hillary either.

 RC> Dont be silly, I couldnt have voted for them, they were in another
 RC> primary.

 RC> If you understand our system so well, you'd know why.

I have never claimed that and when not even every American understand your
system, why should I?

 RC>>> People with low intelligence misplace blame.

 RC>>> Blame your govt..

 BF>> For Bush's foreing politic....?

 RC> Bush's foreign policies have nothing to do with the laws the Swedish
 RC> parliament enacts.

As I said above, those in power here right now worship the American (read Bush)
way.

 RC> If the Swedish parliament was under pressure to pass this legislation from
 RC> outside sources, with the vote the way it turned out, dont you think that
 RC> the parliamentarians whom voted against it would have made sure word of
 RC> this had gotten out to the Swedish press or anyone else whom would listen,
 RC> like in the blogoshpere?

I've already explained that to you.

 RC> These type of secrets cant be kept in Washington DC, why would you think
 RC> they would in Stockholm?

I've already explained that too.

 RC>>> Even Felten hasnt played this blame game, but despite his traits, he is
 RC>>> smarter than you apparently.

 BF>> Maybe. I'm not that deeply involved in politics, I'd rather stand with
 BF>> both feet in the soil.

 RC> Being as it may, then perhaps you ought to shut your yap having made such
 RC> an admission.

What happend to The Free Speach that you Americans worship so. Does that
only applies when it suits YOU?

 BF>> You're like Jeff, you say that you have said a lot but I haven't seen any
 BF>> of it.

 RC> Not that I am required to share with you correspondence I have had with my
 RC> legislators, but they dont use Fidonet, therefore....

Why do you then here say that you have said so much negative without proving
it?

 RC>>> I do not run my complaints by you for approval, should I?

 BF>> No, but you could say something sometime what you think instead of making
 BF>> us believe that you're a Bushbot then.

 RC> So if I aint singing your chorus against Bush, I must be a Bushbot, isnt
 RC> that like if I aint with you I must be against you?

That's the Bush ideology.....

 BF>>>> Do you think I watch someting so stupid when I am at home?

 RC>>> Evidentily so else you wouldnt have brought O'Reilly up in a topic that
 RC>>> doesnt pertain to him.

 BF>> That was ment to Roy. He who believs everything they say on Fox News. The
 BF>> guy who says that we shouldn't believ everything we read and see on TV
 BF>> and when he can see the errors of Bush and O'Reilly I will agree to see
 BF>> the errors made by ours (as if I don't do that already).

 RC> So when you run out of arguments to make, you bring in strawmen to divert?

As I said, that wasn't to you so I don't understand why you're making such a
big
fuss about it.

---
 * Origin: . (2:203/614.61)