Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Quick and Dirty Leftist's Guide to Arguing against the War on Terrorism
Right Wing News ^ | September 28, 2002 | John Hawkins

Posted on 09/28/2002 12:52:43 PM PDT by zapiks44

The Quick And Dirty Leftist's Guide To Arguing Against The War On Terrorism

By John Hawkins

Some disreputable people have suggested that Right Wing News is for the 'war on terrorism' or that we're 'biased against liberals.' What scandalous accusations! The truth is that we here at Right Wing News view ourselves as a 'fair and balanced' publication -- just like 'Arab News' or 'The Guardian'! But talk is cheap! That's why we decided to write 'The Quick And Dirty Leftists Guide To Arguing Against The War On Terrorism' to prove RWN's good intentions. Here are the key arguments lefties across the planet can use against those warmongering, oil guzzling, baby-killers on the right who are gungho about the 'war on terrorism'!

Bush Should Have Stopped It -- But Not That Way!: Instead of focusing on what we should do now, claim that Bush could have stopped 9/11 before it happened by aggressively going after the terrorists pre-911. Then reflexively oppose every suggestion the Bush administration comes up with to prevent another attack because it will create a "police state." This one drives right-wingers crazy!!

How Can We Invade Saddam When He Used To Be Our Friend? : We must force these right-wing zealots to realize that relationships between nations are NEVER are allowed to change. Since we were friends with Saddam in the eighties, it was hypocritical of us to kick him out of Kuwait and keep him from annexing Saudi Arabia. Even if he hates us now, is acquiring nukes, and has ties to terrorists we still can't attack him -- for some reason or another. I think there is a UN rule against attacking former friends for any reason or something.

If We Preemptively Attack Iraq -- Everyone Will Do It!: The United States could be setting a dangerous precedent here since no other nation has ever attacked another nation "preemptively." Wait a second, if that was true, shouldn't we always be at peace since no nation has ever attacked another nation except in self-defense? So that's Bush's evil plan, to spoil world peace!

Insist That We Give Inspections A Chance : No one believes Saddam is going to actually allow unfettered inspections but we know from a decade of experience that he can literally run the inspectors around in circles for years. The more time Saddam wastes, the closer he gets to a nuclear bomb he can use to stop Bush's filthy war!

It's About The Ordinary People : The most important reason you are against the war is because you care about the innocent people in Iraq. That's why you're so strongly against replacing the dictator who has starved, gassed, tortured, and oppressed so many of his own people -- you may not want to phrase it exactly like that, but you get the idea.

Keep Moving That Goalpost : If the pro-war crowd starts beating you up too much because you won't support war under any circumstances, say that you are willing to use force.. A) As soon as Al-Queda is destroyed, B) the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is over C) Afghanistan is a strong and stable Democracy D) Against Iran E) Against Pakistan F) Against Iran G) If inspections fail (again) H) Once the whole world agrees with us...etc. It really doesn't matter what you come up with here because the purpose is to delay things endlessly. Even if your condition were met, you would simply change the conditions you'd need to meet your goal.

Never Admit That You Are Helping Terrorists And Dictators : Act offended if anyone claims you are helping dictators and terrorists by opposing killing, capturing, or hindering them in any significant way. Sure that may be the actual RESULT of doing what you're suggesting, but INTENTIONS, not results, are what have to be considered.

Pretend To Be Offended When You're Accused Of Anti-Semitism : Just because you call Palestinian terrorists "freedom fighters", condemn every Israeli attempt to defend itself from terrorist attacks, believe Jews control the US media and government, and think a land dispute is an adequate reason for blowing up women and children at a bus stop (as long as they're Jews), does not make you anti-semitic. No matter how obvious your anti-semitism is, it doesn't count unless you ADMIT that you're anti-semitic.

Remember Who The Real Enemies Are : Obviously, George Bush and America are to blame for the 'war on terrorism.' You should certainly never blame nations like Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, or the 'Disputed Territories', etc, for actually sponsoring terrorist groups that have no real purpose other than to murder innocent people.

Show Me Osama's Corpse : Even though we haven't heard from Osama Bin Laden since the United States bombed the area he was in into blood, sand, and rubble, you must insist that the 'war on terrorism' is a failure since we don't have him in hand. Sure we haven't heard a thing from him in nine and half months but he's probably just laying low! The best thing about this one is that since Osama was probably blown into a fine red mist at Tora Bora, the Bush administration will never be able to 'prove' that he's dead. This means you can't ever be proven 'wrong' when you claim that he's still alive.

Solutions? Uh.... : When pressed for solutions it's a good idea to mumble incoherently, or just say, "I don't know what we should do, but I know war isn't the answer!!!" If you're really pressed you can suggest that America should give more aid to the poor, that one never gets old.

Tell Those 'Chickenhawks' What For : Demand that anyone who is pro-war sign up for the military because only people who are willing to risk their lives in combat have a right to advocate going to war. If they counter with "well if you believe that, then you should go to Iraq and throw yourself on one of Saddam's bunkers so you can be a 'human shield'" either quickly change the subject or say that you detest Saddam (despite the fact that you are firmly against any attempt at removing him from power).

There's No Reason To Bomb Saddam! : Just because Hussein is a psychopathic dictator who gassed the Iranians and his own people, fought against the United States, tried to assassinate a US President, has massive stockpiles of WMD, is seeking nukes, and has ties to terrorists doesn't mean he's dangerous. In fact, we have no evidence that the global terrorist network is still a threat at all...except for 9/11 and all the other attacks across the world since then.

War For Oil! : This war isn't really about terrorism or weapons of mass destruction, it's about oil like every big war America fought in during the last century! Well...except for WW1, WW2, Vietnam, and Korea... but the Gulf War was all about oil! Of course, Iraq only supplies 2.1% of America's oil and Afghanistan doesn't supply any...but "everyone" says it's about oil so it must be somehow or another!

We'll Destabilize the Middle-East : It's common knowledge that the 'Arab Street' will immediately overthrow their leaders if Muslims are harmed anywhere across the world, no matter what the reason may be. Of course, we've gotten off lucky so far since the 'Arab Street' didn't erupt when Israel bombed an Iraqi nuke site, when Israel invaded Lebanon, when Israel 'invaded' the "disputed territories" about 500 times, when Reagan bombed Libya, when the US invaded Iraq, when the Serbs were slaughtering Bosnian Muslims, when the US invaded Afghanistan, when the US bombed through Ramadan, etc, etc. But this time the 'Arab Street' is REALLY SERIOUS!!!

______________

Congratulations! You've now learned everything you'll need to know to smash those favoring AmeriKKKan imperialism and hegemony!


TOPICS: Editorial; Free Republic; Miscellaneous; Philosophy; Political Humor/Cartoons
KEYWORDS: humor; leftist; war
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last
John Hawkins has really been on a roll lately. A few weeks ago I posted a column of his featuring wacky quotes made by environmentalists over the past few decades. This guy rocks!
1 posted on 09/28/2002 12:52:43 PM PDT by zapiks44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Believe this nonsense -- or your lying eyes, America.

THESE are dead children, previously playing in Halabja [March 1988].
Terrorist Saddam used chemical weapons against his own people
until the "streets were piled with corpses."


2 posted on 09/28/2002 1:04:17 PM PDT by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Bump!
3 posted on 09/28/2002 1:13:06 PM PDT by Peacerose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
LOL! This was like watching an hour of Breaking news on CNN, or reading some of the "Conservative" threads on this forum! This guy is spot on!
4 posted on 09/28/2002 1:19:16 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Wow...that was a great read. Really puts a lot of stuff in it's proper perspective. Thanx for posting it.
5 posted on 09/28/2002 1:31:00 PM PDT by Once-Ler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Another argument is that Bush First should have "gotten" Saddam in 1991 when he had the chance. Never mind that the UN mandate expressly stated that once the iraqi's were out of Kuwait, the conflict must end. The same idiots that now call Bush an idiot for not doing so, would have begun impeachment proceedings had he done so.

Also, you must conveniently forget that klinton had numerous opportunities to "get" saddam. But that is different.

Dems state that the war will last for years and result in thousands of US casualties. They offered this same argument in 1991. We all know what happened then. Well, the iraqi's have a far weaker ground force now and those are far more likely to play frenchman when the missles fly.

The dems are hypocritical scum and I cannot believe the American public can give them support for anything.

6 posted on 09/28/2002 1:34:41 PM PDT by lawdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Since we were friends with Saddam in the eighties, it was hypocritical of us to kick him out of Kuwait and keep him from annexing Saudi Arabia. Even if he hates us now, is acquiring nukes, and has ties to terrorists we still can't attack him -- for some reason or another. I think there is a UN rule against attacking former friends for any reason or something.

Its too late to not attack Saddam now but we should have let him kill the Saudis.

7 posted on 09/28/2002 1:37:44 PM PDT by weikel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Tell Those 'Chickenhawks' What For

Yeah. Trot out the same rhetoric that worked so well for the Left 40 years ago in Southeast Asia. Sure, it was a different time and a different war, but what the heck, a good slogan is as timeless as fine art.

8 posted on 09/28/2002 1:52:13 PM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weikel
Its too late to not attack Saddam now but we should have let him kill the Saudis.

The House of Saud?! My God man... to destroy this breeding pot of nepotism, martyrism, garish furniture and swooshy princes would offend Allah!

Ahhh... screw'm!

9 posted on 09/28/2002 2:08:15 PM PDT by johnny7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; Amelia; justshe; CWOJackson; COB1; jwalsh07
BUMP!! This is a refreshing, and quite useful, article!! I'm bookmarking this one, keep it bumped!


10 posted on 09/28/2002 6:33:34 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mo1; rdb3; Howlin; 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
Check THIS one out. Wish I'D written it (actually, I was working on something similar, but he beat me to it!!!). Excellent!


11 posted on 09/28/2002 6:37:48 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I'M BACK!!!

SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com


STOP BY A BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

12 posted on 09/28/2002 6:38:13 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
Fantastic, Long Cut. Thank you. (I was just on the other thread you pinged me to, wondering where these nuts are coming from. Ugh.)

My favorite:

There's No Reason To Bomb Saddam! : Just because Hussein is a psychopathic dictator who gassed the Iranians and his own people, fought against the United States, tried to assassinate a US President, has massive stockpiles of WMD, is seeking nukes, and has ties to terrorists doesn't mean he's dangerous.

13 posted on 09/28/2002 6:41:56 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan; terilyn; ErnBatavia; Chancellor Palpatine; ArneFufkin
You'll like this. BIZ-UMP!!!!

Tell some FRiends...


14 posted on 09/28/2002 6:42:44 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Pinging you...you'll dig this.
15 posted on 09/28/2002 6:44:06 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple; PhiKapMom; wimpycat; deport
Bump and ping - you guys will appreciate this.
16 posted on 09/28/2002 6:49:32 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; All
Yeah, like I said, it's refreshing, especially after dealing with that other thread, and some of the past ones.

My favorite dodge has got to be the overworn "It'll be another Viet Nam!" bit. No disrespect at all meant to VN vets on this, but it drives me nuts when presumably smart folk compare a counterinsurgency jungle war, run by a corrupt Democrat to an open-country conventional war run by an honest Republican, almost four decades later. Do they not see ANY difference at all? C'mon, people, WORK with me here!

It has been said of the leftists of that era that they "cannot learn and cannot forget". How true. Their lives were wrapped up tightly protesting the war in VN, to the point that it became the reason for their existence. Thus, the Left tends to view ANY use of American power through that prism, no matter how irrational or wrong-headed it may be. A lot of them, I'm convinced, would like those "sex-love-dope" times back.


17 posted on 09/28/2002 6:52:12 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; All
From the article:

"act offended if anyone suggests you're helping dictators or terrorists"

Sound familiar? How hard have we argued that it doesn't matter what one's intentions are, the RESULTS are what count, and the overall RESULT of the naysaying is to help the Bad Guys?

18 posted on 09/28/2002 6:56:35 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Damn this guy has been reading FreeRepublic. LOL
19 posted on 09/28/2002 7:01:52 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper; FreeReign; RedBloodedAmerican; dennisw; SJackson; A Navy Vet
BIZ-UMP!!! Thought you might like this. I certainly did, after all the crap we've been subjected to around here lately.


20 posted on 09/28/2002 7:08:47 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
I love it! Thanks for the ping :)
21 posted on 09/28/2002 7:12:40 PM PDT by terilyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
Great points, 'Cut.

I'm trying to understand the far right on this -so far right they hate our POTUS - and maybe that's what drives them. It strikes me as odd that they can't put their hatred for President Bush on the back burner long enough to understand that it's their own protection and well being he is fighting for.

I thank God there are people in charge who recognize the threat (Condi Rice: "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud") and are willing to step up and deal with it. The left and the far right are shaking hands on this one. It's reckless and crazy thinking. I never thought I'd see the day when Freepers would hate a Republican president so much they'd be echoing Al Gore all over this forum, but here we are.

22 posted on 09/28/2002 7:15:11 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
I think so - LOL! He's got the average extreme-right, anti-war, leave-Saddam-alone-he-didn't-attack-us Freeper down cold.
23 posted on 09/28/2002 7:17:38 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
"My favorite dodge has got to be the overworn "It'll be another Viet Nam!" bit."

I tell you Brother I am so sick of hearing this BS line.
Fact is the military won that war.
The politicians just quit that war.
55% (the silent majority) were in favor of that war yet DC just walked away.
Over 58,00 Americans (from Eishenhower to Nixon) died in vain.
Because not one of the 4 different administrations ever did anything to win that war.
That is NOT the case with this administration.
24 posted on 09/28/2002 7:21:36 PM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Thanks for the ping...... Looks like this guy understands and has it nailed.....
25 posted on 09/28/2002 7:24:54 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
Thanx for the ping. Time proves us right time and time again, doesn't it? ;-)
26 posted on 09/28/2002 7:28:23 PM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
I believe it goes something like this ...

1. Iraq probably doesn't have WMD's, so we shouldn't attack, because it would be unecessary.

2. If Iraq DOES have WMD, we shouldn't attack because it would be too dangerous.

3. Therefore, while "we all detest Saddam", we should only attack Iraq if neither of the above is true.
27 posted on 09/28/2002 7:32:24 PM PDT by watchin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; All
My belief is that they are of three camps:

1. Extreme Libertarians/Constitutionalists who want a declaration of war, and oppose on principle any pre-emptive attacks. On the declaration-of-war issue, they have some merit.

2. Pat Buchanan marks. They STILL seethe about his pathetic showings in elections, and blame Republicans. George Bush is their worst enemy, because they feel that he and his wing of the party "stole" it from Pat. They can be recognized by their almost-constant return to the issue of immigration reform and Israel.

3. Dedicated disruptors. Some are from DU, and simply CLAIM to be conservative, and some are without doubt posting from offices in Teheran, Beijing, and Baghdad. These can be recognized by their suggestions that we'd be better off voting for Democrats than "RINOs" like President Bush, and wild calls to boycott or attack Israel.

Just a few of my own observations. The sad part is, the first two provide information and intellectual ammunition to the third (suggestion of which, of course, triggers the "offended" response").


28 posted on 09/28/2002 7:37:52 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
Amen to that, Bro. Some of those imbeciles out there STILL claim that the Viet Nam war was "unwinnable", as insulting and disgusting as that claim is. What a joke.
29 posted on 09/28/2002 7:41:15 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: section9
BUMP. You'll like this one, Man. Check my post #28 for some more fun. ENJOY!!!


30 posted on 09/28/2002 7:43:42 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert_Paulson2
Bump. Check it out...good thread.
31 posted on 09/28/2002 8:21:10 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: All
I love the one for "Chickenhawks":

"Well, if you believe that, why don't you go to Iraq and drape yourself over his bunker as a human shield?"

Classic response to one of the silliest arguments I've ever seen on FR - the implication that anyone who is pro-war is a "chickenhawk". I've seen this word tossed at military veterans, for the love of God.


32 posted on 09/28/2002 8:37:18 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Bump for evening readers...
33 posted on 09/28/2002 9:03:06 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: All
BTTT. Trying to keep this one from dying, it's good.
34 posted on 09/28/2002 9:33:19 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Keep Moving That Goalpost : If the pro-war crowd starts beating you up too much because you won't support war under any circumstances, say that you are willing to use force.. A) As soon as Al-Queda is destroyed, B) the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is over C) Afghanistan is a strong and stable Democracy D) Against Iran E) Against Pakistan F) Against Iran G) If inspections fail (again) H) Once the whole world agrees with us...etc. It really doesn't matter what you come up with here because the purpose is to delay things endlessly. Even if your condition were met, you would simply change the conditions you'd need to meet your goal.

35 posted on 09/28/2002 9:34:08 PM PDT by m1911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; All
Good idea, Daughter! I see you linked to it on another thread, as well. Thanks!
36 posted on 09/28/2002 9:34:21 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: m1911
ANOTHER one that fires off the old deja vu, eh, 19? I swear, the whole article reminded me of specific people here.


37 posted on 09/28/2002 9:36:59 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
There may be a few of those here, but I get it mostly from the media. I find that particular one most annoying, with "We'll destabilize the Middle East" balancing it out by making me laugh. Another Freeper (don't have the link) said "destabilizing the Middle East is like watering the Pacific".
38 posted on 09/28/2002 9:46:38 PM PDT by m1911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
I read four lines of your thread and suddenly I am an acolyte.


Thank you.


LoL
39 posted on 09/28/2002 9:47:49 PM PDT by Radix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
This is good. Here's a bump for ya.
40 posted on 09/28/2002 9:59:58 PM PDT by Jen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: m1911; Long Cut
There are more of them here than I would have imagined. They've been coming out of their nests lately. Seems like there's a new one every day...and they all sound like Al Gore, or worse (referring specifically to the one who hurls epithets at our active duty military in nearly every post).
41 posted on 09/28/2002 10:00:41 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: m1911; DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; Snow Bunny; COB1; CWOJackson; A Navy Vet; justshe; AntiJen; ...
And how about the old saw about "thousands of Americans coming home in body bags"? Besides being an obvious Viet Nam throwback, it is patently ridiculous. These "thousands of Americans coming home in body bags" would, presumably, be placed there by soldiers who A) were placed in their own body bags, by Americans, to the tune of 100,000 or so in 1991, and; B) Surrendered in droves to those UN-bagged Americans.

Have they gotten THAT much better in the intervening years? Since the ONLY time an Arab or Islamist seems to muster courage is when he is conducting a terrorist attack against unarmed civilians (as opposed to ARMED Soldiers), I submit that the answer is no, and the pronunciations of mass doom are moronic. The saddest thing may be that those making those pronouncements have so little faith in their country's military, even though it has won every battle it has fought for MANY decades.


42 posted on 09/28/2002 10:02:05 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; AntiJen; justshe; Amelia; CWOJackson; Texasforever; COB1; ...
Bumping this one again 'cause I like it so much. Can anyone think of anything to add? I've kicked in a couple extras already, how 'bout y'all?


43 posted on 09/29/2002 11:51:12 AM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; sinkspur; SJackson; SpookBrat; HiJinx; SAMWolf; jwalsh07
PING to y'all, got any new ones to add? This is fun, thinking up new ones...


44 posted on 09/29/2002 11:54:43 AM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
Hell I thought they were the talking points for Meathead prior to his speech he wrote for Gore...
45 posted on 09/29/2002 12:01:59 PM PDT by antivenom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
We can't let Bush win the War on Terrorism! We can't just because he's Bush!

This applies equally to some on the Left and Right.

46 posted on 09/29/2002 12:08:12 PM PDT by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: All
Bumping the far left/far right talking points.
47 posted on 09/29/2002 1:57:31 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Bah, these are just the posting guidelines at Democrat Underground.
48 posted on 09/29/2002 4:36:12 PM PDT by Democratshavenobrains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Big Bump !!


49 posted on 09/29/2002 5:53:21 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zapiks44
Very funny. BTTT!
50 posted on 09/30/2002 1:13:48 PM PDT by jjm2111
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson