are you asking how to pronounce my name?

Yes. Then I'll debate it from an ultra-rightwing perspective!

I'm guessing: May - V

yeah. my actual name, Maeve, is pronounced to rhyme with Dave. the 'cute internet version' just has 'ee' on the end

Like Davy!

Davy is a real name?

[edit] my brain just went "Davy Jones!" at me

[edit2] aaaaaaaah

Over here it's more or less common, although it's pretty working-class I think.

Edit: Davy Crockett!

SUCH AS?

Later on, this would be referred to as "Wookie's theory of how two wrongs make a right"

She still stands by it to this day, so it can't be all that reactionary. In fact, in one of her newer books she claims that she believes it more than ever. I'm curious to know which countries you believe still need to be invaded and have their leaders killed.

In response to your first point, America now consumes 25% of the world's oil.

In response to your second point, you're simply wrong. We don't have 'more than enough' in Alaska. We have only 14.5 billion barrels of oil in the Alaskan Fields. America, as of 2000, was using just under 2 billion barrels a year. That may be a fair bit of oil, but it is by no means 'more than enough'.

Do you like having a computer? Do you like having air conditioning? Do you like having lights? Do you like having television?

Do you like electricty? Do you like having a car?

If you do, then you like using 25% of the world's oil. Alaska isn't America's solution. If the American economy wants to continue to grow, and if you want to live the lifestyle which was promised to you at birth, America needs to keep pumping oil from all over the world.



Right, and when you need a heart transplant, the doctor bringing you food will satisfy you because its in the spirit of giving!

I think people understand the degree to which pain and devastation that has been brought to parts of Asia due to this disaster, but I don't think that people understand the effort it will take to bring these areas of the world back to what they were. It will take money, and this money needs to come from somewhere. I'm glad that the administration over time gave more and more money to the areas damaged by the tsunami, but it wasn't enough. The amount which Bush hopes to give is simply less than a percent of the 120+ billion that America has spent on the war on Iraq.

If this administration really cared about the international interests of the world, they'd be giving more. This is not to say that we shouldn't appreciate our government for giving as much money as it has, but the adminstration could have taken this opportunity to say to the world "look, America isn't such a bad place after all. You don't have much of a reason to hate us." While America has given a lot of money compared to other nations, it pales in comparison to what we spend on ourselves.

The irony is that America has somewhat mixed feelings about the Iraqi war, but find anyone who beileves those people who were killed by the tsunami really needed to die...

Pretty much all of them that support and harbor radical islamic terrorism. However, this isn't practically feasible so a combination of military action, diplomatic pressure, and inciting change at the citizen level are realy what need to happen. The proportion of each would obviously need to be varied depending on the target and I also include the threat of military action in my definition of military action.

She should stand by her comments. Being reactionary doesn't mean she shouldn't stand by them. By reactionary I mean that to be applied to her "tone".

Eversor, we can't simply help the people affected by the tsunami by throwing insane ammounts of money at the situation. When you consider the extent of corruption in those countries and organizations such as the UN, that is the worst thing that can happen.

Fair enough. I'm glad that you see alternatives to simply carpet-bombing the entire Middle East. :p



Well, I would rather see someone turn away from a bigoted remark they made than stand by it.

More lovely quotes from a lovely woman:

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."


"I think [women] should be armed but should not [be allowed to] vote.


--Ann Coulter

I know we're enemies of democracy, truth, justice, freedom and christian fundamentalism and all, but still, any links on that 'UN corruption'?

You see, the difference in your analogy is that the doctor is paid to work on me. It's not out of the goodness of its heart. And we're talking about Bush's Private donations, not America's donations. Do I think AMERICA could have spent more, the government at least? Yes. But people criticizing Bush for not donating enough privately....well that's just ****ed up.

And we do spend a lot on ourselves, this is true, but we are, by tradition, a rather selfish country. We were built on selfish ideas of capitalism, and democracy. When you get down to it, that's the core of it. Capitalism and Democracy are there to satisfy YOUR needs for what YOU want. But it works splendidly in the end, so it doesn't matter. At least, not to me.

See: Oil for Food Program(me)

Err, good job explaining to me what oil is used for, especially since we apparently were talking about totally different things.

Warlord: Things are fine now so we didn't need to invade a country for oil.

Eversor: The United States consumes 25% of the world's oil! Without it there would be devestation! No electricity! No car! NO COMPUTER! Alaska just doesn't have enough!

Warlord: Well those are some darn good points, it's sure good that we can buy all the oil we need

Alaska would help. A bit of money staying in America rather than going to OPEC. Sounds good to me. Maybe Iraq will be grateful to us for setting up democracy, and undercut OPEC's price. It's not like we're going to see that million a day going into Iraq back any time soon.

I understand that that is part of a simplified summary but it is also hypothetical, right? I mean, we didn't invade anyone for oil so I'm assuming you're just addressing the overall idea as was brought up in the quote by maevie.

We need a viable alternative to oil. I recommend that instead of electricity we use fat. This way we're hitting two birds with one stone. We have too many fat people in this country, and not enough oil to keep driving those fat people around for eternity.

I hate Ann Coulter like I hate the Ward Churchills who dominate American academia in almost every part of the country, but there's a difference. Kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity, little Eichmans, same ****, equally repugnant. But only one is in a position to indoctrinate a captive audience of millions of impressionable young Americans. College students listening to a gray-bearded Marxist droning on about how evil this country is can't change the channel, and even if they could, there's nothing else on.

I know little of Ann Coulter, the only times I have seen or heard of her has been from links and discussions in massassi.
I try not to form much in the way of concrete opinions when I don't know all that much. But so far she seems pretty damn insane to me.

"Food for Oil" ring a bell? It's all over the news right now. Hell, they've been investigating Annan.

I also think some of you are forgetting that the US sent a large contingent of militarty personnel to the Tsunami zone. They were flying more aid and supplies to affected areas than anyone else. That's not hard currency, but manpower costs money and is very necessary in such a situation.

We could invent time travel, go back to WEEKS before the tsunami, save (almost) every damned life, yet we would still be lauded. To some, we will be never viewed highly.

I don't buy that notion at all. The American conservative party won the last election. Maybe in some schools students are subjected to liberal thinking, but does it matter if halfway through their life they decide to change their mind? You forget they can tune out. ~50%-40% of America didn't vote last election.

Winston Churchill said "To be young and a conservative, one must have no heart. To be old and a liberal, one must have no brain". Don't you think there is some truth to this?

No, not really. It's nice-sounding, but it doesn't have any real application.

And a link about the Food For Oil Program:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/12/oil.for.food.ap/index.html

I don't believe I'm heartless.

I don't believe I'm not an antelope, but hey.

So because Churchill said it, it must be true, right?

Don't get me wrong, the man was a great Prime Minister, but seriously...just because he said it doesn't make it true.

Your all hearltess antelopes.

<3

I didn't find a topic, but google got me a few pages. I can't believe I missed that. What a sick mafia business.

Consider myself entirely silenced on this subject.



JediGandalf, if I ever came across as someone who hates everything American, which is in hindsight quite possible, I apologize.

The truth is, indeed, that what reaches me through media doesn't speak highly of America at all. My social psychology textbooks show pictures of people waving around signs reading AIDS is a punishment of God outside of American hospitals, with two men, possibly terminally ill, trying to make way through the crowd.

I saw documentaries of people spontaneously gathering up on the streets, and in mass ceremony shouting out to God, giving thanks for sending 'his messenger, George W. Bush'.

Or people nodding in agreement, waving their little flags when your president labels an entire demographic the axis of evil.

In truth, I instantaneously link unbearable BS like this to America. Like in a fraction of a second. In retrospect however, I realize that the stuff we see on television over here in Europe is highly filtered, not representative. I'll definitely gonna watch out for making hasty conclusions about entire demographics (see above) in the future.

And after all, you saved our asses in WWII, no?

Damn skippy. And don't you forget it. :p

nonononono, thats not what i'm saying at all.

What I should have said more explicitly was in peoples youth, they often have more liberal tendancies. When they grow up, they often develop a more conservative understanding of the world.