Quote:
Diplomacy which will fail just like us trying to make Iraq into a democracy.
Contradiction #1: Pat support Europe and the United Nations who fully believe in diplomacy. Yet he feels diplomacy won't work, so we should go to war with everybody. Yet somehow he thinks that going against North Korea will bring us international support?

Quote:
DJ--Honestly, why would I want to go to war against the country of Sudan? Think about that. There country has done nothing. They're being attacked by rebels.
So you want to war with the rebels then, I'm assuming.


Quote:
Which is why we need to shift the money that is being planned on being spent in Iraq, to either Sudan or our economy. $225 billion is a tad too much.
Yes, shift the money from our troops...Contradiction #2: Pat says the War on Iraq will fail, but clearly thinks we can "win" while diverting funds away from the troops. He also thinks we could solve poverty in the same way.

Quote:
Ok, so if you got documents (pre 9/11) saying that Bin Laden wanted to hi jack planes and crash them into sky scrapers, you wouldn't even put out any type of warnings?
Don't think for a second the intelligence was just ignored; but again, I'm talking relevance here. Of course, now, we would totally agree that we should take that kind of thing extremely seriously.

But before 9/11, we had never dealt with two things: 1.) Muslim suicide bombers 2.) an unconventional terrorist attack.

Quote:
Sorry.
No one wants to see your self-portrait.

Quote:
If they grew up in a rough enviroment, then yes, they have a chance of being rehabilitated.
Really? If they grew up in a "rough environment" (which, for the sake of the argument, you should define), the are most likely prejudiced towards crime already; ingrained in their attitudes and actions.

Quote:
What about the millions for whom it does work for?
What about the millions and millions for whom it doesn't work for (who I'm sure outnumber those for whom it works for).

BTW, if the social security system is working so well, then why are these statements so true?

Quote:


Q. I'm 35 years old. If nothing is done to improve Social Security, what can I expect to receive in retirement benefits from the program?

A. Unless changes are made, at age 73 your scheduled benefits could be reduced by 27 percent and could continue to be reduced every year thereafter from presently scheduled levels.

Q. I'm 25 years old. If nothing is done to change Social Security, what can I expect to receive in retirement benefits from the program?

A. Unless changes are made, when you reach age 63 in 2042, benefits for all retirees could be cut by 27 percent and could continue to be reduced every year thereafter. If you lived to be 100 years old in 2079 (which will be more common by then), your scheduled benefits could be reduced by 33 percent from today's scheduled levels.

Q. Should I count on Social Security for all my retirement income?

A. No. Social Security was never meant to be the sole source of income in retirement. It is often said that a comfortable retirement is based on a "three-legged stool" of Social Security, pensions and savings. American workers should be saving for their retirement on a personal basis and through employer-sponsored or other retirement plans.

Q. I hear that Social Security has a big financial problem? Why?

A.Social Security's financing problems are long term and will not affect today's retirees and near-retirees, but they are very large and serious. People are living longer, the first baby boomers are five years from retirement, and the birth rate is low. The result is that the worker-to-beneficiary ratio has fallen from 16-to-1 in 1950 to 3.3-to-1 today. Within 40 years it will be 2-to-1. At this ratio there will not be enough workers to pay scheduled benefits at current tax rates.

Source: Social Security.gov
Kinda hard to argue your point when it comes straight from the horses mouth, eh?

Quote:
Little Johnny isn't in the womb anymore, is he?
Yes! So I can kill him now and be clear of conscious! Because we all know, organisms that can't survive on their own aren't living (discounting the bacteria in your intestines, viruses that make you sick, and millions of other symbiotic and/or parasitic limited cell organisms, including a developing human being.) :rolleyes:

Quote:
Our religion states that we're to be against abortion, birth control, and gay marriage. You're against abortion and gay marriage. Why not birth control?
Well since you're so gung ho for gay marriage and abortion, I could ask you the same question - how can you call yourself a Catholic if you support those things?

Why don't I agree with the Catholic church on birth control? Because in some ways, I do understand their point. Birth Control is being used today in an era and society that encourages practically anonymous promiscuity. That being said, I don't see anything wrong with a husband and wife using condoms or the pill, and I'd rather see Pat "wrap it up" than to have little baby Slim Shady impersonators running around Reading, PA.

Regards,
Double-J