southsideirish71 Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 Crazy Crazy talk Do you know how liberal and looney you have to be, to have Alan Colmes seem like a hawk and the voice of reason. This guy from San Fran is completely nuts. He doesnt want a military, wants the cops and the coast guard to defend us if we get attacked. My favorite line from goofy was "The United States should not have a military,'' Sandoval repeated. "All in all, we would be in much, much, much better shape." COLMES: You just said we shouldn't have a military. I don't want to give — I'm speaking out very forcefully to you, because I don't want to give the impression that Democrats hate the military or don't want a military. We may disagree with certain wars, like the ones fought now. SANDOVAL: No, but you said should we give up. COLMES: But to say that we shouldn't have a military is absolutely absurd. It's incredible. That's a ridiculous fringe point of view. HANNITY: That's exactly what I was thinking, Alan. Welcome to San Francisco. SANDOVAL: If you're saying that we don't have a right to defend ourselves that's different from we shouldn't have a military. COLMES: What do you want to defend ourselves — what do you want to defend ourselves with? SANDOVAL: Well, you got cops. It's called the Coast Guard. There's lots of things different. COLMES: You want to send cops to defend our shores if we're attacked? You want to send cops overseas if we're attacked? Cops? SANDOVAL: You want to send people abroad to start these wars. COLMES: I don't. Actually, Gerardo, you don't know anything about what I stand for if you can say that. I've been one of the most outspoken people against this administration and the war in Iraq. But that doesn't mean we as Democrats hate the military or don't want to defend this country. And I'm amaze you could get on national television and say we shouldn't have a military in America? SANDOVAL: Well, that's the way I think a lot of people feel here in San Francisco. HANNITY: I've got to tell you, this is a first. You made look Alan look like a hawk. The San Fran Chronicle states that Sandoval doesnt speak for San Francisco Not for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 LOL, maybe San Fran should be made an autonomous country within the US. Let them defend themselves. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 10:20 AM) Crazy Crazy talk Do you know how liberal and looney you have to be, to have Alan Colmes seem like a hawk and the voice of reason. This guy from San Fran is completely nuts. He doesnt want a military, wants the cops and the coast guard to defend us if we get attacked. My favorite line from goofy was "The United States should not have a military,'' Sandoval repeated. "All in all, we would be in much, much, much better shape." This isn't liberalism - its just looney. This guy isn't even on the spectrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 This is the type of person they put in charge of stuff in the Peoples Republic of San Francisco. How did that once proud city go so far off the deep end anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 Maybe because City Supervisors don't have to run the military? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 01:00 PM) Maybe because City Supervisors don't have to run the military? Wait. You're trying to justify this guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonxctf Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 apparently he does represent the people of SF. He was elected right? It's not our call, it's theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 01:48 PM) apparently he does represent the people of SF. He was elected right? It's not our call, it's theirs. They're not too happy about his idiocy either. http://p209.ezboard.com/fabledartsbathroom...icID=1254.topic NOW, I'M WITH ABLE! WHAT ARE THESE IDIOTS DOING! And how can we get them to stop speaking for US the people of this city. He really has no right saying he represents ALL the people of San Francisco. District Elections repeal here we come. To say we should not have a military is a fringe position. I know there are some stupid people in this city who actually believe that, but my word, do you have to vocalize the position of the very few. This city actually has a very proud military tradition that has been obliterated in that half century by people like Sando who do nothing to preserve it. I bet you our old friend WYWD ( a known Sando sycophant) was cheering him on and blowing kisses at him. Why can't this guy go back to LA where he belongs? Well, what do you expect. You vote in dumbasses, you get dumbasses. It's the fault of the voters in San Francisco. We must be held accountable for our irresponsibility. Sound embarrassed to me. Edited February 21, 2006 by Flash Tizzle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 03:00 PM) Maybe because City Supervisors don't have to run the military? ha! you are trying to defend that moron? c'mon man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 02:00 PM) Maybe because City Supervisors don't have to run the military? Not defending, just saying. A City Supervisor doesn't deal with the Military - so its a fair bet that in a municipal election things like the Iraq war don't really come up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 05:23 PM) Not defending, just saying. A City Supervisor doesn't deal with the Military - so its a fair bet that in a municipal election things like the Iraq war don't really come up. and that excuses his idiotic statement how? he's still a public official... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 QUOTE(samclemens @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 02:31 PM) and that excuses his idiotic statement how? he's still a public official... Public officials at every level make stupid statements all the time. So do I. Everyone does. I'm sure if we looked hard enough, we'd find more than a few public officials who don't like having to use the same sinks as African Americans. Doesn't mean that I should really care, unless they're working for my district. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 QUOTE(samclemens @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 05:31 PM) and that excuses his idiotic statement how? he's still a public official... Where did I excuse anything? The question was asked how San Fransisco would elect a guy who says the US shouldn't have a military. My answer was - because San Fransisco city administrators don't run militaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 04:23 PM) Not defending, just saying. A City Supervisor doesn't deal with the Military - so its a fair bet that in a municipal election things like the Iraq war don't really come up. And for that reason if no other, he shouldn't have brought it up, or made a statement like that. He could have believed that to be the case and had it be irrelevant to his career, if he hadn't said it. Now its relevant. And now it will probably hurt him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Werd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 06:42 PM) Where did I excuse anything? The question was asked how San Fransisco would elect a guy who says the US shouldn't have a military. My answer was - because San Fransisco city administrators don't run militaries. "can you define the word 'the'"? talk about splitting hairs. and guess who said that quote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I'd respond, but I don't even understand what you're saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin57 Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 This guys is naive...dangerously naive. What's most ironic about his anti-military statement is that it is the military which protects the unique groups that inhabit that city. BTW, this is in no way a slam of any of those groups, but a dose of reality. Could you imagine what a Taliban regime would do to the population of SF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 21, 2006 -> 09:38 PM) I'd respond, but I don't even understand what you're saying. thought you might pick out that your fav, clinton, said that while under oath at a grand jury deposition. seems like your defense for this guy is that, since he is just a lowly councilman, he can say whatever he wants about the military since he isnt connected to it. how about some accountability? maybe even some representation of your constituency? even if he was just some guy on the street he would still be a moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 He's a moron. I agree with you. But unless I'm mistaken, there has been no election since he said these stupid ass remarks. All I said is that it's entirely possible that the subject never came up during the campaign and that's how the asshat got elected. But somehow, you take that as defending him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts