What stalled is your mental process, which is why your politics can be written on toilet paper.

You really are a low creature - your mind in stuck in the toilet stall. That accounts for your gutter politics and juvenile name calling.

And you are what works the streetcorners and backalleys, the single-room-only hotels, bringing your cash to Barack Obama because he treats you better than his other ladies, so you don't mind the occasional slap. He has to look strong in front of his peers, and yours is the sort of life you'd have led anyway. He bails you out when the vice squad arrests you, and that's what leadership is all about. What other choice would someone with your mind and inclinations have in this economy? Stapling forms together and putting them in a file?

So the fragile hopes of a whore looks to the silky eloquence of a born leader.

Making stuff up and lying are the only talents that you neoconservatives have. The dishonesty gushes out of every pore of your body.

I don't really care if Third World nations adopt our Constitutional model or not, because they are philosophical primitives, (and you don't respect its provisions regarding private property here at home, because you are a philsophical primitive), so neither one of us is a Neoconservative.

However, I understand that Neoconservatives dance just as good as they walk, and when they play the tighten-up, they go visit your ole lady. That much is true.

As for what oozes from your pores, we'll accept the Board of Health's decision.

Hey, rube, the neocons made up the stuff about WMDs and democracy. The neocons really just believe in war and making things worse by sticking their ignorant noses where they don't belong. That is completely compatible with your half baked philosophy. That is why you spend most of your time defending the neocons and their disasters. That makes you a neocon.

I think your Joo-centric theory is about the only entertaining thing about you. "Capitalism = war" is the wail of high schoolers who think they have a clue.

By the way, in the hick town this rube comes from -- a very mobbed-up city neighborhood, to be exact -- there are guys who in consideration of your philosophy would have done some very bad things with you.

That's because you are weak, skippy.

Go review some paperwork.

Wannabe goombah neocon. Weenie neocons glorify war because it makes them feel like a man. As your mentor, Benito Mussolini put it, "War is to man what maternity is to a woman."

My goodness, what queer things you say. Very, very queer.

Here's the breakdown (apart from the one you're having): investors in the US and Europe created companies that discovered oil in the Near East prior to WW1 and throughout the 1920s-1930s-1940s. They did business with the local tribal leaders or dictators because there was no legitimate government and no rational society there.

The tribal leaders and dictators come-and-go. The oil fields remained the property of the people who developed them; except that when the oil fields are seized as government property, when dictators use that money to fund our enemies, any steps taken against them must wrong, according to the pathetic and the cowardly, who think that somehow they will continue to benefit through the sacrifice of others.

I personally don't care what sort of people live in the Near East and I don't respect the nations they live-in. Replacing any dictator there is as valid any other dictator, which is all that will ever thrive in the area.

As for your defining quote, I believe "Ecco homo" will do nicely; but first you wou'd have to be a man.

"Pares cum paribus facillime congregantur" would be a more apt Latin maxim.

Your "financing our enemies" point would be an argument for attacking Saudi Arabia. But as you unwittingly confirm, the purpose of the Iraq invasion was therapuetic so that you wouldn't feel "pathetic and cowardly".

I believe the birds you refer-to are your own Cage au Folles.

There are in fact no looters of American property in the Near East undeserving of retaliation. Whatever remains is theirs to mismanage without our financial aid. Let them look to Allah from whom all mercies flow.

The fact that you trade this for accommodation is what distinguishes you from other men. It even disturbs you when other men defend their rights; your rationales, like the comforting words of a defense lawyer on behalf of known criminals, allow them to savage an gullible public.

It's a limp-wristed argument that prides itself on its flexibility.

No, it is the birds of a fascist feather who flock together intellectually in their glorification of war.

Your unreconstructed imperialism has few open adherents anymore. "We stole it fair and square, it is our property" is seldom said openly.

Imperialism? My dear, sweet Trotskyite (minus the icepick).

All property is theft, as Proudhon would have us believe?

You have no idea what private property is, how it is earned, how it is the basis for all rights, how no amount of mysticism, tribalism, or statism legitimately transfers ownership of it.

Of course you would negotitate the terms by which the needs of "A" are met by your would-be control over the rights and property of "B". Such benevolence! Of course you would vote to empower those who've accomplished nothing, dictating those same terms to anyone who has accomplished anything. Such egalitarianism! Of course such actions are mandated by a gnostic reading of the Constitution, when the Constitution errs by writing the opposite, as does the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, etc. etc. etc. Such "Enlightenment"!

The present States of the Near East are the full expression of your philosophical ideal. That, and the washroom of a men's prison.

You may have heard of the Ottoman empire, followed by the British and French empires in the mideast. The British even used poison gas in 1920 against the Mesopotamians, who just were not respecting British property rights.

What you are indentifying is the collective rights of the people who were born in the region. Having developed a culture of mysticism, tribalism and dictatorship, they assert a claim on the invention, capital and labor of others. The industries that were brought to them by foreigners, raising their mediaeval standard of living, enriching the local thugs and lunatic holy men, could not have been dreamt-of by the locals. Yet by virtue of being born in the region, they assert a collective right to this property created by the foreigners, knowing themselves incapable of anything with better short-term results. This looting is the special talent of demagogues, who promise their fellow-countrymen a police-state in exchange for increased government services, the same as would be provided by a range of business in a normal country.

This is what, in muted form, the current US election is all about: how much something-for-nothing can a man in a workfare job in a corporation or government agency hope to get from the legalized looting of his fellow man. His vote is predicated on this, his rationale the same as a Bedouin's -- I wandered past your bank, therefore by right it belongs to me.

Of course, to such a man, any defense against being looted is fascism.