RexRed
 
  1  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 07:36 pm
Must-see: Hannity attacks Jon Stewart. Stewart responds with epic smackdown.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/24/1294263/-MUST-SEE-Hannity-attacks-Jon-Stewart-Big-mistake-Jon-responds-with-EPIC-smackdown?detail=facebook
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 08:18 pm
Looking back in history for about 100 years, I can find nothing good done for the country by the Republicans. They have been an absolute negative the nation.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 09:12 pm
@Advocate,
Quote:
Looking back in history for about 100 years,


Well you can thank Eisenhower for the interstate highway system that the Democrats can't maintain.
Communism fell with a Republican in office. Now they are standing back up.
And thank Nixon for the EPA. Democratic freaks use it to kill jobs regularly.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  0  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 09:43 pm
This is an example of liberal deflection. And a beautiful way to explain it.

Quote:
I’ve only ever focused on the BLM. In fact, I repeatedly said on my radio program that this isn’t about Cliven Bundy, it’s always been about the abuse of the BLM. The left is unhappy with this because they want to use Bundy’s remark to invalidate the entirety of the claims against the BLM. Forget Tommy Henderson, Kenni Patton, or other ranchers who have weighty claims against the BLM, it’s all moot now because of Cliven Bundy. Bundy’s a racist, therefore anyone who agreed with his criticism of the BLM’s heavy-handed tactics is also a racist. Bundy’s a racist, thus the politicians who spoke against the BLM sending 200 armed agents to deal with a local issue must also be racists. Now it’s the left who wants to make this about Bundy and his remark so they can silence all criticism of the BLM. In their minds, you can’t condemn Bundy’s remark and criticize the BLM. . . .
Bundy’s horrible remark doesn’t change that the BLM is overreaching.


http://theothermccain.com/2014/04/24/lets-condemn-all-the-sexist-racist-homophobic-heroes-of-american-history/
RexRed
 
  1  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 10:32 pm
GOP lawmaker: Men earn more than women because they work nights and weekends
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/24/1294394/-GOP-lawmaker-Men-earn-more-than-women-because-they-work-nights-and-weekends?detail=facebook
coldjoint
 
  0  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 10:48 pm
@RexRed,
Anything about the real war on women?
0 Replies
 
wmwcjr
 
  2  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 10:58 pm
@coldjoint,
coldjoint wrote:
The war on women no one will talk about. It is like it does not exist.


What an ugly world we live in! Crying or Very sad Crying or Very sad Crying or Very sad

Does Amnesty International report on these atrocious injustices? I hope they do.

I could make a political statement here about a particular international event during my childhood (concerning Iran), but I don't have the heart for it. The atrocities make the politics seem petty, indeed.

Again, it's absolutely heartrending! Crying or Very sad
coldjoint
 
  0  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 11:05 pm
@wmwcjr,
Quote:
Amnesty International


No cigar. They are clueless or scared to speak against Islam
RexRed
 
  2  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 11:06 pm
https://scontent-b-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/t1.0-9/10176100_623808654378859_3114303882987931075_n.jpg
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 11:10 pm
Right on, Harry.
0 Replies
 
wmwcjr
 
  1  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 11:12 pm
@coldjoint,
If they have failed to expose human rights violations in countries such as Iran (which has one of the worst records in the world today), then they have failed in their mission and should close shop! Human rights are too important an issue to be clouded by political considerations. I'm speechless for now. . . . Sad
0 Replies
 
wmwcjr
 
  1  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 11:15 pm
I don't like Bundy, either.

(That's all the bad stuff for tonight.)
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 11:19 pm
Rachel Maddow
Radical racist context missed in rancher hype
http://on.msnbc.com/RQMjnC

Even Bundy's cattle can't stand him...
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 11:23 pm
coldjoint says of Amnesty International:
Quote:
No cigar. They are clueless or scared to speak against Islam


You're the one who gets no cigar, joint. Amnesty has spoken against Islamic countries for years (wmcjr, joint is totally wrong--you really should nknow better than to take anything he says at face value).
Start reading with "Iran" in their 2013 report, and then go to the bottom and click on other countries, including Islamic ones and non-Islamic ones--AI doesn't give a **** what your religion is, if you violate human rights they're on your case.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/iran/report-2013

coldjoint
 
  -1  
Thu 24 Apr, 2014 11:47 pm
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
Amnesty has spoken against Islamic countries for years


No they haven't. they do not put the blame on Islam itself which condones the abuses and is responsible for them happening. Show me where it condemns Islam, or even uses the word.

I see it once and Islamic is used but the ideology/religion is not discussed. They simply talk around the root source of the problem. Cowards.
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Fri 25 Apr, 2014 12:00 am
Just because you have a particular fixation, joint, doesn't mean others have to have it too. For that matter, MOST Moslems are perfectly peaceful. It's largely Wahhab and Wahhab-influenced Muslims that are the fundamentalist ones committing terrorist attacks. You generalize about Muslims but you resist generalizing against Christians, or Jews or Hindus or Buddhists, all of whom have their more fanatical and violent sects (or political parties). You really have several huge blind spots in your field of vision.

As I said, Amnesty doesn't care what your religion is. If you violate someone's human rights, they'll go after you, and they've gone after plenty of Moslems, which you seem at pains to deny. Just because you want them to condemn all Moslems, which is a blatantly untrue position to take, doesn't mean they have to. For that matter, it's untrue when you take that position too.

coldjoint
 
  -1  
Fri 25 Apr, 2014 12:23 am
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
largely Wahhab and Wahhab-influenced Muslims that are the fundamentalist ones committing terrorist attacks.


No it is not . A lot of money comes from Saudi Arabia, but the terrorists are not Wahhabi(proper spelling) in most cases. All of Islam is extreme. And the fact not all Muslims are not devout does not mean they do not support terror financially.
Find me a Wahhabi in here.

Quote:
Islam's Latest Contributions to Peace "Mohammed is God's apostle. Those who follow him are harsh
to the unbelievers but merciful to one another" Quran 48:29

2014.04.22 (Kirkuk, Iraq) - Muslim extremists roll up on an election center and gently machine-gun ten poll workers.
2014.04.21 (Batgund, India) - A man and his son are killed in their own home by Muslim terrorists.
2014.04.21 (Peshawar, Pakistan) - Five members of a rescue party are riddled with bullets by Islamic radicals.
2014.04.21 (Marka, Somalia) - A local politician is assassinated by al-Shabaab.
2014.04.20 (Deir Ezzor, Syria) - Sixteen people are killed in a double suicide bombing by al-Nusra.
2014.04.20 (Yana, Nigeria) - A five-year-old girl is killed when pro-Sharia activists set fire to a school.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Fri 25 Apr, 2014 01:26 am
@wmwcjr,
wmwcjr wrote:

Does Amnesty International report on these atrocious injustices? I hope they do.


Of course it does. Pay no attention to CJ he's a moron and a hypocrite.
RexRed
 
  1  
Fri 25 Apr, 2014 04:42 am
I am more concerned about the 12 year old gays who have killed themselves because of hate caused by these so called "Christians". These people are not Christians they are hate mongers... They don't care about the elderly or the poor and they are racists, the whole lot of them. Vote out these Republican haters. 2014 election, be there VOTE!

Virginia Christians Starve Themselves Over Gay Marriage
http://www.frontiersla.com/frontiers-blog/2014/04/24/virginia-christians-starve-themselves-over-gay-marriage#sthash.4Tcc2PZE.dpuf
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Fri 25 Apr, 2014 05:29 am
@coldjoint,
The Pink Prevaricator wrote:
Bundy’s horrible remark doesn’t change that the BLM is overreaching.

That is an example of a "Law and Order" conservative. The courts have ruled the BLM can remove Bundy's cattle and sell them because Bundy is illegally grazing them and refusing to pay the fines imposed by the courts. When a court order is followed these "law and order" conservatives cheer for the criminal.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 04/24/2024 at 06:37:56