1
   

Far-left liars endanger us all

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 12:47 pm
plainoldme wrote:
McGentrix,

Why do you have such a bee in your bonnet about the left? What has the left ever done to you?


When I was six years old, my best friend, Billy, and I had to walk to kindergarten. It wasn't that far, unless you are 6, then it was miles away. There was a bully that would sometimes harrass Billy and me. He would throw our bags up in trees, sometimes he would bang our heads together, sometimes he would chase us. Needless to say that made our walk somewhat treacherous.

It turns out that that bully was a liberal. I have had a strong dislike for liberals since.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 12:48 pm
Well, that would explain it, I guess.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 01:01 pm
D'artagnan wrote:
Well, that would explain it, I guess.


Seems to be a genuine psychiatric illness postdisaster :wink:
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 01:03 pm
Brandon, that is not a quote from the commission report, or from the Detroit News but a collection of opinions from other sources including The Weekly Standard, National Observer, and MSNBC published under the heading of "Other Voices" in the Detroit News, introduced by the statement:

"Commentators debate whether the 9/11 Commission report refutes or confirms links between the al Qaida terrorist group and Saddam Hussein in the following excerpts"

You are quoting Steven Hays in the Weekly Standard. I will answer you by quoting Dan Abrams from MSNBC also in the Detroit News.

"The commission found that there's "no credible evidence Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11." Well, it now seems everyone including the administration now agrees with that
.
The report also concluded that despite overtures from bin Laden to Saddam, and at least one meeting between a senior Iraqi intelligence officer and bin Laden, none of it appears "to have resulted in a collaborative relationship."

Taking a page from Clinton's book of ambiguity, the administration now says this supports their repeated claims of "long established ties" and "numerous contacts and relationships between Saddam and al Qaida."
That sort of word mongering is just pure gunmanship.
"

We can, and should, debate this. But at least be up front about your sources.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 01:04 pm
Thats the second time McG made me LOL today - and this time, at least I'm sure he is actually joking ...

Right outa leftfield that came, lol
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 01:31 pm
I happen to agree with McG that far-left liars endanger us all. Stalin comes to mind. I also share a similar story to McG's childhood trauma. I used to walk to school, alone, sadly. I also had my own bully, who happened to be a Conservative army brat, and I mean brat. Once when I was getting a beating for my Unicef collection, on Halloween, I asked him, why did you drag me into this ravine to beat me, and why are you hitting me there? He replied, "No witnesses, no bruises. Deal with it commie." I suppose I have had some distrust of Conservatives since then.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 01:34 pm
swolf wrote:
The American left is now officially living in some sort of an alternate universe and alternate reality.


If your view of the world is reality, then thank God for alternate realities...
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 01:38 pm
McGentrix wrote:
plainoldme wrote:
McGentrix,

Why do you have such a bee in your bonnet about the left? What has the left ever done to you?


When I was six years old, my best friend, Billy, and I had to walk to kindergarten. It wasn't that far, unless you are 6, then it was miles away. There was a bully that would sometimes harrass Billy and me. He would throw our bags up in trees, sometimes he would bang our heads together, sometimes he would chase us. Needless to say that made our walk somewhat treacherous.

It turns out that that bully was a liberal. I have had a strong dislike for liberals since.


Of course McGentrix is kidding...he has stated that he's big, tough, and was a bully himself in school....I was a little guy and a peacelover all my life...but if there was two of us and one of the bully then the bully was looking as ass whipping.....and I'm a bedwetting liberal pussy....think of the way McGentrix, a he man miltary family tough guy would rip a bully limb from limb..... :wink:
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 04:18 pm
I happen to agree with McGentrix that the far left are endangering us, but not for the same reasons.

They want the destruction of the American family plain and simple. They are fighting for gay marriage and try to acquaint gay rights to civil rights in the 60's. The two are not the same for one simple reason. You can't choose to be black.

The far left also want to allow the murder of innocent children but stop the execution of guilty murderers. They also want our children to be allowed to get abortions behind the parent's backs, and this is for children under the age of 16.

The far left wants to allow the breaking of the US border policy so that more illegal immigrants can come into the US. They want to allow them to get drivers licenses for ID's when that is what most people use here in the US for proving their citizenship. They also want them to be able to vote in US elections because they think it will encourage them to become citizens.

These are just a couple of the reasons why I think the far left are a danger to the US.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 04:28 pm
Baldimo wrote:
They [i.e., the far left] want the destruction of the American family plain and simple. . . .


Uh huh . . . you got the straight skinny, huh? Right from the horse's mouth? Just where does one go for the information when they need to find an official spokesman for the "far left?" It is little short of simply amazing that anyone would attempt such an absurd contention in any seriousness. However, the extremes of self-delusion are sadly too well known in political debate. This, and all that follows in your short rant here, is predicated upon an assumption that there is something which can be identified as "the far left" for which there is a demonstrable program. Next time, just for sake of strengthening a feeble argument, i would suggest that you use a phrase such as "some on the left want . . . " You see, in a case like that, i would be more than happy to stipulate that it is indeed true that some on the left unwittingly support initiatives which fear-mongers and the exploiters of the gullible can use to convince those sad people that family life is under assault. When you write "the murder of innocent children" rather than abortion, you tip your hand as someone who parrots phrases rather than debates issues. When you speak of guilty murderers, you ignore both that there are those whose sincere ethical positions lead them to condemn any form of execution, and you ignore that the anti-death penalty movement has exploded in size since the advent of DNA evidence has cleared so many people convicted or rape or murder. You are not outlining positions for debate, you are spewing hatred upon those with whom you disagree. One could as easily catalogue all of the things about a conservative agenda with which they disagree, characterize them in the most negative and lurid terms, and at a stroke, choose to condemn all those whom they describe as conservative without furter qualification. That is precisely what you have done here.

Tell me something, Boss, what's the Far Left's office address? Do they have an "800" number i could call?
0 Replies
 
cavfancier
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 04:40 pm
Ha hah! I am, in internet speak LMAO!
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 04:46 pm
Ask a conservative a real question and you get a childish reply. So much for McGentrix.

About marriage -- and you can look up my thesis which was on marriage -- marriage was never the union of a man and woman.

Marriage was and is an economic contract designed to protect the property rights of the parties to the marriage. Period.

Consider that Hera is the Greek goddess of marriage. Herakles, whose name means follower of Hera, went about demanding princesses in marriage. Their fathers generally refused him and Herakles killed them and took their daughters into captivity.

In the MIddle Ages, divorce was as common as it is today and marriages at that time were made to provide lords with troops and/or land, or to cement treaties, with the women as "peace weavers." Because these women were property, the families into which they married could change their given names and make certain that their dowries, which ought to have been usufruct in the event of the husband's early demise, were beyond their reach. Definitely in Scandinavia and perhaps elsewhere in Medieval Europe, only people of property could marry. Serfs, slaves and peasants could not.

If gay people marry, children will not be hurt. After all, marriage is, in fairy tales, about committment.

However, as CBS commentator Nancy Giles reminded us that perhaps all of those people whose marriages fail ought to be subject to prosecution.

I say that so-called reality shows do more to hurt marriage.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 04:58 pm
Who is endangering America?
Baldimo wrote:
I happen to agree with McGentrix that the far left are endangering us, but not for the same reasons.

They want the destruction of the American family plain and simple. They are fighting for gay marriage and try to acquaint gay rights to civil rights in the 60's. The two are not the same for one simple reason. You can't choose to be black.


You attribute a "want of destruction" where none exists. People who advocate equal rights for all individuals are not advocating the destruction of anything you have. You erroneously believe that a person's sexual orientation is a choice. You're wrong. Gay people are not heterosexual people in disguise who simply choose to engage in "deviant behavior." Homosexuality is not a choice. They cannot choose to be homosexual any more than a person can choose the color of his skin.

Just because you cannot force your beliefs and views on others, that doesn't mean other people are trying destroy anything you have. The existence and strength of your family does not falter or depend on the issue of gay marriage.

Quote:
The far left also want to allow the murder of innocent children but stop the execution of guilty murderers. They also want our children to be allowed to get abortions behind the parent’s backs, and this is for children under the age of 16.


Again, you attribute a "want of destruction" and "want of murder" where none exists. People who advocate freedom for all individuals are not advocating the destruction of any of your freedoms or beliefs. Maybe you think abortion is wrong. You are free to believe what you want. However, you can't be so naive as to believe that all people ought to hold your views. You want to force your views on others, interfere in their privacy, and restrict their freedom to make their own decisions concerning their personal lives.

Parents can guide and influence their children, but children inevitably have minds of their own. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. You can't beat them or abuse them or force them to live their lives exactly as you mapped it out. But, if you are successful in foisting your abortion views and opinions into your children's minds--maybe they won't feel it necessary to go behind your back when faced with an unwanted pregnancy.

"Let freedom ring." Those who oppose individual rights; those who are opposed to freedom; those who want to govern the private lives of others based upon their own narrow beliefs and viewpoints (making no allowance for other people's beliefs and viewpoints) are the ones who endanger America.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 05:33 pm
<applause>
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 06:17 pm
to paraphrase the great Zimerman
the progressive thinks
"if you see your neighbor carrying something,
help him with his load.
But don't go mistaking paradise for
that home across the the road"
while the neo-con thinks
"I can get a wetback and not pay
payroll taxes.
when I am done with his labour
I can send him home from Texas."
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 07:58 pm
Quote:
You attribute a "want of destruction" where none exists. People who advocate equal rights for all individuals are not advocating the destruction of anything you have. You erroneously believe that a person's sexual orientation is a choice. You're wrong. Gay people are not heterosexual people in disguise who simply choose to engage in "deviant behavior." Homosexuality is not a choice. They cannot choose to be homosexual any more than a person can choose the color of his skin.


Do you have any proof that it isn't a choice? There are no creditable studies that show homosexuality is genetic. If this could be proven then I wouldn't have an issue with changing my mind. But it hasn't been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. What has been proven is that most people that are gay have had some sort of trauma in their lives that makes them have some sort of attachment to the same sex. Now I know there are going to be cases where this isn't true, because there are always exceptions. There is no real count on how many gays there are in the US because some studies have said 1.5% to as much as 10%. So lets choose a middle ground and say 5-6% of the US population is gay. I don't advocate putting gays in prison or the beating of gays. I have at least 2 family members on my wife's side that are lesbians and I love them very much but I don't agree with their lifestyles. It is more of a live and let live.

Quote:
Just because you cannot force your beliefs and views on others, that doesn't mean other people are trying destroy anything you have. The existence and strength of your family does not falter or depend on the issue of gay marriage.


I'm not the one trying to force anything down people's throats. It is the other way around. The gay agenda is trying to force things down peoples throats with an in your face style. There are movements in the public school system to teach about the homosexual life style. Parents aren't asked if they approve of the teaching it is done. This has been done in several states. I don't remember where it was but there was some sort of sex ed conference done where children from the school were invited. The parents were told it was going to be your run of the mill sex ed class. It turns out that some of the parents attended this conference and they were teaching more then just sex ed. There were classes on "fisting" there were classes on homosexual sex positions. Are these the types of things children need to learn in school? I would say not. I'm happy some parents attended this because if they didn't then they wouldn't know what was being taught in schools. I know I don't want my children learning any type of sexual position regardless of it is for straight people or gay people. That isn't what school is about.

Quote:
Again, you attribute a "want of destruction" and "want of murder" where none exists. People who advocate freedom for all individuals are not advocating the destruction of any of your freedoms or beliefs. Maybe you think abortion is wrong. You are free to believe what you want. However, you can't be so naive as to believe that all people ought to hold your views. You want to force your views on others, interfere in their privacy, and restrict their freedom to make their own decisions concerning their personal lives.


I don't' want to force anything. I want people to understand that this is where people are trying to force our nation. We used to be a nation of morals but now we are a nation of "if it feels good then lets do it". TO make a moral judgment in this country is to bring down the wrath of many on your head. Look at some of the responses I have received in this thread since I posted my own opinion. Most of what I have done is make a moral judgment, and people don't like that pointed out.

Quote:
Parents can guide and influence their children, but children inevitably have minds of their own. Parents do not own their children. Children are not property. You can't beat them or abuse them or force them to live their lives exactly as you mapped it out. But, if you are successful in foisting your abortion views and opinions into your children's minds--maybe they won't feel it necessary to go behind your back when faced with an unwanted pregnancy.


A child of 13 doesn't have a mind of their own yet. They don't' even have the right to do a damn thing let alone make a decision that could effect them the rest of their lives. Look at the things that are on T.V. today, how is a parent who is away working supposed to compete with the level of sexuality on T.V.? When it comes to sex ed in schools the parents don't really know what is being taught in school nowadays and sometimes the teachers don't tell the parents anything except little Johnny needs to be on meds because the teacher can't control him.

You say parents don't own their children, but if something goes wrong and they get in trouble who is to blame, who is held responsible? You got it the parents! Look at what happened here in CO with the Columbine school shooting. The parents were held accountable because the children they don't own, children with their own minds went to school and decided to kill their classmates. Are you going to tell me that these parents were responsible?

On the issue of abortion. In school and everywhere else children are taught that there is nothing wrong with abortion and that it is ok. So when Jill gets pregnant and doesn't want to tell her parents she can go to the school nurse and request to get an abortion. The school will set it up and even take the child to the clinic to have said abortion. If you think I'm lying then check the Penn state law on the issue. They can do this all without having to tell the parents of Jill. On the other hand she still have to have permission to take an aspirin at school.

Quote:
"Let freedom ring." Those who oppose individual rights; those who are opposed to freedom; those who want to govern the private lives of others based upon their own narrow beliefs and viewpoints (making no allowance for other people's beliefs and viewpoints) are the ones who endanger America.


You speak of individual rights, but you always forget to mention personal responsibility. I don't have an issue with personal freedom but I do have an issue with people wanting to change things to fit their own personal agenda and then having our children be the test subjects for something they don't have the guts to tell the parents about!
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 08:03 pm
dyslexia wrote:
to paraphrase the great Zimerman
the progressive thinks
"if you see your neighbor carrying something,
help him with his load.
But don't go mistaking paradise for
that home across the the road"
while the neo-con thinks
"I can get a wetback and not pay
payroll taxes.
when I am done with his labour
I can send him home from Texas."


Your funny but it isn't the neo-cons that want cheap labor. They prefer to kick out all the illegals and have the lazy white people do the work themselves.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 08:20 pm
Foisting MORALS
Baldimo wrote:
You speak of individual rights, but you always forget to mention personal responsibility. I don't have an issue with personal freedom but I do have an issue with people wanting to change things to fit their own personal agenda and then having our children be the test subjects for something they don't have the guts to tell the parents about!


What part of "let freedom ring" do you NOT understand? This is the battle cry upon which the United States of AMERICA was founded. You cannot foist your moralistic views upon others. PERIOD.

If my next door neighbor is a homosexual and wants to marry the person he loves--that's none of my business--it's none of your business.

If my next door neighbor's daughter chooses to have an abortion--that's none of my business--it's none of your business.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 08:40 pm
Re: Foisting MORALS
Debra_Law wrote:
Baldimo wrote:
You speak of individual rights, but you always forget to mention personal responsibility. I don't have an issue with personal freedom but I do have an issue with people wanting to change things to fit their own personal agenda and then having our children be the test subjects for something they don't have the guts to tell the parents about!


What part of "let freedom ring" do you NOT understand? This is the battle cry upon which the United States of AMERICA was founded. You cannot foist your moralistic views upon others. PERIOD.

If my next door neighbor is a homosexual and wants to marry the person he loves--that's none of my business--it's none of your business.

If my next door neighbor's daughter chooses to have an abortion--that's none of my business--it's none of your business.


Marriage has always been between a man and a woman, why should we change it because of a persons choice?

On the abortion issue, murder is murder. If you plan on having sex then you should plan on having a baby and not use abortion as a form of birth control. There are better options then abortion, like adoption. At least then an innocent child would have a chance! Since 1973 when abortion was legalized there has been over 40 million murders committed in the US alone.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jul, 2004 09:00 pm
not nearly enough
0 Replies
 
 

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 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 08:16:17