Watch wild-eyed celebs pray to their god Obama [Archive]

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 04:39 PM

He could never be the letdown the past 8 years has been with Howdy Doody and his facist henchmen leading this country down the tubes.

I don't think you know what fascism is then. Fascism, according to wikipedia, is "an authoritarian nationalist political ideology and mass movement that is concerned with notions of cultural decline or decadence, and which seeks to achieve a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation or race, as well as promoting cults of unity, strength and purity" Basically, that is Obama's platform to a T! Michelle Obama gives speeches decrying "middle-classness" and Kucinich was out there saying that government needs to control oil and other such things. Obama is trying to become president to "unite" to overthrow the "decadence" of the profit motive, speculation, etc. The entire democratic convention speeches have been fascist in nature. The word fascism has been hijacked by left-wing radicals that want to suppress free speech. Universal Health Care, as it is government run private enterprise, Fannie May, Freddie Mac, Amtrak, et al are all fascist enterprises by definition, as they are private corporations under direct government oversight.

strandinthewind

08-27-2008, 04:42 PM

^^^

Are you actually making that facism argument again. You were corrected once - please refer to that thread :wavey:

On edit -- you ought to love this thread from 2003 :laugh:

I miss those guys!

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 04:50 PM

^^^

Are you actually making that facism argument again. You were corrected once - please refer to that thread :wavey:

On edit -- you ought to love this thread from 2003 :laugh:

I miss those guys!

I wasn't corrected. You made a valiant attempt, but you were far from conclusory. Look up fascism and you'll see that it is left leaning in nature, as were the Nazis.

chiliD

08-27-2008, 04:51 PM

"an authoritarian nationalist political ideology and mass movement that is concerned with notions of cultural decline or decadence, and which seeks to achieve a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation or race, as well as promoting cults of unity, strength and purity".

What rock have you been under the past 8 years? That pretty much describes what has been happening in the "good ol' USofA" under this current administration.

strandinthewind

08-27-2008, 04:53 PM

I wasn't corrected. You made a valiant attempt, but you were far from conclusory. Look up fascism and you'll see that it is left leaning in nature, as were the Nazis.

Revisionist history!

Also, I am never wrong, just ask gldstwmn :nod:

Seriously, the current R party and its support of religion over the rule of law is facism. I beleive the wiki article you cite says that in the "Positions on Religion" section :wavey:

strandinthewind

08-27-2008, 04:54 PM

What rock have you been under the past 8 years? That pretty much describes what has been happening in the "good ol' USofA" under this current administration.

I know. But, he'll never admit it :rolleyes: He still clings to his belief that the R's are the party of less govt. and less taxes, when recent history demonstrates that is just untrue.

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 04:55 PM

What rock have you been under the past 8 years? That pretty much describes what has been happening in the "good ol' USofA" under this current administration.

In your opinion, you mean. I happen to just simply disagree. Historically, we've had much worse things happen and much more egregious violations of civil rights. For example, Roosevelt's internment of Japanese-American citizens, Lincoln's deporting senators who disagreed with him, Bobby Kennedy trying to set up MLK by spying on him and trying to take him down politically, etc. Most of it makes Bush seem pretty darn mild in comparison.

I think Bush has done a basically okay job, not great, but okay. Unlike you, I don't blame the president for everything that goes wrong in the world. The president only has the ability to set up roadblocks or take them down, the rest is up to us. As a nation, we have a bad habit of blaming the president for our own collective actions. A perfect example is the economy. If you ask anyone on the street, they'd be shocked that the economy is nothing more than the sum of our financial behavior and the president doesn't "control it".

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 04:58 PM

I know. But, he'll never admit it :rolleyes: He still clings to his belief that the R's are the party of less govt. and less taxes, when recent history demonstrates that is just untrue.

Republicans generally, yes. I agree that government has swelled in the last decade, which I am unhappy about. That is why I support McCain, because he has a track record of cutting waste. Conversely, the dems actually brag that they want government to be bigger, taxes to be higher, and have giveaways for everybody. Kucinich last night attacked my ability to invest in a retirement account because he's against "speculation". What the hell?! Who the hell is he to tell me what I can and cannot do with my own money. THAT is fascism at it's ugliest core, which is to complain about people trying to prosper and playing upon the class envy of the proletariat classes. It is disgusting!

I'm all for party reform. Bring back the party of Newt. My only dilemma is that whatever the dems do if Obama is elected is not likely to be undone any time soon. As Reagan put it in 1964, "the closest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this Earth is a government program."

strandinthewind

08-27-2008, 04:59 PM

In your opinion, you mean. I happen to just simply disagree . . . .

Well, no. There is a difference in opinion and fact. The R's use of religion in a facist manner is a fact. There really is no disputing that.

. . . . I think Bush has done a basically okay job, not great, but okay . . . .

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Come on - not even you can believe that. Name one good thing he's done?

strandinthewind

08-27-2008, 05:01 PM

Republicans generally, yes. I agree that government has swelled in the last decade, which I am unhappy about. That is why I support McCain, because he has a track record of cutting waste. Conversely, the dems actually brag that they want government to be bigger, taxes to be higher, and have giveaways for everybody. I'm all for party reform. Bring back the party of Newt. My only dilemma is that whatever the dems do if Obama is elected is not likely to be undone any time soon. As Reagan put it in 1964, "the closest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this Earth is a government program."

You mean like the efficient, prosperous, surplus building govt. under the Clinton adminstration?

Also, if you think McCain will do anything other than what the R party tells him to do, I suggest you are misguided. The R party controls the money and therefore controls him.

BombaySapphire3

08-27-2008, 05:06 PM

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Come on - not even you can believe that. Name one good thing he's done?

The only thing iamnotafraid could come up with for the entire 8 miserable years that Smirky has occupied The White house was him muttering something about offshore drilling supposedly causing a drop in gas prices..impressive I must say!

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 05:07 PM

Well, no. There is a difference in opinion and fact. The R's use of religion in a facist manner is a fact. There really is no disputing that.

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Come on - not even you can believe that. Name one good thing he's done?

Certainly I can dispute that the use of religion is fascist. No encroachment of civil rights has been made, only attempts to curtail the expansion of certain rights, IE gay marriage. You would be correct if gay marriage has been legal in the past and has been stopped, but that is not the case. They were trying to prevent it. That is freedom, my friend, not fascism. You might bring up blue laws, how many are actually enforced on a regular basis? Almost none, and only when the suspect is being investigated for something else and they need an excuse to hold him. IE that case you mentioned a month ago where the two gay guys were arrested on sodomy charges, however, you failed to mention that there was a gunfight of sorts and they were trying to keep them at bay while they investigated that. Basically, that argument is pathetic and isn't supported by the facts.

To answer your question, I think the fact that we haven't been attacked again is a great accomplishment. How many times were we attacked under Clinton? The first WTC attack, Khobar towers, several embassy bombings, McVeigh, etc. Also, his tax cuts were very successful. His tariff's on imported steel were also a good accomplishment. He has helped AIDS in Africa more than any other president in history. Basically, okay accomplishments, certainly not what one would expect over 8 years, 6 of which with a majority in congress and the senate.

On edit: It would be fascist for the Republicans to try to ban gary marriage through the courts, (as most leftist accomplishments in the last 30 years have been), however, they tried to send it through congress, the state legislatures, the governor's, etc. That is democracy and just because you don't like what they were trying to accomplish doesn't make it fascist. The fact of the matter is that congress is our representation against dictatorial regimes and sending anything through congress is exactly what should be happening. There is no fascism in submitting an unpopular or bad idea through the proper channels.

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 05:11 PM

You mean like the efficient, prosperous, surplus building govt. under the Clinton adminstration?

Also, if you think McCain will do anything other than what the R party tells him to do, I suggest you are misguided. The R party controls the money and therefore controls him.

Since when has McCain been beholden to money? Maybe 20 years ago.

The Clinton administration which produced a recession in early 2000 and the dot-com bubble, raids on private religious organizations (real fascism from the left, yet again, that gets ignored by you), the downsizing of the military, general military incompetence with failed missions in places like Somolia, a declared peace that never happened in Israel and Palestine, etc. You also forgot that Clinton swung right after the first two years because Newt and the freshman republicans held his feet to the fire and shut down the government several times and forced him into swinging further right than Bush most of the time.

On edit: If a government has a surplus, that means they are taking too much money and need to cut taxes. Ideally, a governments deficit/surplus should be zero.

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 05:12 PM

The only thing iamnotafraid could come up with for the entire 8 miserable years that Smirky has occupied The White house was him muttering something about offshore drilling supposedly causing a drop in gas prices..impressive I must say!

That is actually true, because part of the price of crude oil is made up of futures market investments. If they believe supply will increase, the speculative market drops, hence the lowering of gas prices. In congress would do the same, we'd see prices falling like Obama's poll numbers.

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 05:18 PM

not half as laughable as the terrible. unabashedly redneck anthem by Big n Rich 'Raising McCain".:laugh:

No one is praying to McCain or pretending he's anything but a good politician. You have people changing their names to Hussein, starting Obama groups where they discuss how they came to "Him", celebrities praying to Obama, Obama himself making messianic proclamations. Look on youtube and people are calling Obama their "lord and savior". Doesn't this strike you as a little weird?! It's creepy!

Johnny Stew

08-27-2008, 05:32 PM

No encroachment of civil rights has been made, only attempts to curtail the expansion of certain rights, IE gay marriage. You would be correct if gay marriage has been legal in the past and has been stopped, but that is not the case. They were trying to prevent it. That is freedom, my friend, not fascism.

"Freedom" is blocking someone from marrying the person they love? I thought the entire Republican party was supposed to be against intrusive government -- so why are they trying so desperately to intrude into my life and dictate to whom I can and cannot be married?

Oh, and AJ, you criticized "left-wingers" for not providing facts about hate and prejudice from the right, yet when I provided direct quotes from numerous Republican politicians (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?p=768697#post768697), you never responded.

I found that odd.

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 05:40 PM

"Freedom" is blocking someone from marrying the person they love? I thought the entire Republican party was supposed to be against intrusive government -- so why are they trying so desperately to intrude into my life and dictate to whom I can and cannot be married?

Oh, and AJ, you criticized "left-wingers" for not providing facts about hate and prejudice from the right, yet when I provided direct quotes from numerous Republican politicians (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?p=768697#post768697), you never responded.

I found that odd.

No one was "blocking" you from marrying someone you love because you didn't have that right to begin with. Why not allow siblings to marry? I love my sister, why can't I marry her so she can have rights of survivorship? Why can't I marry my daughter so she can have spousal rights, or my son, etc? Gay marriage is exclusionary by it's nature. Why not take marriage out of the hands of government?! Heck, Obama even said he's anti gay marriage. It's not a Republican thing at all. Pay attention to your own candidate. He slapped the gay community in the face at Saddleback.

I agree with Santorum's position, in part, that if we allow gay marriage we should allow all of it. Why be exclusionary at all? I never held the position that the government should exclude gay marriage, so why are you attacking me on it? My position has always been that the government has no business sanctioning any relationship. I like to use the saying, if a church wants to marry three guys, a donkey and a porkchop, I say let 'em. I don't see why siblings can't marry, or whatever. To me, conservative economics are a much bigger issue. I can't really care much less about gay marriage, it's not even a blip on my radar screen. I say run it through the legislature and if they approve it, so be it.

As far as the politician quotes go, so what?! Politicians have opinions that you don't like. They've made it clear that they don't like gay marriage. Heck, a lot of gay Republicans don't like gay marriage. Let 'em all fight it out in the state legislatures. I think Kucinish did nothing but spew hate and prejudice, as well as fundamental ignorance last night. It's his right, I'm not trying to silence him. Obama came out against gay marriage, after he told gay crowds he was for it. It's the right of legislators to be as ignorant as they want to be also. It's fascist of you to want to limit their free speech.

Tango

08-27-2008, 05:53 PM

No one was "blocking" you from marrying someone you love because you didn't have that right to begin with. Why not allow siblings to marry? I love my sister, why can't I marry her so she can have rights of survivorship? Why can't I marry my daughter so she can have spousal rights, or my son, etc? Gay marriage is exclusionary by it's nature. Why not take marriage out of the hands of government?! Heck, Obama even said he's anti gay marriage. It's not a Republican thing at all. Pay attention to your own candidate. He slapped the gay community in the face at Saddleback.

I agree with Santorum's position, in part, that if we allow gay marriage we should allow all of it. Why be exclusionary at all? I never held the position that the government should exclude gay marriage, so why are you attacking me on it? My position has always been that the government has no business sanctioning any relationship. I like to use the saying, if a church wants to marry three guys, a donkey and a porkchop, I say let 'em. I don't see why siblings can't marry, or whatever. To me, conservative economics are a much bigger issue. I can't really care much less about gay marriage, it's not even a blip on my radar screen. I say run it through the legislature and if they approve it, so be it.

As far as the politician quotes go, so what?! Politicians have opinions that you don't like. They've made it clear that they don't like gay marriage. Heck, a lot of gay Republicans don't like gay marriage. Let 'em all fight it out in the state legislatures. I think Kucinish did nothing but spew hate and prejudice, as well as fundamental ignorance last night. It's his right, I'm not trying to silence him. Obama came out against gay marriage, after he told gay crowds he was for it. It's the right of legislators to be as ignorant as they want to be also. It's fascist of you to want to limit their free speech.

"we allow?" We the people allowed people to be slaves. We allowed them not to vote. We allowed them to not own land. We allowed to not let them use the same rest rooms or entry doors or sitting on the bus. Please tell me you don't think that was right.

Making things right in terms of civil rights for gays is not something Santorum or those of that ilk should be in charge of, for I fear he wouldn't have been much help to many pre- 1865 either.

ajmccarrell

08-27-2008, 05:59 PM

"we allow?" We the people allowed people to be slaves. We allowed them not to vote. We allowed them to not own land. We allowed to not let them use the same rest rooms or entry doors or sitting on the bus. Please tell me you don't think that was right.

Making things right in terms of civil rights for gays is not something Santorum or those of that ilk should be in charge of, for I fear he wouldn't have been much help to many pre- 1865 either.

Typical liberal, playing the race card when I didn't say anything about race at all. Why not focus on the countries in the middle east that still practice slavery instead of bashing your own country. Fact is that we abolished slavery and I wish the African continent, parts of Asia and the Middle East would follow our example. I'm not a racist and I resent the accusation. I doubt Robert "Sheets" Bird was any help during the civil rights era either, as he was a Grand Cliegle (Recruiter) for the KKK and never repudiated it. It's reported he still uses racial slurs. Racism is not the sole property of Republicans. Don't forget that Bobby Kennedy illegally wiretapped Martin Luther King because he thought he was a threat.

BombaySapphire3

08-27-2008, 06:04 PM

No one is praying to McCain or pretending he's anything but a good politician. You have people changing their names to Hussein, starting Obama groups where they discuss how they came to "Him", celebrities praying to Obama, Obama himself making messianic proclamations. Look on youtube and people are calling Obama their "lord and savior". Doesn't this strike you as a little weird?! It's creepy!

Well I agree that is silly but IMO no moreso than praying to Jesus .Allah.Jehovah ,Odin ,Zeus or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.:lol:

estranged4life

08-27-2008, 06:19 PM

not half as laughable as the terrible. unabashedly redneck anthem by Big n Rich 'Raising McCain".:laugh:

"Ick & Bitch" blow monkey balls, so no surprise there...

I thought about voting for Obama, UNTIL Toby "I'm a Democrat" Keith gave Obama his endorsement...And that spells "Kiss of death" (If you paid attention to Toby Keith's track record of backing Democratic candidates, He ALWAYS picks the one who loses - Not good!)

Wished William "KHANNNNNNNNNNNNNN!" Shatner would run for President (But he is a Canuck) because I COULD believe more in his (acting) of caring for everyone than ANY politician when it is election time.

Satan/Shatner in 2008

BombaySapphire3

08-27-2008, 06:34 PM

"Ick & Bitch" blow monkey balls, so no surprise there...

I thought about voting for Obama, UNTIL Toby "I'm a Democrat" Keith gave Obama his endorsement...And that spells "Kiss of death" (If you paid attention to Toby Keith's track record of backing Democratic candidates, He ALWAYS picks the one who loses - Not good!)

aww come on now Brian don't let that big ol' Okie blowhard dissuade from voting for Obama ..I have been completely tuning him out for years.:lol:

Johnny Stew

08-27-2008, 06:43 PM

No one was "blocking" you from marrying someone you love because you didn't have that right to begin with. Why not allow siblings to marry? I love my sister, why can't I marry her so she can have rights of survivorship? Why can't I marry my daughter so she can have spousal rights, or my son, etc? Gay marriage is exclusionary by it's nature. Why not take marriage out of the hands of government?! Heck, Obama even said he's anti gay marriage. It's not a Republican thing at all. Pay attention to your own candidate. He slapped the gay community in the face at Saddleback.

I agree with Santorum's position, in part, that if we allow gay marriage we should allow all of it. Why be exclusionary at all? I never held the position that the government should exclude gay marriage, so why are you attacking me on it? My position has always been that the government has no business sanctioning any relationship. I like to use the saying, if a church wants to marry three guys, a donkey and a porkchop, I say let 'em. I don't see why siblings can't marry, or whatever. To me, conservative economics are a much bigger issue. I can't really care much less about gay marriage, it's not even a blip on my radar screen. I say run it through the legislature and if they approve it, so be it.

As far as the politician quotes go, so what?! Politicians have opinions that you don't like. They've made it clear that they don't like gay marriage. Heck, a lot of gay Republicans don't like gay marriage. Let 'em all fight it out in the state legislatures. I think Kucinish did nothing but spew hate and prejudice, as well as fundamental ignorance last night. It's his right, I'm not trying to silence him. Obama came out against gay marriage, after he told gay crowds he was for it. It's the right of legislators to be as ignorant as they want to be also. It's fascist of you to want to limit their free speech.

I'd appreciate you not comparing my relationship to incest. For the record, we also don't have anything in common with polygamists, pedophiles or folks into bestiality. The claim that allowing gay marriage suddenly opens it up for every imaginable deviant is a straw man argument, and demonstrates that those who oppose it have absolutely no genuinely valid reasons.

Regarding Obama's stance on the issue -- he's always stated that he's pro-civil unions, but not gay marriage. He's never said anything to the contrary.

And nice try dismissing the quotes. You opined that left-wingers accuse right-wingers of hate and prejudice without backing those claims up with facts -- I provided facts, and now you say "so what," and ridiculously accuse me of fascism.

They have a right to say anything they please -- however, those statements illuminate the deep-seated prejudices in the party, and negate your claim that one "never hears this kind of anger and hate coming from the right wing."

But, hey, at least you finally responded.

estranged4life

08-27-2008, 06:49 PM

I wished a case of "Careeris Suicidis" would occur for this asschunk (Dude, the Dixie Twits OWN ya!)...he definitely fits the term "Okie" (A term I loathe, as do ALL Muskogee residents - Thanks Merle "Never lived in Muskogee - But lived in Checotah for 6 months at the age of 2 years old, But my personal plane did crash in Muskogee killing all my personnel and spilling kilos of coke across Davis Field" Haggard).

Hey, I did love how "Mulletman" kissed ass of his beloved Booner-Gooners (aka OU Sooners) during the National Championship game of 2005 between USC - No sooner than he kissed the Crimson and Cream colored ass (Crimson and Cream is accurate for Blow-U, Because their fans are Red-necks and White-trailer trash) than the Trojans ran off 38 points to SLAUGHTER Blow-U 55 - 19.

Mr.Keith made me "oh so proud" that I drove the 77 miles to Norman (Location of Blow-U) to wear my So.Cal clothing as I shopped (And rubbed it in their FACES!!!)

David

08-27-2008, 07:55 PM

My position has always been that the government has no business sanctioning any relationship. As long as that relationship rests on consent; otherwise, the matter becomes one of intentional tort & can -- & should -- be prosecuted accordingly.

Consent is the crux.

strandinthewind

08-27-2008, 09:26 PM

^^^^^

AJM - yawn - please see the 1,000 other posts directly refuting this BS.

ajmccarrell

08-28-2008, 12:44 PM

I'd appreciate you not comparing my relationship to incest. For the record, we also don't have anything in common with polygamists, pedophiles or folks into bestiality. The claim that allowing gay marriage suddenly opens it up for every imaginable deviant is a straw man argument, and demonstrates that those who oppose it have absolutely no genuinely valid reasons.

Regarding Obama's stance on the issue -- he's always stated that he's pro-civil unions, but not gay marriage. He's never said anything to the contrary.

And nice try dismissing the quotes. You opined that left-wingers accuse right-wingers of hate and prejudice without backing those claims up with facts -- I provided facts, and now you say "so what," and ridiculously accuse me of fascism.

They have a right to say anything they please -- however, those statements illuminate the deep-seated prejudices in the party, and negate your claim that one "never hears this kind of anger and hate coming from the right wing."

But, hey, at least you finally responded.

I still stand that you don't hear the same kind of hatred coming from the right as from the left. No right-winger has made a rap song about killing a political commentators family in front of him or about "silencing" people once and for all, or that the opposition party nominee needs to be "paralized". The best you can come up with are a bunch of ignorant statements, but no one wants to kill anyone specifically or makes any threats to. I did back up the argument with several quotes previously.

Anyway, the problem with the gay marriage agenda is that it really isn't all about rights. If it were, then it would allow for close family members to give one another spousal rights. If I'm close to my brother, sister, daughter, son, mother, father, etc then under the logic supporting gay marriage, why can't I marry one of them? Even gay marriage advocates argue that I can't because it's incest. Well, to me, it would be all about rights and not sex. The basic problem is that gay marriage boils the argument down to sex. If I'm not having sex with any of the above relations, why should it matter? It brings the government into the bedroom, which is the last place it should be. Gay marriage, as is any state sanctioned marriage, is exclusionary by nature.....STILL! Why not allow free marriage with anyone, as it may be important to pass on spousal rights to someone else I could not currently legally marry? I mean, in France, you can actually marry dead people, and in Spain a 12 year old can marry. Having the state involved in such issues just leads to craziness.

BombaySapphire3

08-28-2008, 01:01 PM

I still stand that you don't hear the same kind of hatred coming from the right as from the left. No right-winger has made a rap song about killing a political commentators family in front of him or about "silencing" people once and for all.

Except perhaps for the gun happy right winger Jim Adkisson who went into a Knoxville Tenn. Unitarian church a month ago and opened fire because he" didn't like liberals "and by extension homosexuals and then there was Olympic bomber Eric Rudolph who also bombed abortion clinics and a gay night club..these rightwingnuts actually murdered real people as opposed to the ones you cited who only sang about it or inferred it.Riddle me this :where are their left wing counterparts of the last 30 years or so that actually followed through and murdered people.?.I'll bet you can't answer that one.

ajmccarrell

08-28-2008, 06:40 PM

Except perhaps for the gun happy right winger Jim Adkisson who went into a Knoxville Tenn. Unitarian church a month ago and opened fire because he" didn't like liberals "and by extension homosexuals and then there was Olympic bomber Eric Rudolph who also bombed abortion clinics and a gay night club..these rightwingnuts actually murdered real people as opposed to the ones you cited who only sang about it or inferred it.Riddle me this :where are their left wing counterparts of the last 30 years or so that actually followed through and murdered people.?.I'll bet you can't answer that one.

Just look at Vince Foster. My aunt (who is a socialist by the way) shared an office with Robert Mueller, who was originally assigned to the case. Hillary murdered Vince Foster, according to her. How about the biggest cases of murder in the name of liberalism and "equality", the tens of millions of murders committed by Stalin, a leftist, and Hitler a left-wing socialist. People forget that Hitler wasn't right-wing, he was a lefty. Take a look at any abortion clinic. In 1996 an angry lesbian had a standoff at her local church after shooting the pastor for speaking out against homosexuality. Janet Reno invading Randy Weaver's home and killing his 12 year old son, his wife and dog. Jack Kevorkian was a famous killer in the name of liberalism. There was a shooting in Seattle about a year ago, where a liberal arab shot up the Jewish League building and killed a few women. His politics were not released to the press, of course. Two Indianapolis pastors were murdered because of their conservative views in 1997. One of Falwell's co-ministers was also murdered by a liberal.

http://tsfiles.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/david-ehrenstein-calls-on-conservative-justice-to-be-murdered/

How about this pastor arrested for preaching,
http://www.conservativetruth.org/archives/tombarrett/07-28-02.shtml

ajmccarrell

08-28-2008, 06:50 PM

BombaySapphire3

08-28-2008, 07:06 PM

Just look at Vince Foster. My aunt (who is a socialist by the way) shared an office with Robert Mueller, who was originally assigned to the case. Hillary murdered Vince Foster, according to her. How about the biggest cases of murder in the name of liberalism and "equality", the tens of millions of murders committed by Stalin, a leftist, and Hitler a left-wing socialist. People forget that Hitler wasn't right-wing, he was a lefty. Take a look at any abortion clinic. In 1996 an angry lesbian had a standoff at her local church after shooting the pastor for speaking out against homosexuality. Janet Reno invading Randy Weaver's home and killing his 12 year old son, his wife and dog. Jack Kevorkian was a famous killer in the name of liberalism. There was a shooting in Seattle about a year ago, where a liberal arab shot up the Jewish League building and killed a few women. His politics were not released to the press, of course. Two Indianapolis pastors were murdered because of their conservative views in 1997. One of Falwell's co-ministers was also murdered by a liberal.

http://tsfiles.wordpress.com/2008/06/29/david-ehrenstein-calls-on-conservative-justice-to-be-murdered/

How about this pastor arrested for preaching,
http://www.conservativetruth.org/archives/tombarrett/07-28-02.shtml

I was talking about this country in particular and the last 30 years .Hitler was a fascist hateful of jews,homsexuals and racial and religious minorties far to the right indeed so a terrible example.Stalin was a communist despot ..hardly a liberal.Where is the proof that Falwell's pastor was murdered by a liberal for his politcal beliefs or the Indianapolis pastors for that matter?As for the Arab I'm sure it had more to do with conflicts in the Middle East than American politics that and most Jewish people are liberal Democrats!Dr Kevorkian assisted with sucides he did not shoot people.Janet Reno was a represenative of the U.S. government and that was a hard case but what about the reactions of Timothy McVeigh, the worst homegrown terrorist in US . history and clearly a rightwingnut.Never heard the one about the angry lesbian but I'm sure there was more to it than just that . The preacher probably molested her when she was a kid.And last but not least your Aunt needs to go the FBI right away while Bush is still in power and report what she knows about Hillary murdering Vince Foster! either that or start takimg her psych meds again.:laugh:

BombaySapphire3

08-28-2008, 07:14 PM

Here's one that just occurred!

http://www.religionnewsblog.com/21356/richard-watson

Here's another!

http://thomaskraemer.blogspot.com/2007/12/christians-killed-for-anti-gay-views.html

Still more

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2007/12/09/1131

all of these are websites of virulently anti-gay,paranoid, right wing religious nuts ..hardly a credible news source.

ajmccarrell

08-28-2008, 07:25 PM

all of these are websites of virulently anti-gay,paranoid, right wing religious nuts ..hardly a credible news source.

The liberal media doesn't report murders of right wingers. It doesn't fit their template. Besides, they still think Columbine was racially and not religiously motivated, despite reports of those nuts asking if the victims believed in God before shooting them.

Hitler was not right wing. Hitler was a socialist. Hence National Socialism, DUH!!!! You are making a horrible assumption, not based on fact, that racism is the property of the right wing, which it isn't. Sorry, but only the Dems have a KKK member on board, Robert "Sheets" Bird. Not to mention that it was the Southern Democrats who voted against Civil Rights legislation. Hitler was a socialist and clearly the democratic party is into redistribution, which was Stalin's justification for murder. More murders have happened in the name of "redistribution" and "equality" than for any other purpose. :laugh:

Also, the Jewish Center that was shot up was Michael Medved's Center. He's hardly a liberal democrat!

estranged4life

08-28-2008, 07:34 PM

Timothy McVeigh, the worst homegrown terrorist in US . history and clearly a rightwingnut.

WHATEVER info he had about THOSE who helped in the Murrah Bombing went to the grave with McVeigh.

Terry Nichols has said that OTHERS (Of foreign origin - Interesting that Nichols and 911 Terrorist Mohamed Atta were at the same small hotel in the Phillipines on the same day, and there was reports that the day in question was one where anti-American groups were gathering to plan how to kill Americans. Also odd is the Mohamed Atta was given a speeding ticket near OKC in April 1995...I love conspiracies) had part in the OKC attack - But it seems he has said this ONLY to get a new deal, but should he get a deal from the Federal Govt. the state of Oklahoma will exercise its right to have him put to death.

The attack in OKC has intrigue til this day, and I hate to say the Clinton cabinet FUBAR'd somewhere - Why did a Federal govt. building, adjacent to the Murrah Building (Actually a Federal Court House) receive an advance warning of a possible attack the day of April 19,1995 and YET no word was spread to those in the Murrah Building. A federal judge even showed the doctument sent to his office from those in Washington, DC - and when he offered to testify at McVeigh's federal trial he was blown off but the same justice system he worked for...Of course Janet Reno stated no fore-warning was ever sent.

When McVeigh went to trial, why was it over so damn fast, LOTS of witnesses (I believe the number was 104) werent called who saw McVeigh in the passenger sent of the Ryder truck with a man of olive complextion in the driver seat - and where were ALL the closed circuit security video camera footage from that day? If one has been to downtown OKC you see 'em everywhere (Even before 4/19/195)...Yet not one single frame of the blast has ever been made known.

Why were USAF experts on weaponry not called to testify that the truck bomb could not have caused the damage it did, but a small tactile NUKE could - Possibly one fired from a shoulder held rocket launcher (Which asks why did the parking lot of the Journal Records building across the street suffer total annihilation when experts said a truck bomb could NOT have done as much damage.)

Why were Federal agents in safety containment suits walking around with rad counters and told the OKC PD to "f**k off - this is NOT your concern now". Why did one police officer, who witnessed these feds end up dead in a field from "suicide" when he wasnt suicidal and the suicide note was not in his own handwriting?

Interesting **** to me, and Janet Reno ABSOTIVELY failed the citizens of OKC with the "jerkoff" of a trial, which produced no answers at all. McVeigh is gone and the truth died with him.

That fallout from that attack in my backyard is the main reason I loathe the Clinton. I know I cant blame him for the attack, but I can blame his administration for HURRILY burying the truth.

Now that I remember, Does anyone find it odd that one of the largest meetings of Middle Easterners from across the USA happens in OKC - and at these meetings they had disscused killings Americans/Jews and destroying "Capitalism and the Crusaders"? A network reporter even attending one of these meeting in early 2001 and what he tried to report back to his superiors was blown off. I remember that footage from both some doctumentary and the local OKC news.

BombaySapphire3

08-28-2008, 07:34 PM

The liberal media doesn't report murders of right wingers. It doesn't fit their template. Besides, they still think Columbine was racially and not religiously motivated, despite reports of those nuts asking if the victims believed in God before shooting them.

Hitler was not right wing. Hitler was a socialist. Hence National Socialism, DUH!!!! You are making a horrible assumption, not based on fact, that racism is the property of the right wing, which it isn't. Sorry, but only the Dems have a KKK member on board, Robert "Sheets" Bird. Not to mention that it was the Southern Democrats who voted against Civil Rights legislation. Hitler was a socialist and clearly the democratic party is into redistribution, which was Stalin's justification for murder. More murders have happened in the name of "redistribution" and "equality" than for any other purpose. :laugh:

The "liberal media" at this point is pretty much a myth..Are you aware of the model of the political continum which begins at totalitarian fascism on one end and then goes in a circle to totalitarin communism on the other, the two meet at the end of that circle and all other political ideologies lie somewhere in between on the circle .Maybe imagining that can help with your confusion about Hitler being far to the left he was not and I know Strandie has been over this with you again and again.I think you are wrong. More murders have been comitted in the name of religion over the course of history than anything else

ajmccarrell

08-28-2008, 07:46 PM

The "liberal media" at this point is pretty much a myth..Are you aware of the model of the political continum which begins at totalitarian fascism on one end and then goes in a circle to totalitarin communism on the other, the two meet at the end of that circle and all other political ideologies lie somewhere in between on the circle .Maybe imagining that can help with your confusion about Hitler being far to the left he was not and I know Strandie has been over this with you again and again.I think you are wrong. More murders have been comitted in the name of religion over the course of history than anything else

There was actually a book recently done on the subject and he concluded that there were far more murders committed in the name of atheism in the last century than all the previous wars combined.

I am aware of the circle, but I cannot agree on the premise. It leaves out libertarian or anarchist tendencies. There are also other diagrams such as a cross with authoritarianism on the top, anarchy at the bottom, with redistribution on the left and free markets on the right. I think that is a little closer to representing the truth of the political spectrum. I am not authoritatian and I am for unbridled free markets. Unfortunately, both mainstream parties are both authoritarian on social issues or economic issues. To me, economic issues trump social ones, so I vote republican. I'm more of a libertarian than anything, except I cannot agree with them on open borders, legalizing drugs, or dismantling our standing military.

As far as Hitler goes, he was fascist and sympathized with Mussolini. However, socialism and fascism are both redistributionist concepts, which are Marxist at the core. Hitler was a lefty, albeit a loony. I can't think of a single right wing concept he had. Stalin was a lefty. Communism is an extreme left wing philosophy. This is very basic.

SortaSavageLike

08-28-2008, 07:52 PM

Hitler

Godwin's Law invoked. Argument invalidated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

The Catdancer

08-28-2008, 07:55 PM

The liberal media doesn't report murders of right wingers. It doesn't fit their template. Besides, they still think Columbine was racially and not religiously motivated, despite reports of those nuts asking if the victims believed in God before shooting them.

Hitler was not right wing. Hitler was a socialist. Hence National Socialism, DUH!!!! You are making a horrible assumption, not based on fact, that racism is the property of the right wing, which it isn't. Sorry, but only the Dems have a KKK member on board, Robert "Sheets" Bird. Not to mention that it was the Southern Democrats who voted against Civil Rights legislation. Hitler was a socialist and clearly the democratic party is into redistribution, which was Stalin's justification for murder. More murders have happened in the name of "redistribution" and "equality" than for any other purpose. :laugh:

Also, the Jewish Center that was shot up was Michael Medved's Center. He's hardly a liberal democrat!

And where do you get your "facts" from??? Wiki.... Hitler a lefty..... yeah right :laugh:

BombaySapphire3

08-28-2008, 07:55 PM

There was actually a book recently done on the subject and he concluded that there were far more murders committed in the name of atheism in the last century than all the previous wars combined.

As far as Hitler goes, he was fascist and sympathized with Mussolini. However, socialism and fascism are both redistributionist concepts, which are Marxist at the core. Hitler was a lefty, albeit a loony. I can't think of a single right wing concept he had. Stalin was a lefty. Communism is an extreme left wing philosophy. This is very basic.

My favorite poster is one that says "What if there was no religion"on the poster is a picture of the lower Manhattan skyline ..The World Trade Center is still there. I don't think we're ever going to agree about Hitler being a left winger ..but neither of us are as far as I know advocating for totalitarianism of any kind and I'm sure we both can agree that Hitler and Stalin are equally odious so I guess it is not that important.