AGuSTiN wrote:Rollinredcavi wrote:
Oh god... where do you start on that one. Basically everything. But to hit some of the main points.
-voting against the safty of the nation
-loudly protestin hunting animals yet its ok to kill an unborn child
-undermining the efforts to destroy those who attacked our country
-desparatly attempting to use every scandle and remove every republican from the government who has done somthing wrong, while at the same time vigorously supporting and cheering on the members of thier party who did the same thing.
-removing all aspects of good vs. evil from the school system by teaching that God is bad.
Did you put two seconds of thought into that? Because it looks like it.
-voting against the safty of the nation
Who? On what bill?
-loudly protestin hunting animals yet its ok to kill an unborn child
First, PETA <> Democrats.
I don't like abortion. But no one does, really. What people like are the right to choose what to do with their body. But abortion isn't a problem, it's a symptom. Treating symptoms nevers cures the disease.
Did you know there are 136,000 kids waiting for adoption, and it would only take 1/500 adults to adopt one for all of them to have a home? We outlaw abortion without getting people to start adopting, the social disaster would be unimaginable.
In addition, 1/3 of foster kids end up in prison, another 1/3 on welfare and more than 1/3 don't graduate high school. 80% of our prison population has been in foster care. Do you know why? Because the state is a terrible parent.
Chew on it.
-undermining the efforts to destroy those who attacked our country
I thought Bush did that by sending our troops to Iraq instead of Afghanistan?
-desparatly attempting to use every scandle and remove every republican from the government who has done somthing wrong, while at the same time vigorously supporting and cheering on the members of thier party who did the same thing.
In 1994 the Republicans rode into the power in the exact same circumstances. Pot, meet kettle.
-removing all aspects of good vs. evil from the school system by teaching that God is bad.
While I think that the separation of church and state has gone too far, they do need to be separate. This is more of an angry athiest problem than a liberal problem. So far, every athiest I've seen at JBO is Republican. Go figure.
I hate to say it, but blind loyalty does seem to be your problem. I could do WAY better to name liberal stupidity.
AGuSTiN wrote:I'm not wrong, and definitely not simply. You have your history confused.Amen. To all of that.
First, the democrats voted for the war in Iraq. What the Democrats offer now is a differing plan to get out. Further, your argument that the most tyranical man since Hitler threatening the nation is false. We KNOW that now. The sanctions were working, and he didn't have WMD's, and he wasn't a threat to anyone. You should get your facts straight.
PETA members may be Democrats, but most Democrats are not PETA members. Your logic is faulty.
I would love nothing more for a teenager to take responsibility for her child, but I'd rather more that she never had sex. Again, abortion is a symptom, and birthing a child into this world that isn't wanted is no way to solve our social ills. A child without good parenting becomes exactly what I stated in my statistics...a criminal, a welfare case, a prisoner, uneducated. Those kind of people are drains on America, the exact thing that we don't want. And since conservatives aren't putting their spare bedrooms where their mouths are, I wish they'd just shut the hell up about it.
I have nothing against your specific example about church and state. Like I said, I think it goes too far when you start limiting the children's own religious speech. And there is nothing wrong with stating the FACT that there are other beliefs, as long as they are not taught.
Do you or do you not recognize that a lot of this administration's and congress's fiscal policy has been extremely liberal from a spending point of view?
You're a fool with you think warrantless searches and suspension of habeas corpus is good for America. The reason that Americans let the administration get away with this is because they don't know their history. There are STRONG REASONS and LOTS OF HISTORY as to why we have these rights.
How exactly do you reconcile in your mind violating the Bill of Rights? I bet every gun law is a "stupid liberal" thing, but violating your due processes resulting from a warrantless search isn't a "stupid conservative" thing? Seriously, how to you reconcile that?
And to say liberals don't deserve a life in this country? How is that American?!?!
Man, you are so blinded by the word "liberal" you can't see the forest for the trees. You're the most un-American I've seen post at JBO yet.
Further, you are no conservative. The real conservatives are going to vote to congress out Nov 7th as punishment for their failures.
Quote:this is something I've been saying for a while. Liberals want to take certain freedoms away - the 2nd amendment is a perfect example - although not the only.
How exactly do you reconcile in your mind violating the Bill of Rights? I bet every gun law is a "stupid liberal" thing, but violating your due processes resulting from a warrantless search isn't a "stupid conservative" thing? Seriously, how to you reconcile that?
Rollinredcavi wrote:[Democrats voted against the safety of the nation by undermining the efforts to eliminate the most tyranical leader since hitler, and voting against things that whether take very few rights away give the added safety that is necessary. They have voted against almost anything to do with safety... kinda makes you think they have somthing to hide.
Quote:Prepare for a rant here. I'm sure you've seen this quote around here - "Those who would trade freedoms for a little temporary security, deserve neither" - the great patriot and American forefather Benjamin Franklin.
voting against things that whether take very few rights away give the added safety that is necessary.
myself in another thread wrote:Maybe I'll be killed by terrorism one day, but until that day...
I will live free.
I will live proud.
I will not live in fear.
I will not disrupt my life due to any terrorist threat.
I will not let terrorist change my American way of life(if you change anything due to terrorism they already won).
I will do my best to live the American dream or at least my version of it.
I will not let terrorist nor the cowards who would yield freedoms due to terrorist threats stop me.
If I do therefore die due to a terrorist act...
I will die a free man.
I will die a proud man.
Rollinredcavi wrote:And I will never side with anyone that has the stupidest and most dangerouse ideas that our nation has ever seen.You already are. I won't argue that there aren't alot of stupid Liberals - cuz your right. NEWS FLASH - there are alot of STUPID CONSERVATIVES TOO. It isn't the smart Conservatives that are in power either. You know what? - it used to be the Republican duty to hold off the more radical Liberal ideas. Guess what?! Now the current batch of Conservatives in power are way more radical than anything we've seen out of Liberals(America Liberals at least.) Radicals with political power are always dangerous. And this batch is wielding and passing the "most dangerous ideas that our nation has ever seen." You're clearly on their side - therefore your statement is false.
Bastardking3000 wrote:
Both parties are anti-rights. Both parties want to legislate their own BS sense of morality on everyone. Both parties are more alike than they are different. And they both have their heads up their asses.
Bastardking3000 wrote:AGuSTiN wrote:I'm not wrong, and definitely not simply. You have your history confused.Amen. To all of that.
First, the democrats voted for the war in Iraq. What the Democrats offer now is a differing plan to get out. Further, your argument that the most tyranical man since Hitler threatening the nation is false. We KNOW that now. The sanctions were working, and he didn't have WMD's, and he wasn't a threat to anyone. You should get your facts straight.
PETA members may be Democrats, but most Democrats are not PETA members. Your logic is faulty.
I would love nothing more for a teenager to take responsibility for her child, but I'd rather more that she never had sex. Again, abortion is a symptom, and birthing a child into this world that isn't wanted is no way to solve our social ills. A child without good parenting becomes exactly what I stated in my statistics...a criminal, a welfare case, a prisoner, uneducated. Those kind of people are drains on America, the exact thing that we don't want. And since conservatives aren't putting their spare bedrooms where their mouths are, I wish they'd just shut the hell up about it.
I have nothing against your specific example about church and state. Like I said, I think it goes too far when you start limiting the children's own religious speech. And there is nothing wrong with stating the FACT that there are other beliefs, as long as they are not taught.
Do you or do you not recognize that a lot of this administration's and congress's fiscal policy has been extremely liberal from a spending point of view?
You're a fool with you think warrantless searches and suspension of habeas corpus is good for America. The reason that Americans let the administration get away with this is because they don't know their history. There are STRONG REASONS and LOTS OF HISTORY as to why we have these rights.
How exactly do you reconcile in your mind violating the Bill of Rights? I bet every gun law is a "stupid liberal" thing, but violating your due processes resulting from a warrantless search isn't a "stupid conservative" thing? Seriously, how to you reconcile that?
And to say liberals don't deserve a life in this country? How is that American?!?!
Man, you are so blinded by the word "liberal" you can't see the forest for the trees. You're the most un-American I've seen post at JBO yet.
Further, you are no conservative. The real conservatives are going to vote to congress out Nov 7th as punishment for their failures.
Quote:this is something I've been saying for a while. Liberals want to take certain freedoms away - the 2nd amendment is a perfect example - although not the only.
How exactly do you reconcile in your mind violating the Bill of Rights? I bet every gun law is a "stupid liberal" thing, but violating your due processes resulting from a warrantless search isn't a "stupid conservative" thing? Seriously, how to you reconcile that?
Conservatives are no better - in fact many of them are WORSE. They want to take away numerous constitutional rights and governement checks and balances. If you support the actions that this administation(and this congress/senate) has taken against your rights(and against our own constitution) - then you'd better STFU about your gun rights. Many conservatives don't hide the fact that they want to legislate their morality on everyone. Denying gay marraige(as KOTL says - let them suffer too), outlawing abortion(like it or hate it - what right do you have to legislate this?) On the same coin, Liberals want to legislate THEIR OWN MORALITY - aka abolishing the Death Penalty for example.
Both parties are anti-rights. Both parties want to legislate their own BS sense of morality on everyone. Both parties are more alike than they are different. And they both have their heads up their asses.
As was mentioned - yes the whole can't talk about religion in school thing - it is true and it is BS. Our eduation system does openly advocate the athiest theory(evolution on its own right does not contradict Christianity - I'm not sure about Islam or others) as the 100% absolute truth and dismisses everything else as not even potentially valid. Christianity(and other faiths) are under attack in certain fashions in this nation. Yet how many Christians are trying to push a "Christian-agenda" (I would call it a FALSE-Christian-agenda - as a Christian myself) on the rest of the nation? No those two things do not balance - two wrongs do not make a right as the saying goes. Both sides are wrong.
As for the PETA example - I'd bet most all KKK members vote conservative - but that sure as hell doesn't mean consevatives have anything in common with the KKK. See what you can do when you twist statistics?
Bastardking3000 wrote:
Rollinredcavi wrote:[Democrats voted against the safety of the nation by undermining the efforts to eliminate the most tyranical leader since hitler, and voting against things that whether take very few rights away give the added safety that is necessary. They have voted against almost anything to do with safety... kinda makes you think they have somthing to hide.
I've never seen someone who bought heavier into partican propaganda BULL-@!#$. The only thing Democraps have done recently which is endangering this nation is in their failure to stand against this administration. They are weak and ineffective against tyranny. That tyranny is in the oval office. What you have sprouted is typical propaganda BS. If a Democrat votes against one version of a defense bill(in favor of another version which they do vote for) - its all over Rush Limbaugh etc how they're voting against a defense bill. You have bought it hook, line, and sucker. This administration has repeatedly taken actions which don't actually grant any new powers to them, only remove any supervision to make sure they aren't abusing their powers. Sounds like THEY have something to hide.
Quote:Prepare for a rant here. I'm sure you've seen this quote around here - "Those who would trade freedoms for a little temporary security, deserve neither" - the great patriot and American forefather Benjamin Franklin.
voting against things that whether take very few rights away give the added safety that is necessary.
Well he doesn't go far enough IMO. YOU DESERVE NETHER FREEDOM OR SECURITY. Anyone who wants to surrender freedom for security IS A WEAKLING AND A COWARD, AND HAS NO RIGHT TO CALL HIM/HERSELF AN AMERICAN. That is the most Anti-American thing you could possibly do - any coward who would take that option has no right to call him/herself an American - no right at all. "Very few rights away" - how about you let the Liberals take "very few firearms away" or "very few religious liberties away?!"
Furthermore - have you thought about the insult of what you want to do?! Yeah 3000 people died on 9/11. Guess what?! Over 100,000 American servicemen have died protecting your liberties - the SAME liberties that you are so quick to forfiet. What @!#$ing right do you think you have to @!#$ on their collective sacrafices like that?! If you want to do that - then you should find a veteran memorial, dig up the body, open the coffin, and literally take a dump on the body of the hero whose sacrafices you ARE @!#$ing on by waiving your liberties.
If you want to give up your AMERICAN FREEDOM in order to be secure - Get the @!#$ out of America!! Go move to Communist/Socialist @!#$ING China or Cuba - You don't have rights but you do have security. ISN'T THAT WHAT YOU WANT?! If that is then GTFO of America!! America is the land of the free, home of the proud, and Un-American cowards who @!#$ on our Veteran's sactifices don't belong!! GTFO!!
myself in another thread wrote:Maybe I'll be killed by terrorism one day, but until that day...
I will live free.
I will live proud.
I will not live in fear.
I will not disrupt my life due to any terrorist threat.
I will not let terrorist change my American way of life(if you change anything due to terrorism they already won).
I will do my best to live the American dream or at least my version of it.
I will not let terrorist nor the cowards who would yield freedoms due to terrorist threats stop me.
If I do therefore die due to a terrorist act...
I will die a free man.
I will die a proud man.
[/rant]
Rollinredcavi wrote:And I will never side with anyone that has the stupidest and most dangerouse ideas that our nation has ever seen.You already are. I won't argue that there aren't alot of stupid Liberals - cuz your right. NEWS FLASH - there are alot of STUPID CONSERVATIVES TOO. It isn't the smart Conservatives that are in power either. You know what? - it used to be the Republican duty to hold off the more radical Liberal ideas. Guess what?! Now the current batch of Conservatives in power are way more radical than anything we've seen out of Liberals(America Liberals at least.) Radicals with political power are always dangerous. And this batch is wielding and passing the "most dangerous ideas that our nation has ever seen." You're clearly on their side - therefore your statement is false.
Rollinredcavi wrote:
Well obiously your just as misinformed as you seem to think I am.
First off, Most democrats even agree that Saddam had WMD's. Well actually it was even proven. Did you know that chemical weapons are classified under the category of WMD's? You must not know that. Remember before the 2004 elections where the democrats attempted to use that whole "missing weapons cache" decoy to try and steer people away from voting for Bush. Well, there were barrels of chemicals there which could be used for creating chemical weapons. We already know that he was using or planing on using chem's on kewait. He doesnt have to be a direct threat to our nation, but our allies. Plus you think he is just going to leave WMD's laying out when he knows we are going to attack? Only the liberals would be dumb enough to do somthing like that.
Quote:
Liberal from a spending point of view really means nothing. Party policy does not dictate what spending takes place. Democrats like to spend insane amounts of money on helthcare (which people should work for not be given),
Quote:
Look at your whole "quote from yourself". all I can see is I..I..I...I...I..I. I is selfish, I is only thinking about yourself. I will give up myself for others. I will give up some of my freedoms for the safety of my fellow americans. Whether you agree with me or not is your choice. Continue being selfish if you wish to. I am more American because I am willing to do things for my fellow country members.
Quote:
Think about you statement about the service men and women who gave thier lives. During WWII we detained how many thousands of Japanese-Americans, there are even reports of these people getting out of the detention camps and saying that they were happy to get out but completely understand that for the safety of the nation it may have been necessary.
Quote:
but I can say I would give up some of my rights for even a person like you. So if you want to keep your biased, quite wrong, insults going your more than welcome. But just think about that when you talk about who is un-american.
Jeremy Knox wrote:To respond to some of Rollinredcavi's points:
#1 There is no such thing as safety okay? Forget that. It's impossible. If you wanna live in a prison to be safe, that's fine. But no one else wants that. Most conservatives DEFINITELY don't want that. Just ask the NRA guys and the Survivalists.
#2 Iraq. You are in luck buddy. Because the war in Iraq isn't going to end any time soon. The cold war lasted 41 years. This war against Islamic Extremists is likely to last even longuer. So if it's not Iraq it'll be some other godforsaken craphole. Probably Syria or Somalia. As for Hussein being the worst dictator since Hitler... oh my god. How can you say that with a straight face??? Go read about Stalin who made Hitler's genocide look amateurish. Go read about Idi Amin who used to EAT PEOPLE. Go read about Pol Pot who extrerminated almost half of his country's population... and got ZERO response from us btw. The Vietnamese army, our old enemies actually had to stop him. Talk about irony. Anyway, my point is that in 2045 we should still be at war so your grandkids will get to fight and die to protect you. Doesn't that make you proud? By the way, I say this without irony or humour. I've long ago accepted that perpetual war is the way of the free world. We were at war in some form or another for 70-75 of the 20th century's 100 years. What hippy crap about peace were people smoking to believe that war isn't the normal state of affairs?
#3 Killing children is wrong? Could have fooled me. We drop bombs on Afghanistan and Iraq every day and some have surely killed children. You've already said you support the war. So that means that you don't mind killing (or maiming) children when it comes to YOUR safety. And to be honest I don't mind killing children when it comes to mine. Be it war or abortion, it comes down to the same damn thing. Acceptable casualties. I don't want to be carjacked by some 15 year old crackhead with a gun. You don't want some wacko Iraqi blowing himself up on the plane you're flying in. We're both ready to accept some innocents to die to keep us safe. Oh, and don't give me that "It's an accident" about child casualties in war. Modern warfare kills gobs of civilians, this is inevitable. We KNOW we're going to kill children eventually and to be honest we don't care. So this whole "Save the children" crap is just pure hypocrisy. You support the war, you support the death of children. End of story.
#4 Liberals are scum? You'll get no argument from me on this. I'm in total agreement. However, where exactly are these people? I see none in government except for guys like Ted Kennedy and he's hardly a threat. The Clintons? Oh please. They play to whatever base will give them more votes. I don't see liberals voting to increase welfare, just like I don't see conservatives vote to stop social(ist) security. Both sides play to the voters. Ahnuld plays the liberalish Republican to entice Californians, Hilary's gonna play the Conservative Democrat to snag some religious conservatives. It's all a game. It's all lies. And it's all very easy to notice once you figure out that EVERYTHING the government says is either a lie or a half-truth. Nothing they say is true. Nothing.
Quote:
Well obiously your just as misinformed as you seem to think I am.
Quote:
First off, Most democrats even agree that Saddam had WMD's. Well actually it was even proven. Did you know that chemical weapons are classified under the category of WMD's? You must not know that. Remember before the 2004 elections where the democrats attempted to use that whole "missing weapons cache" decoy to try and steer people away from voting for Bush. Well, there were barrels of chemicals there which could be used for creating chemical weapons. We already know that he was using or planing on using chem's on kewait. He doesnt have to be a direct threat to our nation, but our allies. Plus you think he is just going to leave WMD's laying out when he knows we are going to attack? Only the liberals would be dumb enough to do somthing like that.
Quote:
Liberal from a spending point of view really means nothing.
Quote:
Party policy does not dictate what spending takes place.
Quote:
Democrats like to spend insane amounts of money on helthcare (which people should work for not be given), welfare, and other stuff so that the @!#$ ups of America can survive while smoking crack all day (that is a generalization and I know there are many people who work hard to get out of poverty, but most dont do the simple things to help themselves out).
Quote:
And then they cut funding for military, law enforcement, and other extemely important things.
Quote:Must have been TERRIBLE to field a Clinton-era Military... So terrible in fact, that Bush did NOTHING with the Military Budget (except cut discretionary spending) for 3 years.
"A commander-in-chief leads the military built by those who came before him," then-vice presidential candidate Dick Cheney said during the 2000 campaign. "There is little that he or his defense secretary can do to improve the force they have to deploy. It is all the work of previous administrations. Decisions made today shape the force of tomorrow."
Quote:Sure, but if you make more, you got back a greater percentage of those taxes... And of course it makes perfect sense to dump personal and corporate taxes in an era of pork-barrel and colossal budget overruns, as well as in a time of war. Why, that must have been why WWII and WWI weren't paid off until the mid-60's! EGAD!
Republicans cut taxes and allow people to have the money they rightfully earned.
Quote:Under Communism, spending becomes irrelevant because there is no money... maybe I'm weird, but that's what Marx more or less envisioned.
But they are big on military and law enforcement operations. Safety Vs. equality, it is matter of opinion but the type of equality the Demie's want is more like communism. This is republican spending not liberal spending, sorry.
Jeremy Knox wrote:Since I'm Canadian, I can't vote down there, but I'd probably edge towards the Republicans. They're the ones that seem to have most of their crap together. Funny thing is that I'd be totally for an economically conservative and socially liberal government but those never seem to exist.
As for voting in my own country, I never seriously vote. What's the point? To elect the best liar? ALL POLITICIANS are liars. It's like how people call George Bush a conservative. What are you HIGH? He's a politician. He's been molded and rehearsed into a "role" he has to play. Kerry's exactly the same, as will anyone who'll run for president in 2008. If the government REALLY cared about our opinion they'd put a no-confidence vote option on the ballot box. That means that if none of the candidates seem worthwhile, you check that. And if "No-confidence" get's the most votes then they'd better get their sh*t together and haul some better candidates out because we're going through the whole election thing again and again and again until both leading political parties are either bankrupt or incapable of countering the ads for the 3rd parties because they can't spend any more money on their campaigns. Watch how they shape up real freaking quick.
Of course that won't happen, because you don't really have a choice. Democrats and Republicans are likely conspiring together to hot potato the Presidential position. When one side screws up too bad, they toss it to the other party. That way the one that created the problem can say the new guys are making it worse, and the new guys can say they didn't create the problem. Either way, the problem isn't solved. It's like Iraq, vote for the Democrats ALL you want, but none of the troops are coming back home. They're gonna stay there for as long as was intended and there's no one you can vote for that will make any difference whatsoever.
Nathaniel O'Flaherty wrote:so are you saying canadians cant vote with their genetalia? that IS weird. I guess americans really ARE better.
sndsgood wrote:
heres something to chew on agustin. chances are pretty good that if those 1/500 adults could adopt the children they would. i know of a few close friends that have gone to china to adopt because it was way to hard to adopt in the us. less red tape and less cost to adopt a kid from china, and i know that they probalby spent about 10 grand when it was all said and done to go thru china rather then in the u.s. political redtape has just as much to do with why the kids arnt adopted as anything.
secondly you state that 1/3 of foster kids end up in prison,welfare etc.etc.etc. but um doesnt that mean that 2/3 of them dont. the way you state it is like saying lets kill these 3 kids becaue one of them will turn out bad. that to me is kinda an odd way of thinking.
and just on a side note, were all wrong in this post because the original poster just wanted to know who was repulican not get into a war like it has.
Quote:
secondly you state that 1/3 of foster kids end up in prison,welfare etc.etc.etc. but um doesnt that mean that 2/3 of them dont. the way you state it is like saying lets kill these 3 kids becaue one of them will turn out bad. that to me is kinda an odd way of thinking