It's Time For Liberals To Start Supporting America!

[Pale Rider]

Its The Right Way, And It's Time For Liberals To Start Supporting America:


Liberals in America are too busy supporting or defending our enemies. They should be spending time defending this country. Many Liberals in America are a bunch of U.N. loving sell-outs. It's time for the rest of us to stand up and say "enough is enough" There have been a number of times in the past four years that Liberals have turned their backs on America. The war in Iraq is an example. Many Liberals continue to bad mouth America and I believe they secretly call for her defeat.

An example of this horrible behavior has roared its ugly head recently. The Liberal media and its Liberal followers have made such a to do with the embarrassing photos of Iraqi soldiers. Get a grip. This type of behavior occurs in war time. While it's deplorable that it occurred, it does happen. America acts like Saints in comparison to other countries or its enemies. We know that our enemy in Iraq has done much worse things to our POW's and the American/British soldiers that they took hostage. Why haven't the Liberals and the media publicized such activity? Does everyone forget that Private Jessica Lynch was raped by Iraqi soldiers? Were the soldiers who raped her the prisoners in the photos?

While the media has spent little or no time reporting the abuses that Iraqi militants have committed against Americans, they have spent days reporting on the Iraqi prisoner scandal. Recently Nick Berg, a U.S. citizen was kidnapped. The animals that kidnapped him, chopped his head off. Where were the Liberals and the the media? There was very limited reporting on the Nick Berg execution. Don't Nick Berg and his family deserve better?

Liberals must wake up. The Iraqi prisoner situation has been over reported. It's definitely not as bad as chopping someone's head off. The very people that the Liberals are defending are not the nicest people on earth. They're not a bunch of innocent prisoners of war. The media should report on the horrible crimes that these prisoners committed. They are not innocent victims. They're a bunch of horrible people. I don't believe that Liberals really care about these prisoners. All they care about is humiliating America.

For American soldiers to make the special forces, they are put through much worse situations then the Iraqi soldiers were put through. They are put through much worse things then being photographed in the nude. Come on people. Stop hating America. Start hating our enemy. Allow America to do anything it needs to win the war on terror. Support our troops. Allow them to fight the good fight without being held up to a microscope. If you are going to point fingers, make sure you're pointing them right back at the enemy.

It's time that Liberals in this country start sending a message to our enemies that they will support this country. It's also time that we shut these Liberals up. We must not allow them to dictate American policy or culture. It's time for the public to forget about the Iraqi scandal and start embracing the Berg family. We must fight back for the crimes committed against Nick Berg. We must attack the scum that committed that crime.

While the Iraqi scandal was terrible, it was blown out of proportion. 1 hour of reporting would have been enough. The President of the United States apologized and took action. Enough is enough. The media should start reporting on the crimes that our enemies commit against us. It's time for Liberals to support America.

http://www.itstherightway.com/support.html

[Pale Rider]

This article may be a little out of date, but the message is as true now as it was then.

LIBERALS NEED TO START SUPPORTING AMERICA!!! NOT SCHEMING AND WORKING FOR IT'S DEFEAT!!!

[loosecannon]

Why haven't the Liberals and the media publicized such activity? Does everyone forget that Private Jessica Lynch was raped by Iraqi soldiers?

That never happened according to Lynch. She was taken to a hospital where she was rescued from doctors who were treating her injuries.

The article is bunko. The one point that really sticks out is the commentary about the Iraq war.

Who is the enemy? Because all the authorities from Rummy to Gates to the pres have acknowledged that the foreign terrorists are barely a presence, which means we are fighting the very people we "aimed " to liberate. Iraqis.

It is a twisted mission statement, it can't be accomplished militarily, we aren't welcome.

Why would anybody support the pres in his mission of Madness in Iraq?

[Hagbard Celine]

Disagreeing with bad policy and an administration that represents my views and goals by a factor of zero does not make me unpatriotic nor does it make me a "bad" American.

[darin]

Disagreeing with bad policy and an administration that represents my views and goals by a factor of zero does not make me unpatriotic nor does it make me a "bad" American.

No - Liberal Democrats' (if that's you, fine) expressed desire for the US to fail in Iraq makes them/you a bad American.

(shrug)

[Birdzeye]

Posting an opinion piece that makes false allegations without bothering to prove them doesn't prove a damned thing. This thread is nothing but flame bait planted by the thread parent; it seems to be his specialty.


It's also time that we shut these Liberals up.

The writer clearly has no love of the freedoms we have in this country, if he calls for silencing a group of people because of their political viewpoints. Where do they do that? Oh, yes, in dictatorships like Cuba, North Korea and Saudi Arabia.

[Birdzeye]

Disagreeing with bad policy and an administration that represents my views and goals by a factor of zero does not make me unpatriotic nor does it make me a "bad" American.

:clap:

[Hagbard Celine]

No - Liberal Democrats' (if that's you, fine) expressed desire for the US to fail in Iraq makes them/you a bad American.

(shrug)

If our goal in Iraq was to set-up a stable democratic government then we've already failed. Continuing to occupy Iraq based on some false ideology and sacrificing an endless stream of US soldiers for it is wrong and I won't support it. If in your black and white world that means I'm "hoping the US will fail" then so be it.

(shrug/silent toot/skidmark)

[nevadamedic]

No - Liberal Democrats' (if that's you, fine) expressed desire for the US to fail in Iraq makes them/you a bad American.

(shrug)

Jessica Lynch did admit to being raped. Once again Cannon open's his/her mouth without knowing what the heel he/she is talking about.

[nevadamedic]

Posting an opinion piece that makes false allegations without bothering to prove them doesn't prove a damned thing. This thread is nothing but flame bait planted by the thread parent; it seems to be his specialty.



The writer clearly has no love of the freedoms we have in this country, if he calls for silencing a group of people because of their political viewpoints. Where do they do that? Oh, yes, in dictatorships like Cuba, North Korea and Saudi Arabia.

No, you moron's are to stupid to realize that you are enabeling the enemy.

[Birdzeye]

No, you moron's are to stupid to realize that you are enabeling the enemy.

I'll ignore the unprovoked insults and respectfully ask you to prove that - if you dare.

[nevadamedic]

I'll ignore the unprovoked insults and respectfully ask you to prove that - if you dare.

Violent jihadists now know that the elected leadership of Congress would undermine the troops by holding their funding hostage to demands for surrender.

This Democratic Congress would bring us back to the dark days of the 1970s, when the world doubted our staying power. Except only much worse. Withdraw our troops and the very next day Iraq becomes an unchecked den of terrorism at the heart of the Middle East -- a new base for the same people that struck our homeland on September 11th.

[Birdzeye]

Violent jihadists now know that the elected leadership of Congress would undermine the troops by holding their funding hostage to demands for surrender.

This Democratic Congress would bring us back to the dark days of the 1970s, when the world doubted our staying power. Except only much worse. Withdraw our troops and the very next day Iraq becomes an unchecked den of terrorism at the heart of the Middle East -- a new base for the same people that struck our homeland on September 11th.

So, do you have any real, reliable evidence to back up your allegation that liberals are on the side of the enemy? All you provided was opinion and conjecture. That doesn't prove jackshit.

[typomaniac]

If liberals didn't care about America, they wouldn't be liberals in the first place. They wouldn't "be anything," politically. Put another way, anyone who is politically involved supports America. Period.

I can't believe that such mindless articles like the one in the OP even get read, let alone published.

[nevadamedic]

So, do you have any real, reliable evidence to back up your allegation that liberals are on the side of the enemy? All you provided was opinion and conjecture. That doesn't prove jackshit.

Did I say they were on the side of the enemy? I said they enable the enemy with their actions.

[Birdzeye]

Did I say they were on the side of the enemy? I said they enable the enemy with their actions.

So prove it. I'm sick and tired of hearing that same old tripe being spewed over and over and over again, but never seeing a shred of reliable evidence to back that up, despite repeated requests.

[glockmail]

If our goal in Iraq was to set-up a stable democratic government then we've already failed. Continuing to occupy Iraq based on some false ideology and sacrificing an endless stream of US soldiers for it is wrong and I won't support it. If in your black and white world that means I'm "hoping the US will fail" then so be it.

(shrug/silent toot/skidmark)

So how many soldiers did we lose fighting in Europe after we let evil steep for so long? Is that what you suggest we do? If so the blitzkreig will begin with nukes and be even more costly.

[typomaniac]

So prove it. I'm sick and tired of hearing that same old tripe being spewed over and over and over again, but never seeing a shred of reliable evidence to back that up, despite repeated requests.

The partisan twits will never back up this claim with evidence, because no such evidence exists. I thought you already knew that, Ms. Birdzeye.

[glockmail]

So prove it. I'm sick and tired of hearing that same old tripe being spewed over and over and over again, but never seeing a shred of reliable evidence to back that up, despite repeated requests. Dude, don't you listen to what your lib congress has been saying about the Prez and this war? What more proof do you need? Harry Reid on the receiveing end of bin Laden's dick? Nancy Pelosi getting the wood from the Syrain President?

[Birdzeye]

The partisan twits will never back up this claim with evidence, because no such evidence exists. I thought you already knew that, Ms. Birdzeye.

Actually, I do, but I figure if I keep asking for the evidence every time they make those allegations, and they fail to provide anything of substance, it becomes clear that they are full of shit.

[typomaniac]

Actually, I do, but I figure if I keep asking for the evidence every time they make those allegations, and they fail to provide anything of substance, it becomes clear that they are full of shit.And pornography, apparently, to listen to schlockmale.

[glockmail]

Actually, I do, but I figure if I keep asking for the evidence every time they make those allegations, and they fail to provide anything of substance, it becomes clear that they are full of shit. That bird I blasted out of the tree this morning was full of shit.

[glockmail]

And pornography, apparently, to listen to schlockmale. You're just pissed because I zinged you back with twice the power, bro, because I broke "your rules". :laugh2: What a douchebag.

[Birdzeye]

Dude, don't you listen to what your lib congress has been saying about the Prez and this war? What more proof do you need? Harry Reid on the receiveing end of bin Laden's dick? Nancy Pelosi getting the wood from the Syrain President?

Uh huh. And what does that prove? You are taking a huge leap of logic here. Sure, they've criticized the president, and imo it was spot on. Your comments about Reid and Pelosi are laughable and prove nothing.

[typomaniac]

You're just pissed because I zinged you back with twice the power, bro, because I broke "your rules". :laugh2: What a douchebag.
Not really: I've always been, let's say, "disappointed" in you. In that regard, I'm no different from anyone else on this board.

[Abbey Marie]

So prove it. I'm sick and tired of hearing that same old tripe being spewed over and over and over again, but never seeing a shred of reliable evidence to back that up, despite repeated requests.

You mean like this:

So prove it. I'm sick and tired of hearing that same old "Bush lied" tripe being spewed over and over and over again, but never seeing a shred of reliable evidence to back that up, despite repeated requests.

[Birdzeye]

You mean like this:

So prove it. I'm sick and tired of hearing that same old "Bush lied" tripe being spewed over and over and over again, but never seeing a shred of reliable evidence to back that up, despite repeated requests.

I think there are many examples of statements that Bush has made that turned out not to be true. If you want to assert that he never "lied" with those misstatements, iow, didn't intend to deceive, then have it your way. His credibility is shot and I won't believe anything he says now.

[typomaniac]

You mean like this:

So prove it. I'm sick and tired of hearing that same old "Bush lied" tripe being spewed over and over and over again, but never seeing a shred of reliable evidence to back that up, despite repeated requests.Every holder of public office has lied. There are no exceptions.

That anyone would try to deny it in Bush's case indicates only that:

1. They are being paid to be obstructionist,

OR

2. They are just easily taken in.

[glockmail]

Uh huh. And what does that prove? You are taking a huge leap of logic here. Sure, they've criticized the president, and imo it was spot on. Your comments about Reid and Pelosi are laughable and prove nothing.

No leap of logic that Reid and Pelosi have both given aid and comfort to our enemies. I don't expect you libs to recognize or admit that though.

[glockmail]

Not really: I've always been, let's say, "disappointed" in you. In that regard, I'm no different from anyone else on this board. My life revolves around your opinion of me. :rolleyes:

[glockmail]

Every holder of public office has lied. There are no exceptions.

That anyone would try to deny it in Bush's case indicates only that:

1. They are being paid to be obstructionist,

OR

2. They are just easily taken in.

Funny I don't see you saying Reid lied, Pelosi lied, or any other lib.

[typomaniac]

Funny I don't see you saying Reid lied, Pelosi lied, or any other lib.I'm sure they have, but don't ask me what they lied about, because I have no idea.

[nevadamedic]

I think there are many examples of statements that Bush has made that turned out not to be true. If you want to assert that he never "lied" with those misstatements, iow, didn't intend to deceive, then have it your way. His credibility is shot and I won't believe anything he says now.

Im sure you also believe that Clinton never inhaled.

[nevadamedic]

Funny I don't see you saying Reid lied, Pelosi lied, or any other lib.

Reid has lied and committed a number of felonies while in office. We have tracked them all. We have just started a campaign against Dirty Harry, he is a disgrace to our state and country.

[nevadamedic]

Dirty Harry could atleast give the troops a reach around while he screws them.

[glockmail]

Reid has lied and committed a number of felonies while in office. We have tracked them all. We have just started a campaign against Dirty Harry, he is a disgrace to our state and country.
:link:

[Birdzeye]

Im sure you also believe that Clinton never inhaled.

No. What a silly comment to make.

[Birdzeye]

Reid has lied and committed a number of felonies while in office. We have tracked them all. We have just started a campaign against Dirty Harry, he is a disgrace to our state and country.

:link:

[nevadamedic]

:link:

I have pleanty of information about it on my website but I got nailed for putting a link to it already. If you want the link to my page I guess youll have to send me a private message because im going to respect the Mod's wishes. Here is a link that goes into detail what he and other Democrats have done that is dirty while in office. http://www.noagenda.org/democrats/harry_reid/
:finger3:

[typomaniac]

Here is a link that goes into detail what he and other Democrats have done that is dirty while in office. :finger3:
In your own words: "Your not to bright." :lol:

[glockmail]

I have pleanty of information about it on my website but I got nailed for putting a link to it already. If you want the link to my page I guess youll have to send me a private message because im going to respect the Mod's wishes. Here is a link that goes into detail what he and other Democrats have done that is dirty while in office. http://www.noagenda.org/democrats/harry_reid/
:finger3:
The place for your personal link is:
control panel/ edit profile/ home page URL

How can they nail you fer that?

[Abbey Marie]

I think there are many examples of statements that Bush has made that turned out not to be true. If you want to assert that he never "lied" with those misstatements, iow, didn't intend to deceive, then have it your way. His credibility is shot and I won't believe anything he says now.

Things "turning out not to be true" which can include mistakes, and "lying", which requires intent, can be very different things.

However, you are going off point. The point is, that it is hypocritical to complain that we rail against Pelosi and Reid with no proof, when you all do the same, endlessly, about our President. Which way do you want it?

[Birdzeye]

I have pleanty of information about it on my website but I got nailed for putting a link to it already. If you want the link to my page I guess youll have to send me a private message because im going to respect the Mod's wishes. Here is a link that goes into detail what he and other Democrats have done that is dirty while in office. http://www.noagenda.org/democrats/harry_reid/
:finger3:

You call a link to a website with a clearly pro-GOP bias (all the bad guys listed are Democrats; they ignore the GOP bad boys altogether) credible? :rolleyes:

Try again. I'm sure you don't need your own website to do that.

[nevadamedic]

:link:



http://www.thereidworld.com/hypocrisy/?id=18

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/email/s_475468.html

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2006/10/the_media_scandal.html

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8KMJ8I00&show_article=1

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10162006/postopinion/opedcolumnists/reids_smelly_windfall_opedcolumnists_ed_morrissey. htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/16/AR2006101600525.html

Doo you need anymore? I can go on all day.

[Birdzeye]

Things "turning out not to be true" which can include mistakes, and "lying", which requires intent, can be very different things.

However, you are going off point. The point is, that it is hypocritical to com-plain that we rail against Pelosi and Reid with no proof, when you all do the same, endlessly, about our President. Which way do you want it?

I think it was you who went off point. The issue originally was the allegation that liberals are, well, traitors, a point that I challenged others to prove, adding that I was tired of hearing the same crap over and over again without proof. At that point YOU stepped in and made a similar complaint about the allegations that Bush lied.

[glockmail]

http://www.thereidworld.com/hypocrisy/?id=18

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/email/s_475468.html

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2006/10/the_media_scandal.html

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8KMJ8I00&show_article=1

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10162006/postopinion/opedcolumnists/reids_smelly_windfall_opedcolumnists_ed_morrissey. htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/16/AR2006101600525.html

Doo you need anymore? I can go on all day.

Birdie man will never admit that either of his lib heros are anything other than virginal.

[Birdzeye]

Birdie man will never admit that either of his lib heros are anything other than virginal.

I looked at the first three links and found them of no value. One was to an organization that had a clear anti-Reid axe to grind; the other two were editorials which contribute nothing to an argument.

Need I go on?

[Abbey Marie]

I think it was you who went off point. The issue originally was the allegation that liberals are, well, traitors, a point that I challenged others to prove, adding that I was tired of hearing the same crap over and over again without proof. At that point YOU stepped in and made a similar complaint about the allegations that Bush lied.

You're trying to twist, and it isn't working. To stay on point one would have had to respond to the content of this particular thread. Your introducing the complaint that you are tired of hearing our allegations on the board is exactly what went off point. I responded to the hypocrisy of it. Someone responding to your post cannot possibly going off point. That's illogical.

So, which way do you wish it to be? Should we only discuss provable points? 'Cause that's really gonna put a damper on the Bushphobia around here. :)

[typomaniac]

You're trying to twist, and it isn't working. To stay on point one would have had to respond to the content of this particular thread. Your introducing the complaint that you are tired of hearing our allegations on the board is exactly what went off point. I responded to the hypocrisy of it. Someone responding to your post cannot possibly going off point. That's illogical.

So, which way do you wish it to be? Should we only discuss provable points? 'Cause that's really gonna put a damper on the Bushphobia around here. :)

You're comparing apples and oranges. Calling everyone who disagrees with you a criminal and a traitor is nothing like calling a specific public figure a criminal and a traitor. I really expected more honesty from you, Abbey.

[glockmail]

I looked at the first three links and found them of no value. One was to an organization that had a clear anti-Reid axe to grind; the other two were editorials which contribute nothing to an argument.

Need I go on?

You've already proven my point. Thanks.

:laugh2:

[Abbey Marie]

You're comparing apples and oranges. Calling everyone who disagrees with you a criminal and a traitor is nothing like calling a specific public figure a criminal and a traitor. I really expected more honesty from you, Abbey.

I disagree. Each lacks proof and each gets tiresome. We have had to hear this nonsense about the President for 6 years.

But further, I would argue that calling a specific person, and the leader of your own country, no less, a traitor, a criminal and a liar with no proof, is much worse than accusing an amorphous group of nameless individuals.

Thanks for the sort-of compliment, though. :)

[Birdzeye]

You've already proven my point. Thanks.

:laugh2:


Like hell I have.

But perhaps it's time to get back to the thread topic, namely, the as yet unproven allegations that liberals are in bed with America's enemies. Anyone care to provide some credible evidence to back that up?

[glockmail]

Like hell I have.

....

Of course I have: you will never admit that your lib heros are anything other than virginal.

[typomaniac]

Of course I have: you will never admit that your lib heros are anything other than virginal.And you're never anything other than vaginal.

[Birdzeye]

Of course I have: you will never admit that your lib heros are anything other than virginal.

I never have made that claim, and you're putting words into my mouth.

Now, do you have any credible evidence to back up the allegation that liberals are in cahoots with "the enemy?" I certainly don't expect to ever hear you admit that it's an empty allegation without any evidence to back it up.

[nevadamedic]

The place for your personal link is:
control panel/ edit profile/ home page URL

How can they nail you fer that?

I can put it there? It's not a personal page, it's something three of us has put together.

[glockmail]

I can put it there? It's not a personal page, it's something three of us has put together.
I'm not a rule maker so I don't know. But what the hell else would it be for? At one time I had the Drudge Report linked on mine.

[glockmail]

And you're never anything other than vaginal.
You need to STOP the sexual innuendos. Or else I'll run to admin and pull a hissy fit. :laugh2:

[nevadamedic]

I looked at the first three links and found them of no value. One was to an organization that had a clear anti-Reid axe to grind; the other two were editorials which contribute nothing to an argument.

Need I go on?

Nothing's ever good enough for you. You ask for links and I give you a few. Then they arn't good enough. Since when is The New York Post or other media outlets not credible, especially when the media is Liberal in general, they're not going to print something about another Liberal scumbag unless there is some evidence.

Also Reid admitted he gave holiday bonuses to the employee's of his Ritz Carlton Apartment out of his campaign fund, which is a felony. Then he calimed he didn't know it was against the law and paid it back out of his pocket so he wouldn't get charges brought on him. H must think were fool's. This man has been in office since the early 80's. He knew what he was doing was wrong when he did it, he was just rying to be cheap.

[glockmail]

I never have made that claim, and you're putting words into my mouth.

Now, do you have any credible evidence to back up the allegation that liberals are in cahoots with "the enemy?" I certainly don't expect to ever hear you admit that it's an empty allegation without any evidence to back it up.

As you have recently demonstrated your troll- ability to dismiss an 8 link smack-down on your liberal heros by clicking three and claiming foul because of the messengers, why would I waste time linking you to more proof and facts? You obviously are not interested in facts and CAN"T HANDLE THE TRUTH.

(A little Jack Nicholson there to make my point.)

[gabosaurus]

Why don't conservative Republicans support our troops? You only support their right to die abroad.

[Pale Rider]

I never have made that claim, and you're putting words into my mouth.

Now, do you have any credible evidence to back up the allegation that liberals are in cahoots with "the enemy?" I certainly don't expect to ever hear you admit that it's an empty allegation without any evidence to back it up.

Just ask the leader of you liberals, dingy harry. He's already declared that we lost the war! What do you think that did for the moral of our heroic forces in harms way? If that doesn't HELP and EMBOLDEN the enemy, I don't know what does.

Then top that off with that pie faced old ignorant fuck murtha calling our troops rapists and murderers, and there ya go. These stinking liberal pieces of shit do more for our ENEMY than they do for our OWN TROOPS.

Now sit down shut up. Your fifteen minutes of being a fool should be over.

[Pale Rider]

Why don't conservative Republicans support our troops? You only support their right to die abroad.

I can't even respond with any amount realavency. All I have to say is this has to be one the most ignorant, moronic, full of shit statements the board has seen to date, and even a new low for you, which never ceases to amaze me.

You are a vile, rancid bitch.

[glockmail]

I can't even respond with any amount realavency. All I have to say is this has to be one the most ignorant, moronic, full of shit statements the board has seen to date, and even a new low for you, which never ceases to amaze me.

You are a vile, rancid bitch. She did make one reasonable post yesterday- out of 790 or so.

[Birdzeye]

Just ask the leader of you liberals, dingy harry. He's already declared that we lost the war! What do you think that did for the moral of our heroic forces in harms way? If that doesn't HELP and EMBOLDEN the enemy, I don't know what does.

Then top that off with that pie faced old ignorant fuck murtha calling our troops rapists and murderers, and there ya go. These stinking liberal pieces of shit do more for our ENEMY than they do for our OWN TROOPS.

Now sit down shut up. Your fifteen minutes of being a fool should be over.

Nothing but conjecture and leaps of (il)logic on your part. You have jack shit for proof.

Now, if you want to see someone who is truly dangerous for America, I submit that it is the person you quoted in your first post. My evidence is right there in your post, and in your link. That scumbucket showed he has no regard for our freedoms when he said, "It's also time that we shut these Liberals up. "

[Birdzeye]

I can't even respond with any amount realavency. All I have to say is this has to be one the most ignorant, moronic, full of shit statements the board has seen to date, and even a new low for you, which never ceases to amaze me.

[Mindless and unprovoked personal attack removed]

So, you have no reasoned arguments and nothing but mindless personal attacks, eh?

[glockmail]

Nothing but conjecture and leaps of (il)logic on your part. You have jack shit for proof.

Now, if you want to see someone who is truly dangerous for America, I submit that it is the person you quoted in your first post. My evidence is right there in your post, and in your link. That scumbucket showed he has no regard for our freedoms when he said, "It's also time that we shut these Liberals up. "

Are you denying that Reid and Murtha made those statements?

[Birdzeye]

Are you denying that Reid and Murtha made those statements?

No. I'm saying that your buddy hasn't provided any evidence to back up his allegation about liberals being in bed with "the enemy." Those quotes don't prove what he claims. He has, however, quoted one farrightnut who wants to strip liberals of their free speech rights, and he's been quite generous with the juvenile personal attacks on those who challenge him to back up his claims. That's all he has, personal attacks, no reasoned arguments.

[darin]

No. I'm saying that your buddy hasn't provided any evidence to back up his allegation about liberals being in bed with "the enemy." Those quotes don't prove what he claims. He has, however, quoted one farrightnut who wants to strip liberals of their free speech rights, and he's been quite generous with the juvenile personal attacks on those who challenge him to back up his claims. That's all he has, personal attacks, no reasoned arguments.

Hasn't SecDef briefed Terrorists claim to be emboldened by the likes of Democrats, and others', "We've Lost!" statements?

[glockmail]

No. I'm saying that your buddy hasn't provided any evidence to back up his allegation about liberals being in bed with "the enemy." Those quotes don't prove what he claims. He has, however, quoted one farrightnut who wants to strip liberals of their free speech rights, and he's been quite generous with the juvenile personal attacks on those who challenge him to back up his claims. That's all he has, personal attacks, no reasoned arguments. How are the Murtha and Reid comments to be taken, if not giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

[Birdzeye]

Hasn't SecDef briefed Terrorists claim to be emboldened by the likes of Democrats, and others', "We've Lost!" statements?

And what evidence does the SecDef have? And why should I believe him? After all, this is the administration that used the nonexistent WMDs as a rationale to get us into this ill-advised war.

[glockmail]

And what evidence does the SecDef have? And why should I believe him? After all, this is the administration that used the nonexistent WMDs as a rationale to get us into this ill-advised war. Didn't Murtha and Reid (along with Kerry, Clinton, and most of the Liberal gang) also state that Saddam had WMDs, and used this as part of their justification for supporting the war initially?

[Birdzeye]

And what does that have to do with the topic, namely, the still-unproven allegations that liberals are somehow helping the enemy? Can't you guys come up with anything of substance, say, a check from Moveon to Al Qaeda?

[glockmail]

And what does that have to do with the topic, namely, the still-unproven allegations that liberals are somehow helping the enemy? Can't you guys come up with anything of substance, say, a check from Moveon to Al Qaeda?


Nice attempt at Dodge and Weave, but your refusal to answer the question proves that you have no answer. And therefore the named liberals are traitors.

The evidence of a cancelled check is not required for a conviction. Besides, your heart throb George Soros probably pays in cash.

[Birdzeye]

Nice attempt at Dodge and Weave, but your refusal to answer the question proves that you have no answer. And therefore the named liberals are traitors.

The evidence of a cancelled check is not required for a conviction. Besides, your heart throb George Soros probably pays in cash.

I'm the one dodging and weaving?!?! :rolleyes:

Sounds like a bad case of projection that you have.

Notice that nobody has met my challenge to provide some credible evidence that liberals are in cahoots with the enemy, which is the issue, right? All anybody has provided are hateful screeds from farrightwing commentators (opinion is not evidence) and leaps of illogic.

And Soros is no more my heartthrob than George W. Bush is. :puke3:

Using the same illogic that your buddies have used, I could make a case that Bush and his cronies are helping the enemy by their stubborn insistence on prolonging a war that is going nowhere, accomplishing nothing but to make more enemies for us, thus making us more vulnerable to future terrorist attacks. I could, but I won't, because the "evidence" I've provided is every bit as flimsy as the "evidence" your buddies have provided.

[Pale Rider]

So, you have no reasoned arguments and nothing but mindless personal attacks, eh?

So these low life cowards and their statements are "HELPING" the troops. Please explain how?

[Birdzeye]

So these low life cowards and their statements are "HELPING" the troops. Please explain how?

The burden isn't on me to make the case. The burden is on YOU to back up your claims that liberals are "helping" the "enemy." So far you have failed miserably.

[nevadamedic]

So these low life cowards and their statements are "HELPING" the troops. Please explain how?

Don't worry about the birdy, she is incapible of knowning when she is wrong.

[Yurt]

If liberals didn't care about America, they wouldn't be liberals in the first place. They wouldn't "be anything," politically. Put another way, anyone who is politically involved supports America. Period.

I can't believe that such mindless articles like the one in the OP even get read, let alone published.

Eh? Communist party? Do they support America?

[Birdzeye]

Don't worry about the birdy, she is incapible of knowning when she is wrong.

How am I wrong? I've been challenging your ilk to back up the allelgations that liberals are in cahoots with the enemy, and all you (plural you, that is) have come up with is conjecture and mindless bullshit.

You not only have failed to provide any evidence that would hold up in a court of law, but you have failed to provide any reasoned argument why liberals' opposition to Bush and this war is immoral.

[glockmail]

[B][SIZE="2"] .....

Using the same illogic that your buddies have used, I could make a case that Bush and his cronies are helping the enemy by their stubborn insistence on prolonging a war that is going nowhere, accomplishing nothing but to make more enemies for us, thus making us more vulnerable to future terrorist attacks. I could, but I won't, because the "evidence" I've provided is every bit as flimsy as the "evidence" your buddies have provided.


Your logic is amazing: Bush is helping the enemy by fighting a war, but liberals are not helping the money by defunding our troops and claiming defeat. :laugh2:

Time to go shoot some more birds out of my trees.

[Birdzeye]

Your logic is amazing: Bush is helping the enemy by fighting a war, but liberals are not helping the money by defunding our troops and claiming defeat. :laugh2:

Time to go shoot some more birds out of my trees.

Not only are you not making any sense, but you are putting words in my mouth again. Please don't do that anymore.

I did not say that Bush is helping the enemy either, and your accusation that liberals are "defunding" the troops is bogus. Congress passed a funding bill; Bush didn't like it and vetoed it. How you can accuse anybody of defunding the troops under those circumstances is amazing "logic" in and of itself.

[glockmail]

Not only are you not making any sense, but you are putting words in my mouth again. Please don't do that anymore.

I did not say that Bush is helping the enemy either, and your accusation that liberals are "defunding" the troops is bogus. Congress passed a funding bill; Bush didn't like it and vetoed it. How you can accuse anybody of defunding the troops under those circumstances is amazing "logic" in and of itself.

The Democrats stated goal is to defund the troops. Do you deny this?

[Birdzeye]

The Democrats stated goal is to defund the troops. Do you deny this?

If their goal is to defund the troops, then why did they pass a bill to FUND them recently? You're making no sense at all.

The troops would have those funds now if Bush hadn't vetoed it because he wants carte blanche to keep this war going indefinitely.

[loosecannon]

Your logic is amazing: Bush is helping the enemy by fighting a war, but liberals are not helping the money by defunding our troops and claiming defeat. :laugh2:

Time to go shoot some more birds out of my trees.

Bush vetoed the funding.

Bush defunded the war.

The dem congress approved the funding.

Bush is feeding the troll of terrorism by engaging in a senseless war against the Iraqi population.

The pentagon, The Iraq study group, Robert Gates all agree.

Bush is not committing us to war against Iraq terrorists, but Iraqi citizens.

[loosecannon]

The Democrats stated goal is to defund the troops. Do you deny this?

The dems goal is to stay in office. That in mind they are pressuring Bush to end the war and are considering withdrawing Bush's congressional authorization.

But Bush single handedly defunded his own war.

[gabosaurus]

Libs like me DO support America. We are opposed to our country being destroyed from the inside by idiots like Bush. The Bushies have severely damaged our infrastructure through defunding of domestic programs. The Bushies have done zero to solve the problem of illegal immigration since taking office. The Bushies have seriously gutted social programs which, like it or not, help young people find alternatives to criminal career choices.
The Bushies are oblivious to all this because they are too busy fighting a war of their choosing. Bush apologists are too busy enjoying the bloodshed to realize what is going on.

[Birdzeye]

Libs like me DO support America. We are opposed to our country being destroyed from the inside by idiots like Bush. The Bushies have severely damaged our infrastructure through defunding of domestic programs. The Bushies have done zero to solve the problem of illegal immigration since taking office. The Bushies have seriously gutted social programs which, like it or not, help young people find alternatives to criminal career choices.
The Bushies are oblivious to all this because they are too busy fighting a war of their choosing. Bush apologists are too busy enjoying the bloodshed to realize what is going on.

And since most of us are taxpayers, we are financially supporting this country and this war, whether we like it or not.

[GW in Ohio]

No - Liberal Democrats' (if that's you, fine) expressed desire for the US to fail in Iraq makes them/you a bad American.

(shrug)

No liberal ever expressed a desire for us to "fail" in Iraq.

What we have said is:




This war should never have been started.
This war was started under false pretexts.
This war was fucked up from the start.
There is no way this thing can be "won."
George W. Bush is a fucking idiot.
Cheney is an incompetent horse's ass.
So is Rumsfeld.
Wolfowitz........pffffffft!


See the difference?

[typomaniac]

Eh? Communist party? Do they support America?I think they're totally wrong, but in their minds, they hope to bring about a positive change in America, and it follows that they support America.

[TheStripey1]

Your logic is amazing: Bush is helping the enemy by fighting a war, but liberals are not helping the money by defunding our troops and claiming defeat. :laugh2:

Time to go shoot some more birds out of my trees.

Congress gave bush the money, he vetoed the bill... so the blame for the troops not having their money lays at his feet... no one elses.

instead of shooting helpless defenseless birds, glocky, why don't you take out your aggression in a manly fashion... enlist.

[typomaniac]

Congress gave bush the money, he vetoed the bill... so the blame for the troops not having their money lays at his feet... no one elses.

instead of shooting helpless defenseless birds, glocky, why don't you take out your aggression in a manly fashion... enlist.Haven't you seen that photo of him? It'd make a recruiting sergeant laugh his ass off!

[Pale Rider]

Congress gave bush the money, he vetoed the bill... so the blame for the troops not having their money lays at his feet... no one else's.

instead of shooting helpless defenseless birds, glocky, why don't you take out your aggression in a manly fashion... enlist.

What about the surrender deadline, and the billions of dollars of pork the liberal white flag unit wrote into the bill? When they were fully aware the president was going to veto it but they did it anyway? That lays the blame FULLY at the feet of the white flag liberals that played POLITICS with money that was supposed to be used solely for the troops. They're a pack of conniving bastards to treat our troops that way.

[Birdzeye]

What about the surrender deadline, and the billions of dollars of pork the liberal white flag unit wrote into the bill? When they were fully aware the president was going to veto it but they did it anyway? That lays the blame FULLY at the feet of the white flag liberals that played POLITICS with money that was supposed to be used solely for the troops. They're a pack of conniving bastards to treat our troops that way.

And Bush is completely innocent of playing politics with this issue? Puh-leeze!

Bush could have had the funds he asked for, courtesy of the congressional bill he vetoed, which was passed with votes from a lot of liberal congresscritters. They just wanted in return some reasonable limits on Bush's continued warmongering.

[typomaniac]

Not to mention playing politics with the troops themselves by sending NG units halfway around the world and giving everyone multiple extended tours of duty until they crack up. Just because the CIC is too chickenshit to call for a draft. The only place the white feather belongs is in the white house.

[Gaffer]

I looked at the first three links and found them of no value. One was to an organization that had a clear anti-Reid axe to grind; the other two were editorials which contribute nothing to an argument.

Need I go on?

Well since all these sites are out to nail ried for being the garbage tyhat he is, do you really expect to find a pro-ried site in there that is against ried and talks about the bad things he does. You asked for links about rieds negative actions and he gave them to you, of course they are GOP sites.

[Gaffer]

And Bush is completely innocent of playing politics with this issue? Puh-leeze!

Bush could have had the funds he asked for, courtesy of the congressional bill he vetoed, which was passed with votes from a lot of liberal congresscritters. They just wanted in return some reasonable limits on Bush's continued warmongering.

Congress purposely set the bill up with loads of pigshit and demands to take away power from the presidency. It was known he would be vetoing the bill bedause he would have too. That is purely the congress playing politics. If the bill were reaonable and Bush didn't sign it, it would have been easy to get a two thirds majority to over ride the veto. It was just congress playing political games with money for the troops. Nothing more than that, and that is dispicatble and shows the libs for the unAmerican unpatriotic morons they are.

They have divided the country with lies in order to get power in washington. Even al queda sends them congradulations on their victories. They continually show our enemies a divided nation and encourage them to continue fighting. Our enemy knows they can't beat us militarily, but they can beat us in washington with the help of their allies the liberal democrats. The longer the libs keep the division going the longer the war goes on and the more troops die.

iraq is a front in a worldwide war with islam. The liberals can only see their war with Bush.

[typomaniac]

iraq is a front in a worldwide war with islam.
:lame2:

If that were true we would have bombed Mecca by now.

[Birdzeye]

Congress purposely set the bill up with loads of pigshit and demands to take away power from the presidency. It was known he would be vetoing the bill bedause he would have too. That is purely the congress playing politics. If the bill were reaonable and Bush didn't sign it, it would have been easy to get a two thirds majority to over ride the veto. It was just congress playing political games with money for the troops. Nothing more than that, and that is dispicatble and shows the libs for the unAmerican unpatriotic morons they are.

They have divided the country with lies in order to get power in washington. Even al queda sends them congradulations on their victories. They continually show our enemies a divided nation and encourage them to continue fighting. Our enemy knows they can't beat us militarily, but they can beat us in washington with the help of their allies the liberal democrats. The longer the libs keep the division going the longer the war goes on and the more troops die.

iraq is a front in a worldwide war with islam. The liberals can only see their war with Bush.

You're making allegations again, and again, aren't providing a shred of proof to back them up. How long are you going to keep up that game? Show us the proof that "al queda sends them congradulations," "They continually show our enemies a divided nation and encourage them to continue fighting," and "they can beat us in washington with the help of their allies the liberal democrats."

It's way past put up or shut up time, so start putting up.

[glockmail]

If their goal is to defund the troops, then why did they pass a bill to FUND them recently? You're making no sense at all.

The troops would have those funds now if Bush hadn't vetoed it because he wants carte blanche to keep this war going indefinitely.

Don't be a douchebag. Their bill had automatic failure provisions that Bush told them from the get-go would get his veto.

Damn, where's that extra box of bird shot?

[Birdzeye]

Don't be a douchebag. Their bill had automatic failure provisions that Bush told them from the get-go would get his veto.

Damn, where's that extra box of bird shot?

So Congress is supposed to roll over and play dead because Bush behaves like a spoiled brat? :rolleyes:

Face it, the war does not have the support of the people, and Bush is giving the public the finger by keeping the war going. It's high time Congress grew a pair and started pressuring Bush to wind down our involvement in what has now become a civil war.

[Abbey Marie]

Here's a little tidbit from ABC News after the 2006 elections, that shows which party al Qaeda feels a kinship with.

Apparently, a Dem win is an al Qaeda win.



Al Qaeda Sends a Message to DemocratsDecember 22, 2006 2:28 PM
Brian Ross and Hoda Osman Report

Al Qaeda has sent a message to leaders of the Democratic party that credit for the defeat of congressional Republicans belongs to the terrorists.

In a portion of the tape from al Qaeda No. 2 man, Ayman al Zawahri, made available only today, Zawahri says he has two messages for American Democrats.

"The first is that you aren't the ones who won the midterm elections, nor are the Republicans the ones who lost. Rather, the Mujahideen -- the Muslim Ummah's vanguard in Afghanistan and Iraq -- are the ones who won, and the American forces and their Crusader allies are the ones who lost," Zawahri said, according to a full transcript obtained by ABC News.
...
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/12/al_qaeda_sends_.html

[Birdzeye]

I'm just not seeing in that blog where Zawahri is overjoyed over the Democrats' victory. In fact, he says that the Democrats didn't win and the GOPers didn't lose.

[lily]

Here's a little tidbit from ABC News after the 2006 elections, that shows which party al Qaeda feels a kinship with.

Apparently, a Dem win is an al Qaeda win.



...
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/12/al_qaeda_sends_.html


Hmmmm......so now we are suppose to believe what the terrorists say? Sounds kinds un-American to me.

Face it, why on earth would they be congratualting Democrats when they have gotten everything they wanted from the Republicans?

[typomaniac]

Hmmmm......so now we are suppose to believe what the terrorists say? Sounds kinds un-American to me.

Face it, why on earth would they be congratualting Democrats when they have gotten everything they wanted from the Republicans?
To keep the Republicans in power. Why else? :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

[nevadamedic]

I can't even respond with any amount realavency. All I have to say is this has to be one the most ignorant, moronic, full of shit statements the board has seen to date, and even a new low for you, which never ceases to amaze me.

You are a vile, rancid bitch.

:clap: Pale ~~> :suck: <~~ Gabby

[loosecannon]

Don't be a douchebag. Their bill had automatic failure provisions that Bush told them from the get-go would get his veto.

Damn, where's that extra box of bird shot?


Well unfortunately for Bush, and you, the constitution provides the congress with BOTH the authorities to budget funds and declare war.

The pres asked for the money for his final attempt to get it done in Iraq after 4 years of failures. Congress allocated the funds.

BUSH refused the money because he wants authoritiues that the const does NOT grant him. IOW he wants the moon and stars.

But Congress is only giving him one more chance, till Sept and that's it.

Deal with it and quit your whining.

[Birdzeye]

:clap: Pale ~~> :suck: <~~ Gabby


That you would applaud someone else's unprovoked and mindless personal attack speaks volumes about you. Your buddy couldn't come up with a reasoned argument and resorted to a personal attack; I guess that would explain this latest display of yours of equally boorish behavior.

[loosecannon]

Here's a little tidbit from ABC News after the 2006 elections, that shows which party al Qaeda feels a kinship with.

Apparently, a Dem win is an al Qaeda win.





And in 04 BinLaden himself campaigned for Bush, blah blah, blah.

[Birdzeye]

Well unfortunately for Bush, and you, the constitution provides the congress with BOTH the authorities to budget funds and declare war.

The pres asked for the money for his final attempt to get it done in Iraq after 4 years of failures. Congress allocated the funds.

BUSH refused the money because he wants authoritiues that the const does NOT grant him. IOW he wants the moon and stars.

But Congress is only giving him one more chance, till Sept and that's it.

Deal with it and quit your whining.

:clap:

[Abbey Marie]

Hmmmm......so now we are suppose to believe what the terrorists say? Sounds kinds un-American to me.

Face it, why on earth would they be congratualting Democrats when they have gotten everything they wanted from the Republicans?

I think it very wise to listen to what your enemies have to say. In fact there is a whole covert industry based on that belief. You must think it is preferable to stick your head in the sand, and hope that what you don't know won't hurt you.

Terrorists love the Dems' retreat approach. Sorry if that doesn't feel good to you- It wouldn't feel good to me either.

[Abbey Marie]

And in 04 BinLaden himself campaigned for Bush, blah blah, blah.

:link:

[Kathianne]

:link:

Gee, you doubt that post? Rep to you!

[loosecannon]

I think it very wise to listen to what your enemies have to say. In fact there is a whole covert industry based on that belief. You must think it is preferable to stick your head in the sand, and hope that what you don't know won't hurt you.

Terrorists love the Dems' retreat approach. Sorry if that doesn't feel good to you- It wouldn't feel good to me either.

pretty disingenuous Abbey.

There is a distinct diff between listening to and believing. You knew that too.

[loosecannon]

:link:

Whatever, the proposal has been presented that the dems are supporting the enemy by being opposed to the war and that the dem congress is aiding the enemy by resisting Bush's reach for unconstitutional powers.

Compared to those assertions the assertion that BinLaden campaigned for Bush in 04 is rock solid. Comparatively.

[loosecannon]

Terrorists love the Dems' retreat approach. Sorry if that doesn't feel good to you- It wouldn't feel good to me either.


And Bin Laden campaigned for Bush. Sorry if that doesn't feel good to you- It wouldn't feel good to me either.

[Abbey Marie]

And Bin Laden campaigned for Bush. Sorry if that doesn't feel good to you- It wouldn't feel good to me either.

:link:

[Abbey Marie]

pretty disingenuous Abbey.

There is a distinct diff between listening to and believing. You knew that too.

What's really disingenuous is to decide not to "believe" what they say when it doesn't suit you.

Terrorists love current Dem foreign policy. I can't help it if you don't like it.

[loosecannon]

What's really disingenuous is to decide not to "believe" what they say when it doesn't suit you.

Terrorists love current Dem foreign policy. I can't help it if you don't like it.


What terrorists Abbey?

Because Bin Laden Loves Bush like a brother.

The families are old freinds, all appearances indicate that Bush and BinLaden forged a truce after 9/11, and Bush has done two of the things BinLaden asked Bush to do.

He pulled ALL of our military bases out of SA, which is practically unthinkable considering the history of US military presence.

And he hasn't captured bin Laden or invaded pakistan (where BL actually is) or even pressured Pakistan to reign BL in.

AND Bin laden campaigned for Bush in 04.

AND the BA has served as a PR firm to recruit AQ members worldwide.

The war in Iraq is accomplishing all of Bin Laden's goals. Bush is the gift that just keeps giving more to the AQ terrorist threat.

I can't help it if the truth is so damning that you can't handle it. Bush practically spoon feeds and protects the terrorists who planned 9/11.


Deal with it.

[Kathianne]

:link:

Did I miss the link?

[loosecannon]

Did I miss the link?

You REALLY do not remember the video that was released 8-10 days before the 04 general election?

Tell me you are kidding.

[Kathianne]

Did I miss the link?

I may have missed a link, but I DO know I owe Loosecannon rep. I was dinged for this rep by this shitmeister.

[lily]

I think it very wise to listen to what your enemies have to say. In fact there is a whole covert industry based on that belief. You must think it is preferable to stick your head in the sand, and hope that what you don't know won't hurt you.

I just know propaganda when I see it and that statement that you posted is %100 grade A pure propaganda.......and I see the same "statement" every election. It's taunting and you fell for it.


Terrorists love the Dems' retreat approach. Sorry if that doesn't feel good to you- It wouldn't feel good to me either.


Well, that's your opinion and sorry Abbey that's all it is, since it hasn't happened yet, compared to them loving and thriving on what this administration has been doing.

[glockmail]

So Congress is supposed to roll over and play dead because Bush behaves like a spoiled brat? :rolleyes:

Face it, the war does not have the support of the people, and Bush is giving the public the finger by keeping the war going. It's high time Congress grew a pair and started pressuring Bush to wind down our involvement in what has now become a civil war.

Wars never have long term support of the people. Bush has a higher approval rating than congress. But we are a Republic, and Bush is the CIC. Its high time congress got with the program and write the check.

[Abbey Marie]

I just know propaganda when I see it and that statement that you posted is %100 grade A pure propaganda.......and I see the same "statement" every election. It's taunting and you fell for it.




Well, that's your opinion and sorry Abbey that's all it is, since it hasn't happened yet, compared to them loving and thriving on what this administration has been doing.


We will likely never agree, but I would like to thank you for debating civilly. :)

[loosecannon]

Wars never have long term support of the people. Bush has a higher approval rating than congress. But we are a Republic, and Bush is the CIC. Its high time congress got with the program and write the check.


Congress wrote the check.

Bush tore it up. Deal with it.

Bush wants the congress to additionally authorize non constitutional authorities to the Failure in chief. No deal. He is a loser. He always fails.

He got the money he asked for, Bush tore up the check.

[lily]

We will likely never agree, but I would like to thank you for debating civilly. :)

Same here.

[lily]

There was a man who thought like Loosecannon, his name was Adolf Hitler.


Fascinating!

[Birdzeye]

I think it very wise to listen to what your enemies have to say. In fact there is a whole covert industry based on that belief. You must think it is preferable to stick your head in the sand, and hope that what you don't know won't hurt you.

Terrorists love the Dems' retreat approach. Sorry if that doesn't feel good to you- It wouldn't feel good to me either.

:link:

[avatar4321]

Congress wrote the check.

Bush tore it up. Deal with it.

Bush wants the congress to additionally authorize non constitutional authorities to the Failure in chief. No deal. He is a loser. He always fails.

He got the money he asked for, Bush tore up the check.

Passing legislation to slow bleed the troops is hardly writing the check. You can't tell the President the troops will get the money only if we make them bleed for political purposes, get tons of money for ourself, and tell our enemy when we are going to retreat then expect the President or the troops to accept such outrageous nonsense. Especially when its unconstitutional for the Congress to do so.

[Birdzeye]

Wars never have long term support of the people. Bush has a higher approval rating than congress. But we are a Republic, and Bush is the CIC. Its high time congress got with the program and write the check.

Congress wrote the check. How many times do I have to remind you of that? They exercised their preogative to set some terms, and Bush vetoed the bill.

Please show me where in the Constitution it says that Congress is obliged to do the president's bidding, exactly on his terms.

And you may crow about the Congress having a lower approval rating than Bush, but if the difference is only 3%, which is less than the margin of error, then the most valid conclusion one can make is that the public has nearly equal disdain for both Bush and Congress.

This may be a republic, but that's no excuse to defy the will of the people.

[Birdzeye]

Passing legislation to slow bleed the troops is hardly writing the check. You can't tell the President the troops will get the money only if we make them bleed for political purposes, get tons of money for ourself, and tell our enemy when we are going to retreat then expect the President or the troops to accept such outrageous nonsense. Especially when its unconstitutional for the Congress to do so.

The outrageous nonsense is Bush's petulant insistence that he keep carte blanche to keep this war going indefinitely. Congress acted responsibly to put him on notice that they won't give him that. Maybe now he'll have to do something that he's unaccustomed to doing, namely, NEGOTIATE with Congress.

[GW in Ohio]

What about the surrender deadline, and the billions of dollars of pork the liberal white flag unit wrote into the bill? When they were fully aware the president was going to veto it but they did it anyway? That lays the blame FULLY at the feet of the white flag liberals that played POLITICS with money that was supposed to be used solely for the troops. They're a pack of conniving bastards to treat our troops that way.

Do you neocons ever feel ashamed that you helped to elect a chickenshit CinC who dodged Vietnam when his generation was sent off to fight, and now is trying to redeem his manhood by sending other people's sons off on a completely bullshit mission in Iraq?

And when your fellow Americans stand up and say the mission is bullshit and we should bring our people home before any more of them are sacrificed to Bush and Cheney's ambitions, you say they're "not supporting the troops?"

[Birdzeye]

Do you neocons ever feel ashamed that you helped to elect a chickenshit CinC who dodged Vietnam when his generation was sent off to fight, and now is trying to redeem his manhood by sending other people's sons off on a completely bullshit mission in Iraq?

And when your fellow Americans stand up and say the mission is bullshit and we should bring our people home before any more of them are sacrificed to Bush and Cheney's ambitions, you say they're "not supporting the troops?"

:clap:

[Doniston]

Passing legislation to slow bleed the troops is hardly writing the check. You can't tell the President the troops will get the money only if we make them bleed for political purposes, get tons of money for ourself, and tell our enemy when we are going to retreat then expect the President or the troops to accept such outrageous nonsense. Especially when its unconstitutional for the Congress to do so. It is NOt unconstitutional to "REQUEST" anything they so desire. It would only become unconstitutional if the Pres when along with it, and I even doubt that would be true.

[loosecannon]

Passing legislation to slow bleed the troops is hardly writing the check. You can't tell the President the troops will get the money only if we make them bleed for political purposes, get tons of money for ourself, and tell our enemy when we are going to retreat then expect the President or the troops to accept such outrageous nonsense. Especially when its unconstitutional for the Congress to do so.

First off the authorization doesn't slow bleed anything.

It sets a deadline for either succeeding under bush's last attempt or accepting the failure as permanent.

Second the suplemental spending bill is in no way required to be exclusively for troops. In fact NONE of the previous supplemental budgets were and Bush never complained before.

Besides setting the budget is the CONGRESS' responsibility.

Third Bush has been granted MORE authority than is legal. He is being given the funds he asked for a LAST attempt.

If Bush is still FAILING in Sept his excess authorities will be pulled.

[glockmail]

Congress wrote the check. How many times do I have to remind you of that? They exercised their preogative to set some terms, and Bush vetoed the bill.

Please show me where in the Constitution it says that Congress is obliged to do the president's bidding, exactly on his terms.

And you may crow about the Congress having a lower approval rating than Bush, but if the difference is only 3%, which is less than the margin of error, then the most valid conclusion one can make is that the public has nearly equal disdain for both Bush and Congress.

This may be a republic, but that's no excuse to defy the will of the people.

:laugh2:

You're so blind to reality all I can do at this point with you is laugh.

:laugh2:

Oh, yeah- I got more bird shot from WalMart last night. :poke:

[glockmail]

Do you neocons ever feel ashamed that you helped to elect a chickenshit CinC who dodged Vietnam when his generation was sent off to fight, and now is trying to redeem his manhood by sending other people's sons off on a completely bullshit mission in Iraq?

And when your fellow Americans stand up and say the mission is bullshit and we should bring our people home before any more of them are sacrificed to Bush and Cheney's ambitions, you say they're "not supporting the troops?"


You've really turned into a huge asshole lately.

[Birdzeye]

You've really turned into a huge asshole lately.

Ah, so you have no reasoned counter argument to present, only personal attacks.

[Birdzeye]

:laugh2:

You're so blind to reality all I can do at this point with you is laugh.

:laugh2:

Oh, yeah- I got more bird shot from WalMart last night. :poke:

Now, do you have any reasoned arguments to present, or just vacuous nonsense like this?

[loosecannon]

You've really turned into a huge asshole lately.

GW was right on the money. In fact I should rep him.

[loosecannon]

Now, do you have any reasoned arguments to present, or just vacuous nonsense like this?

B. suction sounds

[Birdzeye]

B. suction sounds


:laugh2:

[glockmail]

Now, do you have any reasoned arguments to present, or just vacuous nonsense like this? I responded shit for shit, pal.

[glockmail]

GW was right on the money. In fact I should rep him. I think you should boink him too.

[typomaniac]

I responded shit for shit, pal.
Because you're totally incapable of talking anything BUT shit.

With any luck, your days of talking it on this particular site will be limited.

[Birdzeye]

I responded shit for shit, pal.

That's all your side has presented in this thread, nothing but unadulterated shit. You greet challenges to back up your claims with nonsense, and a generous helping of irrational hostility.

[glockmail]

Because you're totally incapable of talking anything BUT shit.

With any luck, your days of talking it on this particular site will be limited.


That's all your side has presented in this thread, nothing but unadulterated shit. You greet challenges to back up your claims with nonsense, and a generous helping of irrational hostility.


Liberal swine and swill. Neither of you deserve to live free in this country.

[Birdzeye]

Liberal swine and swill. Neither of you deserve to live free in this country.

And you do? :rolleyes:

With that attitude, you've just shown your disdain for the freedoms that we enjoy here and which others envy. I know a few countries where you might feel more comfortable, like, North Korea.

[glockmail]

And you do? :rolleyes:

With that attitude, you've just shown your disdain for the freedoms that we enjoy here and which others envy. I know a few countries where you might feel more comfortable, like, North Korea. I think a free trip to NK or Cuba would be an excellent solution for you, commie. Pick one.

[Birdzeye]

I think a free trip to NK or Cuba would be an excellent solution for you, commie. Pick one.

I don't remember ever having joined the Communist Party. And it's news to me that anybody who isn't conservatively correct is by definition a commie.

But I'm sure the lack of freedoms in those two countries will suit you just fine.

[glockmail]

I don't remember ever having joined the Communist Party. And it's news to me that anybody who isn't conservatively correct is by definition a commie...... Then you finally learned something today, bird brain. :laugh2:

[Birdzeye]

Then you finally learned something today, bird brain. :laugh2:

If you intended "bird brain" to be an insult, it really backfired:

http://www.alexfoundation.org/index2.htm

[glockmail]

If you intended "bird brain" to be an insult, it really backfired:

http://www.alexfoundation.org/index2.htm


The goal of The Alex Foundation is to support research that will expand the base of knowledge establishing the cognitive and communicative abilities of parrots as intelligent beings. These findings will be used to encourage the responsible ownership of parrots, conservation and preservation of parrots in the wild, and veterinary research into the psychological diseases and care of these birds. Through these efforts, The Alex Foundation will accomplish its mission to improve the lives of parrots.

This explains a lot. Fucking commie parrot. :laugh2:

[Birdzeye]

This explains a lot. Fucking commie parrot. :laugh2:

Parrots aren't commies. At least my three have the position that "What's mine is mine and what's yours is mine." :coffee:

[glockmail]

Parrots aren't commies. At least my three have the position that "What's mine is mine and what's yours is mine." :coffee:
No wonder you're so stoopid. All that bird crap that you're breathing. Filthy pests.

[MtnBiker]

You've really turned into a huge asshole lately.


Then you finally learned something today, bird brain. :laugh2:


This explains a lot. Fucking commie parrot. :laugh2:


No wonder you're so stoopid. All that bird crap that you're breathing. Filthy pests.

Hey Glockmail, keep the personal insults to a minimum, it just isn't necessary.

MtnBiker

[loosecannon]

This explains a lot. Fucking commie parrot. :laugh2:

fucking neocon parrot:laugh2:

[glockmail]

fucking neocon parrot:laugh2: Eat bird shit.

:pee:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Conservative claims to have patriotism sewn up as one of their virtues is laughable and ignorant in and of itself, namecalling aside.

[nevadamedic]

I don't remember ever having joined the Communist Party. And it's news to me that anybody who isn't conservatively correct is by definition a commie.

But I'm sure the lack of freedoms in those two countries will suit you just fine.

Just because Birdy is a Liberal doesn't mean shes a commie. I know im gonna regret saying that but oh well, I can play nice, sometimes. :laugh2:

[glockmail]

Conservative claims to have patriotism sewn up as one of their virtues is laughable and ignorant in and of itself, namecalling aside. You liberals think that destroying traditions and culture is patriotic.

[loosecannon]

You liberals think that destroying traditions and culture is patriotic.

LOL!

sure, you conservatives think that the earth is flat and 6000 yo

Howduya like those apples glock?

[glockmail]

LOL!

sure, you conservatives think that the earth is flat and 6000 yo

....

Perhaps you can point out where I have said anything to have you think that. :pee:

[Birdzeye]

You liberals think that destroying traditions and culture is patriotic.

Perhaps you can point out where we have said anything to have you think that.

[loosecannon]

Perhaps you can point out where I have said anything to have you think that. :pee:

Not necesary.

With the same authority with which you speak for libruls based on stereotypes and fantasy I can characterize your beliefs.

[glockmail]

Perhaps you can point out where we have said anything to have you think that.
You first.

[Birdzeye]

You first.

No, I asked first, so you can't use that as a dodge.

[glockmail]

No, I asked first, so you can't use that as a dodge.
Bullshit. I asked your bum-buddy first.

[Birdzeye]

You hurl insults at others and then have the gall to think you can make demands on others?!?!?!? Pathetic.

[glockmail]

You hurl insults at others and then have the gall to think you can make demands on others?!?!?!? Pathetic. I agree liberals are pathetic.

:laugh2:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

You liberals think that destroying traditions and culture is patriotic.

Perhaps you can point out where I have said anything to have you think that. :pee: :laugh2:

[nevadamedic]

I agree liberals are pathetic.

:laugh2:

:laugh2:

[gabosaurus]

I love how ConReps believe that the way to support America is to destroy it from the inside. Foster racial hate and prejudice. Start illegal wars and send Americans over to die in them. Allow our elected leaders to lie to us. Support a policy of aggression and terrorism. Suppress free speech, unless it is your side that is doing the speaking.
Love and sex are bad. Hate, violence and racism are good. It's the American way, right? No wonder we are in trouble. Perhaps when some of the older and more vapid conservative rednecks die off, we can return to peace and sanity.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

I love how ConReps believe that the way to support America is to destroy it from the inside. Foster racial hate and prejudice. Start illegal wars and send Americans over to die in them. Allow our elected leaders to lie to us. Support a policy of aggression and terrorism. Suppress free speech, unless it is your side that is doing the speaking.
Love and sex are bad. Hate, violence and racism are good. It's the American way, right? No wonder we are in trouble. Perhaps when some of the older and more vapid conservative rednecks die off, we can return to peace and sanity.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Neocon hatred dies hard, Gabby. Sometimes they repent before they die off but the damage is already done by then. They are a sad and pathetic bunch, those neocons.

[Pale Rider]

Neocon hatred dies hard, Gabby. Sometimes they repent before they die off but the damage is already done by then. They are a sad and pathetic bunch, those neocons.

Wow... such a deep and prophetic post. You obviously put so much hard thought into that. Mind boggling.


The only thing pathetic here is the vile bunch of liberal asswads that's frequently banned for their caustic cake holes.

[nevadamedic]

Wow... such a deep and prophetic post. You obviously put so much hard thought into that. Mind boggling.


The only thing pathetic here is the vile bunch of liberal asswads that's frequently banned for their caustic cake holes.

:clap: :laugh2: :clap:

[SassyLady]

The writer clearly has no love of the freedoms we have in this country, if he calls for silencing a group of people because of their political viewpoints. Where do they do that? Oh, yes, in dictatorships like Cuba, North Korea and Saudi Arabia.

I don't think liberals are being asked to be silent.....I think they are being asked to show support rather than defeatism.

I, for one, think it's great that liberals are allowed to freely speak what's on their mind.....gives me more knowledge about what their true motives are so I can plan better what I need to do to offset their actions.

[SassyLady]

I love how ConReps believe that the way to support America is to destroy it from the inside. Foster racial hate and prejudice. Start illegal wars and send Americans over to die in them. Allow our elected leaders to lie to us. Support a policy of aggression and terrorism. Suppress free speech, unless it is your side that is doing the speaking.
Love and sex are bad. Hate, violence and racism are good. It's the American way, right? No wonder we are in trouble. Perhaps when some of the older and more vapid conservative rednecks die off, we can return to peace and sanity.

And I just love how LibsDims believe that the way to support America is to destroy it from the inside by practicing defeatism. How they foster racial hate and prejudice towards older, vapid rednecks and hardworking people of America. How they spend more time protesting than being gainfully employed. How they are willing to die for a tree or a spotted owl, but not for a fellow American. For allowing our elected leaders to lie to us. How they support a policy of aggression and terrorism towards America and calling for us to surrender. How they absolutely and continuously work to suppress free speech, unless it is their side that is doing the speaking. Casual sex, abortion and drugs are good. It's the American way, right? No wonder we are in trouble. Perhaps when some of the younger and brainless "intellectuals" actually grow up and get a job and become contributing individuals, we can return to peace and prosperity.

[Birdzeye]

And I just love how LibsDims believe that the way to support America is to destroy it from the inside by practicing defeatism. How they foster racial hate and prejudice towards older, vapid rednecks and hardworking people of America. How they spend more time protesting than being gainfully employed. How they are willing to die for a tree or a spotted owl, but not for a fellow American. For allowing our elected leaders to lie to us. How they support a policy of aggression and terrorism towards America and calling for us to surrender. How they absolutely and continuously work to suppress free speech, unless it is their side that is doing the speaking. Casual sex, abortion and drugs are good. It's the American way, right? No wonder we are in trouble. Perhaps when some of the younger and brainless "intellectuals" actually grow up and get a job and become contributing individuals, we can return to peace and prosperity.

Who wrote that fiction? :coffee:

[Doniston]

I agree liberals are pathetic.

:laugh2: another reverse action stupidity????

[Doniston]

Who wrote that fiction? :coffee: and it wasn't even very good fiction especially since much of it was third-gradish "I know what I am, but what are you " reteric

HEH HEH

[lily]

I don't think liberals are being asked to be silent.....I think they are being asked to show support rather than defeatism.

I, for one, think it's great that liberals are allowed to freely speak what's on their mind.....gives me more knowledge about what their true motives are so I can plan better what I need to do to offset their actions.

That's really big of you! It's attitudes like this that keep this country as divided as it is. It's that old "You're either for us or against us" attitude that lost you both the house and the senate and will surely get the Democrats the White House. America is not only tired of the civil war in Iraq, they are tired of the civil war at home.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Wow... such a deep and prophetic post. You obviously put so much hard thought into that. Mind boggling.

The only thing pathetic here is the vile bunch of liberal asswads that's frequently banned for their caustic cake holes.

So typical of the current bunch of antiAmerican Neocons. When you can't come up with an intelligent reply to a claim you resort to the Lee Atwater/Karl Rove attack the claimant strategy. At least half of my posts aren't a quote and a handclapping emoticon. Now THAT takes a lot of thought.

And I have NEVER been banned, goldilocks.

So feeble and pitiful. Get a life, chump.

[glockmail]

....antiAmerican Neocons. ..... You cool aid drinker. :laugh2:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Truth hurts, don't it? Go buy yourself some duct tape and bind up your wounds, sonny boy.

[Pale Rider]

And I just love how LibsDims believe that the way to support America is to destroy it from the inside by practicing defeatism. How they foster racial hate and prejudice towards older, vapid rednecks and hardworking people of America. How they spend more time protesting than being gainfully employed. How they are willing to die for a tree or a spotted owl, but not for a fellow American. For allowing our elected leaders to lie to us. How they support a policy of aggression and terrorism towards America and calling for us to surrender. How they absolutely and continuously work to suppress free speech, unless it is their side that is doing the speaking. Casual sex, abortion and drugs are good. It's the American way, right? No wonder we are in trouble. Perhaps when some of the younger and brainless "intellectuals" actually grow up and get a job and become contributing individuals, we can return to peace and prosperity.

Superb rebuttal mkp! My hats off to you. I really enjoy it when the neolibs get their ass nailed to the floor.

But, I don't put much faith in your last statement.

[nevadamedic]

And I just love how LibsDims believe that the way to support America is to destroy it from the inside by practicing defeatism. How they foster racial hate and prejudice towards older, vapid rednecks and hardworking people of America. How they spend more time protesting than being gainfully employed. How they are willing to die for a tree or a spotted owl, but not for a fellow American. For allowing our elected leaders to lie to us. How they support a policy of aggression and terrorism towards America and calling for us to surrender. How they absolutely and continuously work to suppress free speech, unless it is their side that is doing the speaking. Casual sex, abortion and drugs are good. It's the American way, right? No wonder we are in trouble. Perhaps when some of the younger and brainless "intellectuals" actually grow up and get a job and become contributing individuals, we can return to peace and prosperity.

:clap: :laugh2: :clap:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

I don't think liberals are being asked to be silent.....I think they are being asked to show support rather than defeatism.

I, for one, think it's great that liberals are allowed to freely speak what's on their mind.....gives me more knowledge about what their true motives are so I can plan better what I need to do to offset their actions.

Liberals aren't being "asked" to be silent, they are being told to be silent. The current Neocon antiAmerican bunch who believe in freedom of speech only if it supports their point of view don't want to hear an opposing point of view. To think for yourself and decide to have an opinion of your own is "defeatism" to this Neocon crowd. Liberals came up with the idea of free speech and conservatives have done everything in their power to curb it whenever they didn't like what was being said. As for showing support, we do when the cause is just. Send your own kids to fight in the unjust causes and let them risk their lives for an ideal that no one believes in. The idea that rightwingers have the market cornered on patriotism is absurd and wrong. Jingoism and xenophobia maybe but not patriotism.

[glockmail]

Truth hurts, don't it? Go buy yourself some duct tape and bind up your wounds, sonny boy. Looks like you're gonna need more than duct tape. :laugh2:

[glockmail]

Liberals aren't being "asked" to be silent, they are being told to be silent. The current Neocon antiAmerican bunch who believe in freedom of speech only if it supports their point of view don't want to hear an opposing point of view. .....
Does this explain the Fairness Doctrine? :laugh2:

[GW in Ohio]

This article may be a little out of date, but the message is as true now as it was then.

LIBERALS NEED TO START SUPPORTING AMERICA!!! NOT SCHEMING AND WORKING FOR IT'S DEFEAT!!!

"It's time for liberals to start supporting America"?????

What you really mean is, "It's time for liberals to start mindlessly supporting the asinine policies of the Bush administration......It's time for liberals to undergo a lobotomy like the misguided people on the right, and say, 'Whatever George Bush does, it must be right, because he's the president.'"

Sorry, but anyone who isn't blinded by partisan imperatives can see that Bush and his gang of idiots have made a terrible mess in Iraq and the Middle East.

You want me to mindlessly support this clown simply because he's the president? This isn't Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia. This is America, pal.

[glockmail]

".......It's time for liberals to undergo a lobotomy like the misguided people on the right, ......

When did I have mine? Why am I still able to hold down a technical job?
:laugh2:

[GW in Ohio]

Quote:
Originally Posted by GW in Ohio
".......It's time for liberals to undergo a lobotomy like the misguided people on the right, ......

When did I have mine? Why am I still able to hold down a technical job?
:laugh2:

It's surprising what people with disabilities and addictions can do.

Even Republicans can hold down full-time jobs........

[Birdzeye]

"It's time for liberals to start supporting America"?????

What you really mean is, "It's time for liberals to start mindlessly supporting the asinine policies of the Bush administration......It's time for liberals to undergo a lobotomy like the misguided people on the right, and say, 'Whatever George Bush does, it must be right, because he's the president.'"

Sorry, but anyone who isn't blinded by partisan imperatives can see that Bush and his gang of idiots have made a terrible mess in Iraq and the Middle East.

You want me to mindlessly support this clown simply because he's the president? This isn't Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia. This is America, pal.


:clap: :clap: :clap:

[Gaffer]

Liberals aren't being "asked" to be silent, they are being told to be silent. The current Neocon antiAmerican bunch who believe in freedom of speech only if it supports their point of view don't want to hear an opposing point of view. To think for yourself and decide to have an opinion of your own is "defeatism" to this Neocon crowd. Liberals came up with the idea of free speech and conservatives have done everything in their power to curb it whenever they didn't like what was being said. As for showing support, we do when the cause is just. Send your own kids to fight in the unjust causes and let them risk their lives for an ideal that no one believes in. The idea that rightwingers have the market cornered on patriotism is absurd and wrong. Jingoism and xenophobia maybe but not patriotism.

Your not a patriot, your a defeatist, ready to sell out the country to promote your liberal ideas and damage Bush at all costs. The only war you recognize is the war on Bush, nothing else matters.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Your not a patriot, your a defeatist, ready to sell out the country to promote your liberal ideas and damage Bush at all costs. The only war you recognize is the war on Bush, nothing else matters.

Your rant would be humorous if it weren't so sad.

Sad because you fail to realize that this country is great because of the freedoms that Liberals have proposed and fought for over the last 2 centuries. Conservatives (whigs, know-nothings, Republicans) have stood in that doorway every step of the way.

Sad because you fail to realize that Iraq isn't a matter of winning or losing. It's a matter of survival while kinfolk fight it out. Only a total fool runs halfway across the world to interfere with a family fight. Count your boy George as one such fool.

Sad because the only defeat we are suffering is in the eyes of the world. Only an idiot can take us from a place where the world stood by our side on September 12, 2001 to a place where only Great Britain stands by our side six years later. Liberals had nothing to do with that. Just your boy George and his band of neocon retards managed that feat.

[glockmail]

Sad because you fail to realize that this country is great because of the freedoms that Liberals have proposed and fought for over the last 2 centuries. Conservatives (whigs, know-nothings, Republicans) have stood in that doorway every step of the way.......

Your rant would be humorous if it weren't so sad.

Are you claiming that modern day liberals align themselves with the Founders of this country?

Are you also denying that the Democrat Party fought Republican- supported civil rights bills from the 1860's to the 1960's?

Pitiful.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Your rant would be humorous if it weren't so sad.

Are you claiming that modern day liberals align themselves with the Founders of this country?

Are you also denying that the Democrat Party fought Republican- supported civil rights bills from the 1860's to the 1960's?

Pitiful.

You need a refresher course in reading. Go back and point out ot me where I ever said the "Democrat Party."

[Gunny]

Your rant would be humorous if it weren't so sad.

Sad because you fail to realize that this country is great because of the freedoms that Liberals have proposed and fought for over the last 2 centuries. Conservatives (whigs, know-nothings, Republicans) have stood in that doorway every step of the way.

What's REALLY sad is the gutter your brand of liberalism has taken a once great nation into. Don't flatter the degredation of a society's morals and standards by calling it "freedoms."

Sad because you fail to realize that Iraq isn't a matter of winning or losing. It's a matter of survival while kinfolk fight it out. Only a total fool runs halfway across the world to interfere with a family fight. Count your boy George as one such fool.

Sad because the only defeat we are suffering is in the eyes of the world. Only an idiot can take us from a place where the world stood by our side on September 12, 2001 to a place where only Great Britain stands by our side six years later. Liberals had nothing to do with that. Just your boy George and his band of neocon retards managed that feat.

Hogwash. Your relentless assault against Bush and anything he has tried to do in the media has done nothing BUT fuel the fires international distrust and hatred.

[lily]

Sad because the only defeat we are suffering is in the eyes of the world. Only an idiot can take us from a place where the world stood by our side on September 12, 2001 to a place where only Great Britain stands by our side six years later. Liberals had nothing to do with that. Just your boy George and his band of neocon retards managed that feat.

I hate to interupt when you are on a roll Baron..........but after June 17th I don't think we will have Briton on our side. Brown isn't a fool, he want to keep his position and it's pretty well known that he's no Blair.

[SassyLady]

That's really big of you! It's attitudes like this that keep this country as divided as it is. It's that old "You're either for us or against us" attitude that lost you both the house and the senate and will surely get the Democrats the White House. America is not only tired of the civil war in Iraq, they are tired of the civil war at home.


I'm OK with with my attitude miss lily!

And, I do agree with you about the civil war at home. How are you personally going to stop playing your part in furthering the conflict?

[SassyLady]

Liberals aren't being "asked" to be silent, they are being told to be silent. The current Neocon antiAmerican bunch who believe in freedom of speech only if it supports their point of view don't want to hear an opposing point of view. To think for yourself and decide to have an opinion of your own is "defeatism" to this Neocon crowd. Liberals came up with the idea of free speech and conservatives have done everything in their power to curb it whenever they didn't like what was being said. As for showing support, we do when the cause is just. Send your own kids to fight in the unjust causes and let them risk their lives for an ideal that no one believes in. The idea that rightwingers have the market cornered on patriotism is absurd and wrong. Jingoism and xenophobia maybe but not patriotism.

The only reason libs are being told to be silent is their incessant and shrill harping about something they want changed instead of actually stepping up and doing something constructive to change the situation. They harp and bitch about something and yet that's all you see/hear them doing.

Conservatives don't want to curb free speech, they just think people should be circumspect about what they say, say it with respect and be honest and willing to step up to the plate and back up what they say.

As for sending my own kids.......my husband is a CSM with over 28 years of service and my son tried to join and was waivered due to severe asthma and shattered rotator cuff due to rugby.

You can keep believing that putting your own country, flag, troops and all those who support them down, but don't call it patriotism. Patriotism is stepping up to the plate and putting your butt on the line for what you believe in........it's not sitting behind a computer playing anonoymous and spouting rhetoric.

PS - anyone who thinks they are a Baron isn't very American any way so who are you to slink in here and start judging?

[loosecannon]

Hogwash. Your relentless assault against Bush and anything he has tried to do in the media has done nothing BUT fuel the fires international distrust and hatred.

How disingenuous of you to alleviate Bush of all responsibility for his horrendous FUBAR leadership and to place that blame on Baron and the Librul media that you imagine exists.

Absolutely ANY deceit to avoid actual responsibility for the most aggregious presidential fuck ups in our lives eh?

[loosecannon]

The only reason libs are being told to be silent is their incessant and shrill harping....

no that would be your own bald faced lie.

The reason libs are being told to shut up is because the light of scrutiny is too harsh, the voice of reason too damning, the calm of honesty too revealing for anyone in Bushbot uniform to withstand.

Ya'll simply and literally can not handle the truth.

[Pale Rider]

no that would be your own bald faced lie.

The reason libs are being told to shut up is because the light of scrutiny is too harsh, the voice of reason too damning, the calm of honesty too revealing for anyone in Bushbot uniform to withstand.

Ya'll simply and literally can not handle the truth.

:laugh2: :lmao: :lol: :laugh: :talk2hand: Ooooooohhhh man.... what a laugh. Thanks for that loose. Laughing is good for ya, and I had a good one on that whopper.

[loosecannon]

:laugh2: :lmao: :lol: :laugh: :talk2hand: Ooooooohhhh man.... what a laugh. Thanks for that loose. Laughing is good for ya, and I had a good one on that whopper.

Well you think so. But my use of Liberal is in the mold of Thomas Jefferson and it always has been.

I don't except the perverted definitions of either liberalism or conservatism.

[Pale Rider]

Well you think so. But my use of Liberal is in the mold of Thomas Jefferson and it always has been.

I don't except the perverted definitions of either liberalism or conservatism.

Well, I do.

I just get a kick out of your term "bushbot." I don't know who that is. In fact, I think you'll have a hard time finding one, even here.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

The only reason libs are being told to be silent is their incessant and shrill harping about something they want changed instead of actually stepping up and doing something constructive to change the situation. They harp and bitch about something and yet that's all you see/hear them doing.

I guess my original assertion was correct: the speech is free ONLY when you agree with the conservative point of view. Otherwise it is "incessant" or "shrill" and all they can do is "bitch." Freedom of speech is exactly that: free. It isn't bound by YOUR sense of what should and should not be. But thanks for proving my point again.


Conservatives don't want to curb free speech, they just think people should be circumspect about what they say, say it with respect and be honest and willing to step up to the plate and back up what they say.

See above.


As for sending my own kids.......my husband is a CSM with over 28 years of service and my son tried to join and was waivered due to severe asthma and shattered rotator cuff due to rugby.

Your husband's service is appreciated. The comment was not directed at you personally but rather you collectively (as in all conservatives).


You can keep believing that putting your own country, flag, troops and all those who support them down, but don't call it patriotism. Patriotism is stepping up to the plate and putting your butt on the line for what you believe in........it's not sitting behind a computer playing anonoymous and spouting rhetoric.

Go back and show me again where I have put this country, our flag, our troops and all our supporters down. I have put your boy George down on many occasions and will continue to do so along with his merry band of war profiteers. Patriotism is love of country and wanting what's best for it, not shrilly criticizing anyone who disagrees with your narrow point of view as if you had the only viable definition of what patriotism is.


PS - anyone who thinks they are a Baron isn't very American any way so who are you to slink in here and start judging?

PS - anyone who thinks they are a princess isn't very American any way so who are you to slink in here and start judging?

[Baron Von Esslingen]

I just get a kick out of your term "bushbot." I don't know who that is. In fact, I think you'll have a hard time finding one, even here.

Found one.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d36/BaronVonEsslingen/Bushbots.jpg

[Baron Von Esslingen]

What's REALLY sad is the gutter your brand of liberalism has taken a once great nation into. Don't flatter the degredation of a society's morals and standards by calling it "freedoms."

Hogwash. Your relentless assault against Bush and anything he has tried to do in the media has done nothing BUT fuel the fires international distrust and hatred.

Yep. Old Baron has inspired a whole generation of terrorists by posting some comments on an internet forum critical of George Walker Bush. I have really abused my freedoms by opening my mouth here.

Talk about your utter hogwash...

[Pale Rider]

Yep. Old Baron has inspired a whole generation of terrorists by posting some comments on an internet forum critical of George Walker Bush. I have really abused my freedoms by opening my mouth here.

Talk about your utter hogwash...

He's refering to you and all the shrill, zealot, frothing at the mouth, looney left moonbats like you, i.e., rosie o'licktaco.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

He's refering to you and all the shrill, zealot, frothing at the mouth, looney left moonbats like you, i.e., rosie o'licktaco.

You mean as opposed to the fascist, self-righteous, so-called Christian, arrogant, neocon, child predator protecting, rightwing nobheads like you, i.e., Jerry "I've Gone To Hell In A Handbasket" Falwell?

Thanks. I get it now, hypocrite.

[glockmail]

You need a refresher course in reading. Go back and point out ot me where I ever said the "Democrat Party." The Democrat Party is the bastion of modern liberalism. They are one in the same.

[Doniston]

The Democrat Party is the bastion of modern liberalism. They are one in the same.

Maybe that is why you are so sadly mistaken. You still beleive that Garbage,

There are both republican and Democratic, and independent liberals, just a there are Conservatives on both sides. and in the middle.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

The Democrat Party is the bastion of modern liberalism. They are one in the same.

If they were one and the same then George Bush would be vetoing another War Appropriation Bill because it would still have benchmarks in it. If they were one and the same, Bush would soon set a record for the number of bills that he would have to veto because every item on the Liberal agenda would get passed and sent up to the White House. When that happens let me know. Until then, consider your point blasted to hell.

Liberals have been the major mover of every liberating and compassionate piece of legislation from the founding of this country from abolition to giving women the vote to insuring blacks their civil rights to providing a secure retirement to the aged to assisting the poor with their medical care. What you are having a problem seeing is that, until quite recently, there were Liberals in the Republican Party. In fact, there have been Liberals in the GOP since its founding. You guys have managed to drive them all out making the Party of Lincoln a pretty hollow phrase because you really don't stand for any of the things he stood for. It makes the originating phrase of this thread hollow as well. The jingoism and xenophobia that the GOP claims is "support" is still nothing more than jingoism and xenophobia.

[Pale Rider]

You mean as opposed to the fascist, self-righteous, so-called Christian, arrogant, neocon, child predator protecting, rightwing nobheads like you, i.e., Jerry "I've Gone To Hell In A Handbasket" Falwell?

Thanks. I get it now, hypocrite.

Only problem with your rant is, it's nothing but emotional name calling like a little kid throwing a tantrum. There's no substance. Especially the "child predator protecting" bullshit. NAMBLA is your liberal baby, not the conservatives. NAMBLA is protected by your God, the aclu. Protecting child molesters is all yours muttonhead.

[glockmail]

If they were one and the same then George Bush would be vetoing another War Appropriation Bill because it would still have benchmarks in it. If they were one and the same, Bush would soon set a record for the number of bills that he would have to veto because every item on the Liberal agenda would get passed and sent up to the White House. When that happens let me know. Until then, consider your point blasted to hell.

Liberals have been the major mover of every liberating and compassionate piece of legislation from the founding of this country from abolition to giving women the vote to insuring blacks their civil rights to providing a secure retirement to the aged to assisting the poor with their medical care. What you are having a problem seeing is that, until quite recently, there were Liberals in the Republican Party. In fact, there have been Liberals in the GOP since its founding. You guys have managed to drive them all out making the Party of Lincoln a pretty hollow phrase because you really don't stand for any of the things he stood for. It makes the originating phrase of this thread hollow as well. The jingoism and xenophobia that the GOP claims is "support" is still nothing more than jingoism and xenophobia. The reason why the liberals caved is that they are modern liberals, and by definition have no balls.

You are confusing 1700's liberals (patriots) with 1860's liberals (radical republicans) with 1960's and beyond liberals (kooks and anti-patriots). Modern liberlas have no redeeming qualities and if you think there is any association with historic liberals then you are sadly mistaken.

I Have said many times previous that I consider myself a 1776 liberal and find I have nothing in common with modern liberals.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Only problem with your rant is, it's nothing but emotional name calling like a little kid throwing a tantrum. There's no substance. Especially the "child predator protecting" bullshit. NAMBLA is your liberal baby, not the conservatives. NAMBLA is protected by your God, the aclu. Protecting child molesters is all yours muttonhead.

Well, whackjob, you can't stand it when someone can spew the same venom you do. Dishing it out is a lot easier than taking it. Whine away, Weepy Loo.

NAMBLA isn't a Liberal cause no more than genocide is a conservative cause. NAMBLA is nothing more than a bunch of sexual perverts and, as we all know, there are a lot more rightwing perverts than leftwing. Nice try but that shit ain't sticking to the wall here.

As for the "child predator protecting" part of my claim I got two words for you, boyo: Mark Foley

[loosecannon]

If they were one and the same then George Bush would be vetoing another War Appropriation Bill because it would still have benchmarks in it. If they were one and the same, Bush would soon set a record for the number of bills that he would have to veto because every item on the Liberal agenda would get passed and sent up to the White House. When that happens let me know. Until then, consider your point blasted to hell.

Liberals have been the major mover of every liberating and compassionate piece of legislation from the founding of this country from abolition to giving women the vote to insuring blacks their civil rights to providing a secure retirement to the aged to assisting the poor with their medical care. What you are having a problem seeing is that, until quite recently, there were Liberals in the Republican Party. In fact, there have been Liberals in the GOP since its founding. You guys have managed to drive them all out making the Party of Lincoln a pretty hollow phrase because you really don't stand for any of the things he stood for. It makes the originating phrase of this thread hollow as well. The jingoism and xenophobia that the GOP claims is "support" is still nothing more than jingoism and xenophobia.

i wish i had said that!!

[loosecannon]

The reason why the liberals caved is that they are modern liberals, and by definition have no balls.

You are confusing 1700's liberals (patriots) with 1860's liberals (radical republicans) with 1960's and beyond liberals (kooks and anti-patriots). Modern liberlas have no redeeming qualities and if you think there is any association with historic liberals then you are sadly mistaken.

I Have said many times previous that I consider myself a 1776 liberal and find I have nothing in common with modern liberals.

one of your better posts

[Baron Von Esslingen]

The reason why the liberals caved is that they are modern liberals, and by definition have no balls.

You are confusing 1700's liberals (patriots) with 1860's liberals (radical republicans) with 1960's and beyond liberals (kooks and anti-patriots). Modern liberlas have no redeeming qualities and if you think there is any association with historic liberals then you are sadly mistaken.

I Have said many times previous that I consider myself a 1776 liberal and find I have nothing in common with modern liberals.

The moderate leadership caved, not the Liberals. Senator Reid knew the benchmarks wouldn't float so he gave in. Reid is no Liberal.

As for confusing as to who is a Liberal, that's your department, on the outside looking in. You are no more a 1776 Liberal than you are a cow. Nice try in associating yourself with those who would want EVERYONE to have freedom, not just those that agree with your point of view. Conservatives always try to steal ideas from the Liberals when they see that their own crap isn't selling. The only ones here with no redeeming qualities fall on the right side of the aisle.

[lily]

And, I do agree with you about the civil war at home. How are you personally going to stop playing your part in furthering the conflict?

I don't vote party lines. I vote for the candidate. I know where my elected officials stand on things. This latest pasification of the child in the White House holding his breath until he gets what he wants is just the latest. I also speak up, instead of sitting there silently sitting back while my country is going to hell in a handbasket........and I certainly don't start threads on an internet forum with the title of It's Time For Liberals To Start Supporting America! to further divide the country.

[TheStripey1]

The reason why the liberals caved is that they are modern liberals, and by definition have no balls.

You are confusing 1700's liberals (patriots) with 1860's liberals (radical republicans) with 1960's and beyond liberals (kooks and anti-patriots). Modern liberlas have no redeeming qualities and if you think there is any association with historic liberals then you are sadly mistaken.

I Have said many times previous that I consider myself a 1776 liberal and find I have nothing in common with modern liberals.


have you served in the military NOW, in this lifetime, like those 1776 liberals did during theirs? or are you just another lip service patriot?

[TheStripey1]

Well, whackjob, you can't stand it when someone can spew the same venom you do. Dishing it out is a lot easier than taking it. Whine away, Weepy Loo.

NAMBLA isn't a Liberal cause no more than genocide is a conservative cause. NAMBLA is nothing more than a bunch of sexual perverts and, as we all know, there are a lot more rightwing perverts than leftwing. Nice try but that shit ain't sticking to the wall here.

As for the "child predator protecting" part of my claim I got two words for you, boyo: Mark Foley


I don't think Foley qualifies as a "child" predator, Baron, simply because he liked the barely legal types... the 18 year olds...

There are plenty of republican child predators though... I've a thread running here that will tell alllllllllll about how low some of those republicans can be.

[lily]

I don't think Foley qualifies as a "child" predator, Baron, simply because he liked the barely legal types... the 18 year olds...



Sorry Stripey.......he stays in the child predator list in my eyes, because he broke the law he made and was in charge of, one that is suppose to protect those that he himself preyed on.

[TheStripey1]

For instance...


Larry Dale Floyd, an elected GOP constable in Denton County, Texas Precinct Two (http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/120106dnmetconstable.3e5d079f.html)--and a proud member of the GOP--was arrested and booked into Fremont County Jail in Colorado on suspicion of child prostitution, enticement of a child, sexual assault on a child, pandering, inducement of child prostitution and trafficking in children.

[TheStripey1]

Sorry Stripey.......he stays in the child predator list in my eyes, because he broke the law he made and was in charge of, one that is suppose to protect those that he himself preyed on.

Not if the pages were 18 when he contacted them. That's legal in most states. It doesn't keep him form being a sleezeball. Because that he certainly is.

[gabosaurus]

How did "supporting America" evolve into "supporting an illegal war started by an international terrorist for personal and political purposes"?
I haven't figured that one out yet.

[lily]

Not if the pages were 18 when he contacted them. That's legal in most states. It doesn't keep him form being a sleezeball. Because that he certainly is.

16 is not 18, but I'm not going to quibble, it's old news.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/29/AR2006092901574.html

[theHawk]

I haven't figured that one out yet.

That should be your signature.

[glockmail]

The moderate leadership caved, not the Liberals. Senator Reid knew the benchmarks wouldn't float so he gave in. Reid is no Liberal.

As for confusing as to who is a Liberal, that's your department, on the outside looking in. You are no more a 1776 Liberal than you are a cow. Nice try in associating yourself with those who would want EVERYONE to have freedom, not just those that agree with your point of view. Conservatives always try to steal ideas from the Liberals when they see that their own crap isn't selling. The only ones here with no redeeming qualities fall on the right side of the aisle.

Bullshit. Modern liberals, which you associate yourself with, are defined by the leaders of their movement. That means Reid, Pelosi, Kennedy, Rosie, and Alec Baldwin. You can try to distance yourself from them but if you claim to be a modern liberal then they speak for you. If they don't, then call yourself something else, but don't try and re-define "liberal" based on what you want it to be. It is what it is.

With regards of you're claiming that I am not a 1776 liberal I politely say "fuck you". You don't know me more than I know myself and to me freedom is tops, and worth fighting for, then as well as now. :fu:

[glockmail]

have you served in the military NOW, in this lifetime, like those 1776 liberals did during theirs? or are you just another lip service patriot?


What the fuck does my lack of military service have to do with patriotism? Did Ben Franklin serve in the military? Did Daniel Webster, of John Locke? Did most of the guys landing bird shot on British ass during the Lexington march?

Anyone who thinks that you have to have served in the active military to be a patriot is a douche bag asshole.

[loosecannon]

Bullshit. Modern liberals, which you associate yourself with, are defined by the leaders of their movement. That means Reid, Pelosi, Kennedy, Rosie, and Alec Baldwin. You can try to distance yourself from them but if you claim to be a modern liberal then they speak for you. If they don't, then call yourself something else, but don't try and re-define "liberal" based on what you want it to be. It is what it is.



OK, that is one of perhaps a half dozen arguably valids ways to define a modern liberal. BUT....

.....by taking that position you define ALL modern conservatives in the mold of Bush, Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz, Libby, Rumsfeld etc.

Are you sure you want to put a target on your self that says "self proclaimed Bushbot"?

[glockmail]

OK, that is one of perhaps a half dozen arguably valids ways to define a modern liberal. BUT....

.....by taking that position you define ALL modern conservatives in the mold of Bush, Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz, Libby, Rumsfeld etc.

Are you sure you want to put a target on your self that says "self proclaimed Bushbot"? When have I ever stated that Bush is a conservative? :pee:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Bullshit. Modern liberals, which you associate yourself with, are defined by the leaders of their movement. That means Reid, Pelosi, Kennedy, Rosie, and Alec Baldwin. You can try to distance yourself from them but if you claim to be a modern liberal then they speak for you. If they don't, then call yourself something else, but don't try and re-define "liberal" based on what you want it to be. It is what it is.

With regards of you're claiming that I am not a 1776 liberal I politely say "fuck you". You don't know me more than I know myself and to me freedom is tops, and worth fighting for, then as well as now. :fu:

Well, I guess that shoe on the other foot trick is a real bitch when it happens to you.

First, you try and twist my words from a previous post into meaning something other than what was said. Pretty disingenuous of you.

Then, you try and characterize what kind of Liberal I am by associating me with Reid, Pelosi, Kennedy, Rosie, and Alec Baldwin.

Then, you try and associate yourself with 1776 Liberals without defining who those people might be and how you and those people are the same and, most importantly, how it all ties in with the politics of today.

Finally, you slop it all together with "You don't know me more than I know myself."

Unlike conservatives, for whom the sheep herd is the model, most Liberals don't need "leaders" to speak for them. Good luck in trying to find somewhere on this board or any other board where I have held up those people as my "leaders." You won't find that evidence because it isn't true. If I were to choose my influences, they would be RFK, JFK, Gandhi and MLK before they would be any of the people you chose for me. After all, you don't know me more than I know myself.

Ultimately, no one speaks for me except me. Sorry if that is a concept outside your limited scope of the world but after all you don't know me more than I know myself.

So, until you can come up with a list of those 1776 Liberals or at least what they stood for and how that all relates to this particular discussion, you are just blowing smoke up my ass and trying to convince me I farted. Not happening.

BTW, fuck you, too.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

When have I ever stated that Bush is a conservative? :pee:

You didn't have to. He did that for himself here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) After all, you don't know him more than he knows himself, do you?

[glockmail]

.....Unlike conservatives, for whom the sheep herd is the model, most Liberals don't need "leaders" to speak for them.......

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You're delusional.

:fu:

[glockmail]

You didn't have to. He did that for himself here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) After all, you don't know him more than he knows himself, do you?

:pee: I don't see my name under that wikipedia article, you douchebag.

[Doniston]

OK, that is one of perhaps a half dozen arguably valids ways to define a modern liberal. BUT....

.....by taking that position you define ALL modern conservatives in the mold of Bush, Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz, Libby, Rumsfeld etc.

Are you sure you want to put a target on your self that says "self proclaimed Bushbot"?

This shows both liberal, and the so-called new-liberal party.



lib·er·al
–adjective 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.
–noun 14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.
15. (often initial capital letter) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.

[Doniston]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You're delusional.

:fu:perhaps, but accurate in this case. Heh heh

[loosecannon]

When have I ever stated that Bush is a conservative? :pee:

It doesn't matter Glock.

You defined all modern liberals as being defined by their leaders.

Therefore all modern conservatives are ALSO defined by their leaders.

That makes you a Bushbot by your chosen definition.

[glockmail]

perhaps, but accurate in this case. Heh heh
Screw you, Doniston. The last thing that I have ever been is a fucking sheep. I consider that an insult and you should take it back. :slap:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

:pee: I don't see my name under that wikipedia article, you douchebag.

No, spermbucket, I don't see your name there but I did see Bush call himself a conservative which trumps anything you might have to say.

Still waiting for your answer to the 1776 Liberals challenge I posed to you, that is, if you even have an answer.

[glockmail]

It doesn't matter Glock.

You defined all modern liberals as being defined by their leaders.

Therefore all modern conservatives are ALSO defined by their leaders.

That makes you a Bushbot by your chosen definition. Bush has never been considerd a leader of the conservative movement.

[glockmail]

No, spermbucket, I don't see your name there but I did see Bush call himself a conservative which trumps anything you might have to say.

Still waiting for your answer to the 1776 Liberals challenge I posed to you, that is, if you even have an answer.

Bush can call himself wahtever he wants. I have never considered him a conservative, and you'd be hard pressed to find other conservatives that consider him one as well.

If you wish to challenge me on something, shit fer brains, then you'll need to be more specific, as I'm not going to guess at what game you want to play.:pee:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

It doesn't matter Glock.

You defined all modern liberals as being defined by their leaders.

Therefore all modern conservatives are ALSO defined by their leaders.

That makes you a Bushbot by your chosen definition.

One of these

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d36/BaronVonEsslingen/Bushbots.jpg

[Baron Von Esslingen]

If you wish to challenge me on something, shit fer brains, then you'll need to be more specific, as I'm not going to guess at what game you want to play.:pee:

I did challenge you, turdsucker, and you have ducked out on that challenge for five of your posts now. I guess all that talk about being a 1776 Liberal was just a lot of sheeple shit.

[glockmail]

I did challenge you, turdsucker, and you have ducked out on that challenge for five of your posts now. I guess all that talk about being a 1776 Liberal was just a lot of sheeple shit.

My guess is that you mean this: "So, until you can come up with a list of those 1776 Liberals or at least what they stood for and how that all relates to this particular discussion, you are just blowing smoke up my ass and trying to convince me I farted. Not happening."

What a stupid thing to ask for. Read the list of signers of the Declaration of Independence. If you don't know what they stood for then you are a stupid liberal, beyond my ability to educate you.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

My guess is that you mean this: "So, until you can come up with a list of those 1776 Liberals or at least what they stood for and how that all relates to this particular discussion, you are just blowing smoke up my ass and trying to convince me I farted. Not happening."

What a stupid thing to ask for. Read the list of signers of the Declaration of Independence. If you don't know what they stood for then you are a stupid liberal, beyond my ability to educate you.

Which signers? The ones that owned slaves? Those, too? Those are the people you fashion yourself after? Figures.