Jump to content

A new standard has been set


Recommended Posts

Yeah.  That happens a lot.  Cindy Sheehan, for example...  :lol:

599355[/snapback]

 

Well they did convienently remove her from the State of the Union, and then gave an "Oops, we were wrong" afterwards. Do you really think that wasn't planned to remove her to avoid embarrasing Bush? Removing the Republican wife just helped provide cover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well they did convienently remove her from the State of the Union, and then gave an "Oops, we were wrong" afterwards.  Do you really think that wasn't planned to remove her to avoid embarrasing Bush?  Removing the Republican wife just helped provide cover.

599361[/snapback]

 

You can't actually believe the crap you type, can you? If so, you need to seek immediate therapy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well they did convienently remove her from the State of the Union, and then gave an "Oops, we were wrong" afterwards.  Do you really think that wasn't planned to remove her to avoid embarrasing Bush?  Removing the Republican wife just helped provide cover.

599361[/snapback]

 

Yeah...because that and sending her to an Eastern European concentration camp are obviously the same !@#$ing thing, you nitwit.

 

And knowing how the Capitol Police work...I doubt anything was planned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course. Liberalism is ALL about double-standards.

 

For example: "We should tolerate ALL religious views....so long as they're not evangelical Christianity."

599225[/snapback]

 

Liberals tolerate all religions. The definition of liberal is "Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded." It's just when a religious group tries to legislate what they should or shouldn't do in their own private lives that it's a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since it's not crap it's a moot question.

599370[/snapback]

 

Yeah...OK...Check into that therapy thingy. Of course, you might have to remove the tinfoil hat first, or are you afraid that the stormtroopers of the Bush cabal are going to steal it from you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The definition of liberal is "Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.  Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded." 

What an idealisitc definition. Ironic too, considering the Democrat party has become the party of bigotry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liberals tolerate all religions.  The definition of liberal is "Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.  Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded."  It's just when a religious group tries to legislate what they should or shouldn't do in their own private lives that it's a problem.

599369[/snapback]

 

:lol::lol::lol: I think I just wet myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Democrats continue to think that funerals are platforms for scoring political points.  The Minnesota funeral and Ron Reagan's little diatribe at the Gipper's funeral blew up in their face.  I'm sure this one will too.

597879[/snapback]

 

The Democrats? or the people who speak out of turn trying to represent them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't have to be right-wing to be intolerant. See: Josef Stalin.

599513[/snapback]

 

Well, here's half the problem, classical definitions of liberal and conservative have broken down. Cold war liberalism was antithetical to Stalinism and Maoism - Bush's entire program in the Middle East seems to be prefaced on the fact that Liberal Democracy will spread there, Republicans today seemed to be all for liberalizing markets, (free markets, by the way, are probably the least conservative force on the planet, what could break down the family structure faster than full exposure to world wide competition? ).

 

I find most of this liberal vs. conservative stuff in america today incoherent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, here's half the problem, classical definitions of liberal and conservative have broken down. Cold war liberalism was antithetical to Stalinism and Maoism - Bush's entire program in the Middle East seems to be prefaced on the fact that Liberal Democracy will spread there, Republicans today seemed to be all for liberalizing markets, (free markets, by the way, are probably the least conservative force on the planet, what could break down the family structure faster than full exposure to world wide competition? ).

 

I find most of this liberal vs. conservative stuff in america today incoherent.

599620[/snapback]

 

Spoken like a friggin' liber-...er, conserv-...uh...what is this, exactly? Democonservitarianism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...