Why It’s Time to Deport Liberals(good reading)

[Drunkensquid]

During the run-up to the 2004 election, hundreds, if not thousands of liberals promised to leave America for good if Bush was re-elected. So America came out in record numbers to guarantee a Bush victory by nearly 4 million votes. As is typical, not one liberal kept their promise. Instead, they have only become more obnoxious in their efforts to dismantle America.

America’s liberal movement isn’t what it used to be. The old live and let live, make love not war liberal who just wanted to be left alone to pursue his often drug induced euphoric consequence-free utopian existence has been replaced. I liked this old liberal. He did himself all kinds of harm, but generally speaking, he didn’t hurt anyone else. He was passive by nature, spending most of his time hanging out in his marijuana patch listening to the Beatles. I miss this old liberal…

The new liberal is a horse of an entirely different color. He is a bitter hate-filled America loathing Marxist, just as determined to bring the world’s most powerful nation to its knees as any foreign enemy in history.

The new liberal doesn’t just hate George W. Bush or **** Cheney. As their newly elected Messiah so proudly ****ounced – “they hate everything they stand for.” Things like a strong military, a vibrant, free, capitalist economy, and a foreign policy that hinges on strength rather than weakness, real moral principles and true personal liberty. They hate it all…

America is the freest nation on earth (despite liberal demands for more government control of everything). We have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation on earth, the largest number of self-made millionaires, and the highest average standard of living anywhere, even the richest poor people on the planet. We are the most generous nation because we are the most powerful nation on earth. Liberals don’t like any of it and they can’t think of one good thing to say about the founding principles of the country they love to hate.

They don’t like gun toting hetero****** married people with children, the financially self-sufficient, people not hooked on drugs or alcohol, people of religion, unborn children or those who defend them, or anyone too smart to fall for their socialist spineless drivel. In short, they don’t like most Americans.

They spend all of their free time looking for new ways to undermine everything America has ever been or was ever intended to be. So why are they still here?

Today’s liberal sees nothing wrong with a million abortions a year. He sees nothing wrong with tyrannizing the most productive members of our society for benefit of those who contribute nothing to society. He sees nothing wrong with art in the form of ****ography, but everything wrong with a public display of the Ten Commandments.

He sees nothing wrong with terrorists preaching death to Americans in Mosques and on street corners across this nation, but everything wrong with the pledge of allegiance or a morning peace prayer in our school houses.

He believes that if you work smart enough, hard enough and sacrifice long enough to become wealthy on your own, you owe a share of your spoils to those who won’t do the same - that his government owes it to him, to take those spoils from you against your will if need be.

He believes that all ****** perversions are just “alternative lifestyles” that must be tolerated in the name of creating an open society. He believes that those who don’t support such ideas are bigots.

He believes that all religions are deserving of equal status, including the not so peaceful religion of Islam, the always entertaining satanic cult, and the religion of no religion, atheism. To the modern day liberal, there is no real difference between religions.

He looks at terrorists firing upon American soldiers from behind the cover of female Muslim attire as victims of brutal American oppression. But he sees a terrorist prison camp where the American people pay for clean housing, three squares, a free Koran and a free prayer rug aimed at Mecca for every detainee as a Nazi Gulag.

He sees legal immigration and illegal immigration as the same thing. A chance to recruit another liberal voter in search of free stuff from America’s feeding trough.

He does not believe in self-governance or self-reliance, but rather in absolute government control over every aspect of American life. He doesn’t believe in a free market economy, but rather a government controlled economy designed to arbitrarily redistribute wealth.

He doesn’t believe in freedom, just free stuff. He does not believe in national sovereignty. In the United Nations run by thugs, thieves and third world tyrants, he trusts.

He looks at failing government controlled health care systems around the world and determines that America should do that too. He looks at the impending disaster of open societies in Europe and determines America should follow in their footsteps.

He looks at one self-proclaimed war hero who refuses to release his military records to support his hero status and sees a real honest to goodness war hero. But he looks at more than 200 confirmed war heros who claim the other is a fraud and a traitor, and sees more than 200 liars.

Now, it stands to reason that today’s liberal just might not be too bright, since there is quite literally no way to make sense of any of his logic. But it’s impossible to believe that anyone could actually be so foolish. So it is more likely that there is simply an agenda behind all this foolishness.

That agenda is the dismantling of everything American. They intend to continue to systematically replace our free market economy with a government controlled welfare state that will make every American equal, equally poor that is.

They intend to replace our One Nation under God with a Godless society dependent upon man made laws rather than morality based self-governance. The facts are simply indisputable…

They have already replaced our right to life endowed by our Creator with a government sanctioned right to murder our unborn and our physically or mentally challenged no longer of use to society. They have already replaced our right to free religious expression with a non-existent separation of church and state clause that effectively outlaws religious expression.

All of this is at odds with the vast majority of Americans, yet it continues. If America is to continue being America, the enemy within must be dealt with. The time for tolerance has passed.

We have tolerated far too much already. America’s survival depends entirely upon our ability to foster and nurture true American principles and ideals. Those who would undermine these ideals must be no more welcome in our country than those who seek to destroy America through more brutal means. Though the means are different, the threat is the same.

America can not be all things to all people. It can either be America, or it can be something much less. It is time to deport those who like nothing about the country that unwillingly feeds and provides protection for their ill conceived agenda.

Immigrants who seek to make America more like their homeland need to simply return to their homeland. If they won’t do it voluntarily, we should help them.

I don’t hate anyone… But I will no longer tolerate people intent upon destroying my country!

I hear France is looking for a few good socialists…


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1421890/posts

[BigBaribal]

I would gladly deport the liberal immigrationists to Sudan or Sierra Leone.

[SOG]

this wont become a flame war..... YES IT WILL! NO IT WONT! sigh.

[Ratman]

That's funny. Thanks for sharing it.

rofl rofl rofl

[Conga]

What a bunch of bull****. You could also write a list with all kinds of conservative "crimes" :roll:

[Drunkensquid]

That's funny. Thanks for sharing it.

rofl rofl rofl

I came across this article by accident, I had to share it rofl

[CMNot]

Damn liberals, responsible for such heinous things as blacks voting

[gaijinsamurai]

Yeah! And those damn trade unions who brought about the 40-hour work week! COMMIES!!!

[Werewolf01]

...and anybody who doesn't realize that the Patriot Act is destoying the Constitution for their own good! :fork:

[dangerclose]

I'm all for deporting them. Canada has plenty of open space and people of like mind. Or we could expand the 'torture' facility at gitmo to accomodate some of them. Either way they should leave the country they absolutely hate.


"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant."

Ann Coulter

[Nikitaras]

Those wacky American Talibans are at it again.

"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America.

Isn't it amazing that the same loonies that claim that the Liberals defend the Soviet Union and Saddam Hussein are also the ones that advocate the tactics of both against Liberals?

Which way is the Gulag o' gang of Christo-Fascists?

[Mark Sman]

I actually had a girl tell me she was going to move to Canada if Bush won again.

I said she was just upset and blowing off steam. She said no she was quite serious and that "I just didn't understand, just like I don't understand most of what happens."

I printed out and carried a schedule of flights to Canada for days after the election until I saw her. She is still here.

I understood.

[tyovan]

Please, please, please deport me to Canada!

I'm actually begging you. I'd much rather live up there than here, and if you deport me I can claim asylum!

I'll gladly renounce my US citizenship if I'm allowed to stay in Canada!

[SuperTrooper]

To be honest I don't want anymore liberals in my country, too many of them.
Why don't you draft them and send them off to peace loving Iraq, that way they could spread the love and skip down the streets throwing flowers and candy to the insurgents.

Sgt A

[California Joe]

The next retard that quotes Ann Coulter and it isn't a joke deserves to be banned. Holy Christ what an annoying ****. Funny how the same people that can goof on Al Franken and excoriate Howard Dean don't actually get the joke that Ann Coulter is a ridiculous attention whore.

[Clarsachier]

If so ; Good! Maybe I can catch a ride!

(Intended to be Sarcastic Humor)

[golds80]

liberal or conservative, we all have a right to our opinions in america......however the ones who screamed im moving to france/canada/etc during the election need to be held to their word. *cough* alec baldwin *cough*

[Mark Sman]

Please, please, please deport me to Canada!

I'm actually begging you. I'd much rather live up there than here, and if you deport me I can claim asylum!

I'll gladly renounce my US citizenship if I'm allowed to stay in Canada!

If you actually want to live someplace else, go do it.

Seriously. If I wanted to move you know what I would do? Move.

http://www.expedia.com/pub/agent.dll?tovr=-1294777293&ps3u=

http://www.cic.gc.ca/

[tyovan]

I'm working on it, I seriously am. However its very hard to immigrate somewhere when you're eighteen, have little money, only a high school diploma, and no job skills. ;)

Give me some time

[Mark Sman]

You don't even need a visa to study in Canada for less than six months.

You could register for a summer university course in communism or somesuch. You could get college credit and live there for a little while.

Those credits should transfer to any US university. Doesn't hurt to check first.

[WarriorMonk]

liberal or conservative, we all have a right to our opinions in america......however the ones who screamed im moving to france/canada/etc during the election need to be held to their word. *cough* alec baldwin *cough*

x2

TRUE DAT!

[vote for Pedro]

The next retard that quotes Ann Coulter and it isn't a joke deserves to be banned. Holy Christ what an annoying ****. Funny how the same people that can goof on Al Franken and excoriate Howard Dean don't actually get the joke that Ann Coulter is a ridiculous attention whore.

I agree, she is quite a joke.


"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant."

Ann Coulter

So according to Ann, even though I served in the US military, unlike Ann who did not, I am against America, I am a traitor or an idiot because I have some liberal views? She is a joke.

[walford]

The next retard that quotes Ann Coulter and it isn't a joke deserves to be banned. Holy Christ what an annoying ****. Funny how the same people that can goof on Al Franken and excoriate Howard Dean don't actually get the joke that Ann Coulter is a ridiculous attention whore.Quotes? Examples? There's one I remember in an interview, Coulter explained how someone tried to hit her with a pie. What she was saying at the time was that if it weren't for the terrorism, the Left would hate the Muslims; they're against abortion, oppress women, etc. But it's the hatred of America that redeems them in the eyes of the Left. Ouch!!

And on a similar note, Dan Flynn:
Why the Left Hates America (http://utopia-unmasked.us/flynn.htm)

[vote for Pedro]

What I can't stand is people like Ann or Dan who say that all of the left is like this or that, or the left who say all of the right is like this or that. Don't people understand that not everyone fits nicely into a political box? I have some conservative views, and some liberal views. My existance and my ideology does not fit nicely into someone's little political box or definition.

[abncougar]

great article, i love it..........so true...

[Flagg]

The next retard that quotes Ann Coulter and it isn't a joke deserves to be banned. Holy Christ what an annoying ****. Funny how the same people that can goof on Al Franken and excoriate Howard Dean don't actually get the joke that Ann Coulter is a ridiculous attention whore.

Can you check with Hood on that?

It would certainly help thin the herd :P

[Lokos]

Ann Coulter...

Is that the crazy blonde with the mean streak?

Lokos

[Flagg]

great article, i love it..........so true...

Accccctually....it's not:


America is the freest nation on earth

Depends on how you measure it...but in terms of economic freedom it CERTAINLY is NOT and political freedom, at best it's in a many ways tie for first

(despite liberal demands for more government control of everything). We have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation on earth,

incorrect

the largest number of self-made millionaires, and the highest average standard of living anywhere,

incorrect

even the richest poor people on the planet.

incorrect

We are the most generous nation because we are the most powerful nation on earth.

ehh? generous relates to giving....and in terms of giving per head....incorrect

Liberals don’t like any of it and they can’t think of one good thing to say about the founding principles of the country they love to hate.



Quite a few inaccuracies in just one paragraph.

Before I get pounded on for being anti-american...which I certainly am not.....I prefer genuine reality to overinflated Donald Trump sized bullpoop.

[vote for Pedro]

Ann Coulter...

Is that the crazy blonde with the mean streak?

Lokos

Yes, that's the one. She says I am guilty of treason because I have a few liberal views.

[TacoDelRio]

Liberals still suck.

[TacoDelRio]

Oh yes and they're all about free speach! (so long as it agrees with what they are saying.)

[caleb]

Those articles always remind of the Newspapers printed in my Country between 1936-1939. Propaganda, and not even good Propaganda, written to divide the USA.

When I read what extreme views some of you guys obviously have on liberals it makes me wonder how you all get along over there and that you don't have some sort of violent and bloody civil war. It's like the liberal neighbour that invites you to his summer barbeque is some sort of "sub-human"? Do you beat him down and spit in his face calling him a traitor that should move to France?

Goddamnit, they are just people with a different political opinion, it's o.k to argue about it but the tendencies that seem to build up in the USA really remind me of the sensless fashist hatred that my country succumbed to some 60 years ago..... and it's dangerous, whatever argument you want to throw at me, history is a good teacher you all don't want to listen to.

[Werewolf01]

What about those of us that have some conservative views and some liberal views? Please do not respond with something to the effect of:

"Duh! You have to be one or the other!"

[Werewolf01]

Those articles always remind of the Newspapers printed in my Country between 1936-1939. Propaganda, and not even good Propaganda, written to divide the USA.

When I read what extreme views some of you guys obviously have on liberals it makes me wonder how you all get along over there and that you don't have some sort of violent and bloody civil war. It's like the liberal neighbour that invites you to his summer barbeque is some sort of "sub-human"? Do you beat him down and spit in his face calling him a traitor that should move to France?

Goddamnit, they are just people with a different political opinion, it's o.k to argue about it but the tendencies that seem to build up in the USA really remind me of the sensless fashist hatred that my country succumbed to some 60 years ago..... and it's dangerous, whatever argument you want to throw at me, history is a good teacher you all don't want to listen to.

Give us 20 years. I am sure by that point we will have started our next civil war.

[dangerclose]

Those wacky American Talibans are at it again.

"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America.

Isn't it amazing that the same loonies that claim that the Liberals defend the Soviet Union and Saddam Hussein are also the ones that advocate the tactics of both against Liberals?

Which way is the Gulag o' gang of Christo-Fascists?

Please. If we used the tactics of leftist icons like Stalin - there would be no debate today as you all would've been liquidated decades ago. It's the left that rounds people up and commits mass murder to bring about their socialist utopia. I just wish these people would keep their word and leave.

[DPGLAW]

I love this article, it is 100% correct...I think that instead of just deporting the liberals, they should be sent to prison at Gitmo, that would tech them a lesson...Senator Durban should have each of the interrogaiton techniques e calls torture used on huim until he apologizes for that idiotic remark that he made insulting the gov't and our troops and along with him Harry Reid should also have those techniques used on him as he is also a traitor..

[tyovan]

Give us 20 years. I am sure by that point we will have started our next civil war.

Do you really think so?

[tyovan]

I love this article, it is 100% correct...I think that instead of just deporting the liberals, they should be sent to prison at Gitmo, that would tech them a lesson...Senator Durban should have each of the interrogaiton techniques e calls torture used on huim until he apologizes for that idiotic remark that he made insulting the gov't and our troops and along with him Harry Reid should also have those techniques used on him as he is also a traitor..

Maybe you should read the Constitution of the nation you obviously love so much. :bash:

[vote for Pedro]

I love this article, it is 100% correct...I think that instead of just deporting the liberals, they should be sent to prison at Gitmo, that would tech them a lesson...Senator Durban should have each of the interrogaiton techniques e calls torture used on huim until he apologizes for that idiotic remark that he made insulting the gov't and our troops and along with him Harry Reid should also have those techniques used on him as he is also a traitor..

Maybe you should read the Constitution of the nation you obviously love so much. :bash:

X2

[ElHombre]

I love this article, it is 100% correct...I think that instead of just deporting the liberals, they should be sent to prison at Gitmo, that would tech them a lesson...Senator Durban should have each of the interrogaiton techniques e calls torture used on huim until he apologizes for that idiotic remark that he made insulting the gov't and our troops and along with him Harry Reid should also have those techniques used on him as he is also a traitor..

and when you're done turning the whole world against the US, you can launch the nukes to wipe out every single man, woman, and child you does not 100% agree with your views of how the world should be run.

you can then stand in the ruins of human civilization, the last person alive, a king of necropolis, and thank god that everyone is now forced to agree with you.

[vote for Pedro]

What about those of us that have some conservative views and some liberal views? Please do not respond with something to the effect of:

"Duh! You have to be one or the other!"

X2

[dangerclose]

I love this article, it is 100% correct...I think that instead of just deporting the liberals, they should be sent to prison at Gitmo, that would tech them a lesson...Senator Durban should have each of the interrogaiton techniques e calls torture used on huim until he apologizes for that idiotic remark that he made insulting the gov't and our troops and along with him Harry Reid should also have those techniques used on him as he is also a traitor..

Maybe you should read the Constitution of the nation you obviously love so much. :bash:

X2

Wait .. isn't the constitution a "living" document? As in it can mean anything you want it to mean? It's not the intent of the authors but rather the interpretation of the reader right? That's the way liberal supreme court justices see it.

Relativism - where al qaeda terrorists at Gitmo are just as much victims as jewish women and children incinerated in german concentration camps.

[Werewolf01]

Give us 20 years. I am sure by that point we will have started our next civil war.

Do you really think so?

Yes. The populace is incresingly divided and the far wings of each side of the political spectrum are becoming increasingly militant. The gap between rich and poor is growing and the middle class is shrinking. The chasm between religious fundamentalists and secularists ids growing and challenging everything from public education to the Constitution. People are incresaingly disenchanted with government and have no faith in same. Justice can be bought, the Constitution is constantly ignored by both major parties, and the identity of vast parts of America is changing due to an influx of illegal immigrants that the government refuses to do anything about, and who are increasingly separatist and militant.

[vote for Pedro]

I love this article, it is 100% correct...I think that instead of just deporting the liberals, they should be sent to prison at Gitmo, that would tech them a lesson...Senator Durban should have each of the interrogaiton techniques e calls torture used on huim until he apologizes for that idiotic remark that he made insulting the gov't and our troops and along with him Harry Reid should also have those techniques used on him as he is also a traitor..

Maybe you should read the Constitution of the nation you obviously love so much. :bash:

X2

Wait .. isn't the constitution a "living" document? As in it can mean anything you want it to mean? It's not the intent of the authors but rather the interpretation of the reader right? That's the way liberal supreme court justices see it.



Really? When I took Constitutional law in law school, I read and analyzed 100's of the most important Supreme Court rulings of the last 100 years, and that's not what I came away with. And no offense, but you don't know what your talking about. Take doctorate level Constitutional law classes and then discuss how the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution.

[vote for Pedro]

Let me explain something to the liberal haters. All liberals don't hate Amercia. After boot camp when I was at training, me and some friends were sitting around and one of them said to me: "I don't see how anyone in the military can be a democrat." I thought, "yea he's right." I bought into that crap back then. I listened to the Rush Limbaugh's and others who demonized the left. I bought into thier lies. Well that was years ago. After 8 years of military service and a whole lot of college (a conservative college at that), I have changed my one sided view.

I know some of you won't or can't belive this, but I, like so many others in this country, have conservative views and liberal views. I bet a lot of you liberal haters do to, but you don't know it because your head's are so filled with the retoric you can't see it.

[von_Moo142]

This crap is no better than Moore. Why do some of you, and you should all know better, put up with it?


I think Cali. Joe's suggestion is valid. This type of BS has no place in any forum which values intelligent debate, just as BS and conspiracy theory of any other political flavour has no place.

There are several current threads with similar themes, one of them even more lamentable than this. Where is the save MP.net crowd when you need them?

[abncougar]

great article, i love it..........so true...

Accccctually....it's not:


America is the freest nation on earth

Depends on how you measure it...but in terms of economic freedom it CERTAINLY is NOT and political freedom, at best it's in a many ways tie for first

(despite liberal demands for more government control of everything). We have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation on earth,

incorrect

the largest number of self-made millionaires, and the highest average standard of living anywhere,

incorrect

even the richest poor people on the planet.

incorrect

We are the most generous nation because we are the most powerful nation on earth.

ehh? generous relates to giving....and in terms of giving per head....incorrect

Liberals don’t like any of it and they can’t think of one good thing to say about the founding principles of the country they love to hate.



Quite a few inaccuracies in just one paragraph.

Before I get pounded on for being anti-american...which I certainly am not.....I prefer genuine reality to overinflated Donald Trump sized bullpoop.


please do give specific examples of the above statements:

we don't have the lowest unemployment in the world. Its at about 5%, who has lower???

we do give a lot of money to other nations, that is true....the problem lies in that the Governments of those nations are corrupt and the money doesnt get to the people. But still, we give more in foreign aid than anyone else.

[walford]

Yes, that's the one. She says I am guilty of treason because I have a few liberal views.She's a bit more specific than that. A classic Leftist tactic is to offer vague accusations but no specifics. We're simply supposed to take your word for it. From Treason (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1400050308/thebigpicture-20/002-9245919-0576008?%5Fencoding=UTF8&camp=1789&link%5Fcode=xm2):"McCarthyism" means pointing out positions taken by liberals that are unpopular with the American people. As former President Bush said, "Liberals do not like me talking about liberals." The reason they sob about the dark night of fascism under McCarthy is to prevent Americans from ever noticing that liberals consistently attack their own country." -- Ann Coulter, P. 4

"Liberals don't mind discussing who is more patriotic if patriotism is defined as redistributing income and vetoing the Pledge of Allegiance. Only if patriotism is defined as supporting America do they get testy and drone on about 'McCarthyism.'" -- Ann Coulter, P. 6

"Whenever a liberal begins a statement with 'I don't know which is more frightening,' you know the answer is going to be pretty clear." -- Ann Coulter, P. 6

"The portrayal of Senator Joe McCarthy as a wild-eyed demagogue destroying innocent lives is sheer liberal hobgoblinism. Liberals weren't cowering in fear during the McCarthy era. They were systematically undermining the nation's ability to defend itself while waging a bellicose campaign of lies to blacken McCarthy's name. Everything you think you know about McCarthy is a hegemonic lie. Liberals denounced McCarthy because they were afraid of getting caught, so they fought back like animals to hide their own collaboration with a regime as evil as the Nazis." -- Ann Coulter, P. 10

"...(A)fter World War II, the Democratic Party suffered from the same sort of pusillanimous psychosis that seized all of France after World War I. The entire party began to lose its nerve for sacrifice, heroism, and bravery. Beginning in the fifties, there was a real fight for the soul of the Democratic Party. By the late sixties, the contest was over. The anti-Communist Democrats had lost. -- Ann Coulter, P. 11

"Democrats are on the precipice of securing their reputation as the Chamberlains of our time. In fact, today's appeasers are worse than Neville Chamberlain : Chamberlain didn't have himself as an example." -- Ann Coulter, P. 13

"The only subject fewer authentic Americans cared about than the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo was World Cup Soccer. America is an epic global battle with ruthless savages who seek our destruction, and liberals are feeling sorry for the terrorists." -- Ann Coulter, P. 15

"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant." -- Ann Coulter, P. 16

"A half century later, when the only people who call themselves Communists are harmless cranks, it is difficult to grasp the importance of McCarthy's crusade. But there's a reason 'Communist' now sounds about as threatening as 'monarchist' -- and it's not because of intrepid New York Times editorials denouncing McCarthy and praising Harvard educated Soviet spies. McCarthy made it a disgrace to be a Communist. Domestic Communism could never recover." -- Ann Coulter, P. 33

"Among the most notorious Soviet spies in high-level positions in the Roosevelt and Truman administrations -- now proved absolutely, beyond question by the Soviet cables -- were Alger Hiss at the State Department; Harry Dexter White, assistant secretary of the Treasury Department, later appointed to the International Monetary Fund by President Truman; Lauchlin Currie, personal assistant to President Roosevelt and White House liaison to the State Department under both Roosevelt and Truman; Laurence Duggan, head of the Latin American Desk at the State Department; Frank Coe, US representative on the International Monetary Fund; Solomon Adler, senior Treasury Department official; Klaus Fuchs, top atomic scientist; and Duncan Lee, senior aide to the head of the OSS." -- Ann Coulter, P. 44

"McCarthy was a popularizer, a brawler. Republican elitists abhor demagogic appeals to working-class Democrats. Fighting like a Democrat is a breach of etiquette worse than using the wrong fork. McCarthy is sniffed at for not playing by Marquis of Queensbury Rules -- rules of engagement demanded only of Republicans. Well without McCarthy, Republicans might be congratulating themselves on their excellent behavior from the gulag right now." -- Ann Coulter, P. 70

"The idea of a bowed and terrified liberal minority during McCarthy's 'reign of terror' is poppycock. Then as now, all elite opinion was against McCarthy." -- Ann Coulter, P. 92

"Contrary to today's image of McCarthy as a despised Torquemada, McCarthy was given a rare state funeral with a private memorial service in the Senate chamber, his seat covered with flowers. St. Matthew's Cathedral bestowed him with the highest honor the Catholic Church can confer, performing a Solemn Pontifical Requiem Mass before one hundred priests and two thousand well-wishers. Seventy senators attended his funeral, as did J. Edgar Hoover. Thirty thousand Americans lined up outside the Washington funeral home where McCarthy lay to pay their final respects from early in the morning until late at night. Condolences poured in to McCarthy's wife, amounting to more than seventy bags of mail." -- Ann Coulter, P. 123

"Enragingly, liberals talk about Vietnam as if it proves something about the use of force generally rather than the Democrats own bungling incompetence in military affairs. Historical accounts of the Vietnam war are incomprehensible because liberals refuse to admit the failure of their own national security strategy. The only important lesson from the Vietnam War is this: Democrats lose wars." -- Ann Coulter, P. 125

"In another show of America's force to the world, when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Carter responded by boycotting the Olympics. And thus was a fearsome blow struck at little fourteen-year-old American girls who had spent their lives training for the Olympics." -- Ann Coulter, P. 127

"No matter what the evidence, liberals insist that only their tender ministrations are capable of calming murderous dictators. Negotiation and engagement are said to "work" because, after Democrats spend years dillydallying with lunatic despots who threaten America, eventually a Republican president comes in and threatens aggressive military action. In a fascinating fifty-year pattern -- completely indiscernible to liberals -- murderous despots succumb to "engagement" shortly after a Republican president threatens to bomb them. This allows liberals to hail years of impotent negotiation and engagement as a foreign policy 'win'." -- Ann Coulter, P. 143

"For fifty years, America's foreign policy failures have not been problems of "national dialogue" or "preventative" action or the national psyche. There is one simple problem: Democrats can't handle foreign policy. You could almost forgive the Democrats for their spectacular record of failure in foreign policy. But then they have the audacity to cite their own derelict handling of the military to argue that it is always a fool's errand to deploy troops in defense of the nation. Remember Vietnam!" Ann Coulter, P. 144

"Liberals are very big on taking 'the long view' when evaluating their foreign policies. They create horrendous foreign policy disasters, but then eventually, a Republican is elected President and cleans up the mess. They said containment would work and, lo and behold, forty years later -- right at the end of the Reagan administration -- the Soviet Union was stopped dead in its tracks. That's taking 'the long view.' Praise God President Bush is not 'another Harry Truman.'" -- Ann Coulter, P. 155

"Reagan took an approach to the Cold War dramatically different from any other US President. To wit, he thought we should win. This was a fresh concept. At the time, it was widely ridiculed as a dangerous alteration of US policy. Only after it worked was Reagan's dangerous foreign policy recast as merely a continuation of the policies of his predecessors." -- Ann Coulter, P. 158

"When contemplating a shield that would protect America for incoming missiles, Democrats suddenly became hardheaded fiscal conservatives. For the first time in recorded history, liberals were concerned about the cost and usefulness of a government program. These people believe federally funded art therapy for the homeless will pay for itself. That you can take to the bank. But a shield to repel incoming nuclear missiles from American soil they said, was too expensive and wouldn't work." -- Ann Coulter, P. 162

"Judging by their positions at the time, rather than their post hoc allegations, Democrats adored the Soviet Union. Congressional Democrats repeatedly opposed funding anti-Communist rebels, they opposed Reagan's military build-up, they opposed building a shield to protect America from incoming missiles, they opposed putting missiles in Europe. As a rule, Democrats opposed anything opposed by their cherished Soviet Union." -- Ann Coulter, P. 171

"Even if corners were cut, (Iran-Contra) was a brilliant scheme. There is no possibility that anyone in any Democratic administration would have gone to such lengths to fund anti-Communist forces. When Democrats scheme from the White House, it's to cover up the President's affair with an intern. When Republicans scheme, it's to support embattled anti-Communist freedom fighters sold out by the Democrats." -- Ann Coulter, P. 179

"Whenever liberals start to droning on about 'complex issues' for which there are no 'simple solutions,' hide Grandma and the kids: Rancid policy proposals are coming." -- Ann Coulter, P. 182

"Liberals said Reagan was dangerous and his rhetoric scary. They ridiculed him as an idiot for believing the Soviet Union could be toppled. They opposed him on every front -- strengthening the military, aiding and arming anti-Communist rebels around the world, invading Grenada, preparing to win a nuclear war, building a nuclear shield, and waging a spiritual crusade against Soviet totalitarianism. Reagan said the Soviet Union was an evil empire and we would prevail. He called the ball, the shot, and the pocket, and he won the game. But now we're supposed to believe he was lucky. Liberals lie about Reagan's victory because when Reagan won the Cold War, he proved them wrong on everything they had done and said throughout the Cold War." -- Ann Coulter, P. 190

"While the form of treachery varies slightly from case to case, liberals always manage to take the position that most undermines American security." -- Ann Coulter, P. 203

"Whenever a liberal begins a peevish complaint with a throat-clearing equivocation like, "Of course, we all agree," your antennae should go up. This is how liberals couch statements they assume all Americans would demand they make, but which they secretly chafe at." -- Ann Coulter, P. 204

"Fascinatingly, liberal proposals for achieving goals -- about which 'of course, we all agree' -- are invariably the opposite of what any normal person might think would work. Instead of punishing bad behavior and rewarding good behavior, liberals often feel it is the better part of valor to reward bad behavior and punish good behavior. Of course we all agree that Fidel Castro is a bad man. That's why we need to lift travel restrictions and trade with Cuba. Of course, everyone would like to see Saddam Hussein removed from power. That's why we must not do anything to remove him from power." -- Ann Coulter, P. 205

"Only a war that serves no conceivable national interest gets the New York Time's endorsement. Liberals warm to the idea of American mothers weeping for their sons, but only if their deaths will not make America any safer." -- Ann Coulter, P. 212

"Democrats always assure us that deterrence will work, but when the time comes to deter, they're against it." -- Ann Coulter, P. 213

"Democrats couldn't care less if people in Indiana hate them. But if Europeans curl their lips, liberals can't look at themselves in the mirror." -- Ann Coulter, P. 228

"Only in the case of a terrorist attack on America are liberals consumed with the assailant's motive. How about: Until we understand why rapists would rather violently rape a woman than take her to dinner and a movie, we cannot respond to the crime of rape." -- Ann Coulter, P. 229

"Gore said foreigners are not worried about 'what the terrorist networks are going to do, but about what we're going to do.' Good. They should be worried. They hate us? We hate them. Americans don't want to make Islamic fanatics love us. We want to make them die. There's nothing like horrendous physical pain to quell anger. Japanese Kamikazes pilots hated us once, too. A couple of well-aimed nuclear weapons got their attention. Now they are gentle little lambs." -- Ann Coulter, P. 230

"Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said any assumption that the US would not use force against North Korea would be a mistake. Such bellicosity frightens liberals. The left's reaction to nutty despots is: he might hit me, so I'll be nice. Rumsfeld's idea is: He'll hit me? Maybe I'll hit him. The beauty of that approach cannot be denied." -- Ann Coulter, P. 243

"(Sheryl) Crow explained that the 'best way to solve problems is to not have enemies.' War solves that problem too: We won't have any enemies because we're going to kill them. Crow warned of 'huge karmic retributions that will follow.' She seemed not to understand that America going to war is huge karmic retribution. They killed three thousand Americans and now they're going to die." -- Ann Coulter, P. 248

"Fundamentalist Muslim terrorists kill three thousand Americans, but America isn't supposed to respond, because if we respond, they'll respond. We always hear about 'karmic retributions' and the 'cycle of violence' only after we've been hit." -- Ann Coulter, P. 249

"Being anti-war in Hollywood was an act of bravery on the order of the keynote speaker at a PLO dinner making jokes about Ariel Sharon." -- Ann Coulter, P. 255

"...Sean Penn claimed to be 'serv[ing] the country' by giving aid and comfort to an enemy about to be attacked by the US. He said it made him feel more patriotic to dissent from the war aims of his nation. It is at least a counterintuitive position. Most people would not instantly grasp how it is more patriotic to always root against America. White supremacists should try claiming that burning crosses is more supportive of civil rights than not burning them." -- Ann Coulter, P. 255

"In June 2002, airport security searched Al Gore. There's a lot not to like about Gore, but he's not a terrorist. Gore said he was glad he was searched. Why? To spare a terrorist the trouble? This is a serious national issue; why must liberals lie? Searching Al Gore is purely a religious act. It is the purposeless fetishistic performance of ritual in accordance with the civic religion of liberalism." -- Ann Coulter, P. 262

"There were precisely two groups of people who desperately wanted airport security to be browbeaten into giving suspicious passengers a pass: terrorists and Democrats." -- Ann Coulter, P. 264

"Americans cannot comprehend how their fellow countrymen could not love their country. But the left's anti-Americanism is intrinsic to their entire worldview. Liberals promote the right of Islamic fanatics for the same reason they promote the rights of adulterers, ****ographers, abortionists, criminals, and Communists. They instinctively root for anarchy against civilization. The inevitable logic of the liberal position is to be for treason." -- Ann Coulter, P. 292 So ban me.

[California Joe]

C'mon walford, she's a bomb thrower and you know that. I'm sure if I actually cared enough I could find same amount of quotes from an Al Franken book that would demonize consevatives. People like her always make perfect sense right until they spin off on some mental tangent. She sounds like she wanted to be Joe McCarthy's "Monica" for chrissakes.

[vote for Pedro]

"walford"
Yes, that's the one. She says I am guilty of treason because I have a few liberal views.She's a bit more specific than that. A classic Leftist tactic is to offer vague accusations but no specifics. We're simply supposed to take your word for it.

Sorry I didn't get into specifics, now I'm a leftist? What I was refering to was I saw Ann on Fox news during the early stages of the war in Iraq and I remember her saying people who speak out against the war are commiting treason. I didn't think we should have invaded Iraq, so she was refering to people like me.

[von_Moo142]

great article, i love it..........so true...

Accccctually....it's not:


America is the freest nation on earth

Depends on how you measure it...but in terms of economic freedom it CERTAINLY is NOT and political freedom, at best it's in a many ways tie for first

(despite liberal demands for more government control of everything). We have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation on earth,

incorrect

the largest number of self-made millionaires, and the highest average standard of living anywhere,

incorrect

even the richest poor people on the planet.

incorrect

We are the most generous nation because we are the most powerful nation on earth.

ehh? generous relates to giving....and in terms of giving per head....incorrect

Liberals don’t like any of it and they can’t think of one good thing to say about the founding principles of the country they love to hate.



Quite a few inaccuracies in just one paragraph.

Before I get pounded on for being anti-american...which I certainly am not.....I prefer genuine reality to overinflated Donald Trump sized bullpoop.


please do give specific examples of the above statements:

we don't have the lowest unemployment in the world. Its at about 5%, who has lower???

we do give a lot of money to other nations, that is true....the problem lies in that the Governments of those nations are corrupt and the money doesnt get to the people. But still, we give more in foreign aid than anyone else.

For 2004: Eight EU25 countries, Japan, New Zealand and Austalia all had lower unemployemnt rates than the US (at 5.5%). There may well be other nations that I've missed.

For foreign aid, you will find that per capita or by percentage of GDP, many other nations give more government foreign aid than the US. Of course, if you want to ingore population and GDP, then the US really does kgive the most international aid. It's difficult to give specifics, but you may find the third reference useful.

Not that this matters, since you can turn round and blame the liberal media bias or whatever...

Sources:

http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/portal/page?_pageid=1090,30070682,1090_33076576&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

CIA world factbook, various

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp#ForeignAidNumbersinChartsandGraphs

[vote for Pedro]

Yes, that's the one. She says I am guilty of treason because I have a few liberal views.She's a bit more specific than that. A classic Leftist tactic is to offer vague accusations but no specifics. We're simply supposed to take your word for it.

"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America's self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant." -- Ann Coulter, P. 16



Is that specific enough for you, you wrote it in the same post?

[abncougar]

great article, i love it..........so true...

Accccctually....it's not:


America is the freest nation on earth

Depends on how you measure it...but in terms of economic freedom it CERTAINLY is NOT and political freedom, at best it's in a many ways tie for first

(despite liberal demands for more government control of everything). We have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation on earth,

incorrect

the largest number of self-made millionaires, and the highest average standard of living anywhere,

incorrect

even the richest poor people on the planet.

incorrect

We are the most generous nation because we are the most powerful nation on earth.

ehh? generous relates to giving....and in terms of giving per head....incorrect

Liberals don’t like any of it and they can’t think of one good thing to say about the founding principles of the country they love to hate.



Quite a few inaccuracies in just one paragraph.

Before I get pounded on for being anti-american...which I certainly am not.....I prefer genuine reality to overinflated Donald Trump sized bullpoop.


please do give specific examples of the above statements:

we don't have the lowest unemployment in the world. Its at about 5%, who has lower???

we do give a lot of money to other nations, that is true....the problem lies in that the Governments of those nations are corrupt and the money doesnt get to the people. But still, we give more in foreign aid than anyone else.

For 2004: Eight EU25 countries, Japan, New Zealand and Austailia all had lower unemployemnt rates than the US (at 5.5%).

For foreign aid, you will find that per capita or by percentage of GDP, many other nations give more government foreign aid than the US. Of course, if you want to ingore population and GDP, then the US really does kgive the most international aid. It's difficult to give specifics, but you may find the third reference useful.

Not that this matters, since you can turn round and blame the liberal media bias or whatever...

Sources:

http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/portal/page?_pageid=1090,30070682,1090_33076576&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

CIA world factbook, various

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp#ForeignAidNumbersinChartsandGraphs

The USs numbers were considerably larger, yes......with regards to percentage of GNP....so the US has a larger GNP, so even though we do give more, its irrelevant because its only a small percentage of our GNP???

im not trying to sound like jackass, im trying to learn something here

[Dennis G]

The only way to kill the Socialist, wealth-destroying, negative-NPV projects welfare state is to take the money away. You have to attack on two fronts: flat tax on one end, which will make the Marxists' favorite rhetorical technique---histrionic "class warfare" pandering to pocketbooks in order to shore up political capital--- much more difficult to do; and Constitutional requirements for fiscal and monetary discipline on the other. Shackled, neutered, limited government.

Some won't care for this because it will mean that government cannot get involved in monitoring bedroom conduct, either; I don't care, I just want to see per capita GDP increase as the % of GDP spent on government programs declines. In other words, I want you and I to both have money in our pockets---I trust you to decide whether you want to give your cash to your church or use it to buy Jenna Jameson DVDs or a Sea Doo or whatever.

Until then, we will continue to send good money after bad in order to subsidize projects that the market has rejected as unworkable. Think about what that means---imagine a corporation that routinely took on programs whose future cash flows, discounted back to the present to account for risk and the time value of money, invariably failed to meet their initial investment costs.

An interesting argument can be made that the loss-leader projects have to be compared to what would happen if they weren't funded, but now imagine if a CEO ran his company into the ground and asked to be excused on the grounds that the alternative was to lose even more money. There are, of course, some programs that the government must take on, either because of sheer scale and coordination problems, because they involve killing people overseas, or because of government's advantages in dealing with litigation. But the liberal mindset is one that believes taxes have no consequences and that government spending is a net creator of wealth.

[von_Moo142]

great article, i love it..........so true...

Accccctually....it's not:


America is the freest nation on earth

Depends on how you measure it...but in terms of economic freedom it CERTAINLY is NOT and political freedom, at best it's in a many ways tie for first

(despite liberal demands for more government control of everything). We have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation on earth,

incorrect

the largest number of self-made millionaires, and the highest average standard of living anywhere,

incorrect

even the richest poor people on the planet.

incorrect

We are the most generous nation because we are the most powerful nation on earth.

ehh? generous relates to giving....and in terms of giving per head....incorrect

Liberals don’t like any of it and they can’t think of one good thing to say about the founding principles of the country they love to hate.



Quite a few inaccuracies in just one paragraph.

Before I get pounded on for being anti-american...which I certainly am not.....I prefer genuine reality to overinflated Donald Trump sized bullpoop.


please do give specific examples of the above statements:

we don't have the lowest unemployment in the world. Its at about 5%, who has lower???

we do give a lot of money to other nations, that is true....the problem lies in that the Governments of those nations are corrupt and the money doesnt get to the people. But still, we give more in foreign aid than anyone else.

For 2004: Eight EU25 countries, Japan, New Zealand and Austailia all had lower unemployemnt rates than the US (at 5.5%).

For foreign aid, you will find that per capita or by percentage of GDP, many other nations give more government foreign aid than the US. Of course, if you want to ingore population and GDP, then the US really does kgive the most international aid. It's difficult to give specifics, but you may find the third reference useful.

Not that this matters, since you can turn round and blame the liberal media bias or whatever...

Sources:

http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.int/portal/page?_pageid=1090,30070682,1090_33076576&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

CIA world factbook, various

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp#ForeignAidNumbersinChartsandGraphs

The USs numbers were considerably larger, yes......with regards to percentage of GNP....so the US has a larger GNP, so even though we do give more, its irrelevant because its only a small percentage of our GNP???

im not trying to sound like jackass, im trying to learn something here

Well I think it's far from irrelevent, as US money is just as good as anyone elses (in principal at least). And no-one can question the fact that the amount given by the US is very large.

But that doesn't detract from the point that other countries do give a greater proportion of what they "earn" in foreign aid.

But I'm not going to say that I think the US should or shouldn't give more, becuase that's not for me to say. I just want to make sure we are all aware of how things stand.

[vote for Pedro]

The only way to kill the Socialist, wealth-destroying, negative-NPV projects welfare state is to take the money away. You have to attack on two fronts: flat tax on one end, which will make the Marxists' favorite rhetorical technique---histrionic "class warfare" pandering to pocketbooks in order to shore up political capital--- much more difficult to do; and Constitutional requirements for fiscal and monetary discipline on the other. Shackled, neutered, limited government.

Some won't care for this because it will mean that government cannot get involved in monitoring bedroom conduct, either; I don't care, I just want to see per capita GDP increase as the % of GDP spent on government programs declines. In other words, I want you and I to both have money in our pockets---I trust you to decide whether you want to give your cash to your church or use it to buy Jenna Jameson DVDs or a Sea Doo or whatever.

Until then, we will continue to send good money after bad in order to subsidize projects that the market has rejected as unworkable. Think about what that means---imagine a corporation that routinely took on programs whose future cash flows, discounted back to the present to account for risk and the time value of money, invariably failed to meet their initial investment costs.

An interesting argument can be made that the loss-leader projects have to be compared to what would happen if they weren't funded, but now imagine if a CEO ran his company into the ground and asked to be excused on the grounds that the alternative was to lose even more money. There are, of course, some programs that the government must take on, either because of sheer scale and coordination problems, because they involve killing people overseas, or because of government's advantages in dealing with litigation. But the liberal mindset is one that believes taxes have no consequences and that government spending is a net creator of wealth.

I have liberal views, but I don't believe what you say I believe. My whole point to every post I made on this thread is that I don't agree with the notion that "all liberals think this..." or "all conservatives think like that...". It simply is not true.

[tyovan]

Give us 20 years. I am sure by that point we will have started our next civil war.

Do you really think so?

Yes. The populace is incresingly divided and the far wings of each side of the political spectrum are becoming increasingly militant. The gap between rich and poor is growing and the middle class is shrinking. The chasm between religious fundamentalists and secularists ids growing and challenging everything from public education to the Constitution. People are incresaingly disenchanted with government and have no faith in same. Justice can be bought, the Constitution is constantly ignored by both major parties, and the identity of vast parts of America is changing due to an influx of illegal immigrants that the government refuses to do anything about, and who are increasingly separatist and militant.

Any predictions about what it would be like if it hypothetically happens? Two sides, many sides?

[walford]

C'mon walford, she's a bomb thrower and you know that. I'm sure if I actually cared enough I could find same amount of quotes from an Al Franken book that would demonize consevatives. People like her always make perfect sense right until they spin off on some mental tangent. She sounds like she wanted to be Joe McCarthy's "Monica" for chrissakes.She actually has used those very words to describe herself. I recall Dan Flynn being asked why he chose the title Why the Left Hates America. His first response was that it gets attention. Then he went on to describe examples [see next paragraph] The Left detests the likes of Ann Coulter is that she not only does not apologize for being conservative, she actually has the temerity to attack people for being Leftists.

In a rally Flynn attended, one young lady said the US is a “little bitch – someone broke her nail, so [America] is blowing up the whole world.” Another youth was selling t-shirts with Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld portrayed as icons of the true ‘Axis of Evil.’ Other shirt represented the President of the United States as today’s Hitler. With little prompting, the vendor offered that he considered America a fascist state. In rally I observed, some people with contrarian signs infiltrated a 'peace' rally (http://utopia-unmasked.us/counter-demo2003.10-25.htm) without saying a word. They were physically attacked, including pushing a pregnant woman to the ground. While I was giving a speech at a simultaneous Support the Troops rally, people from ANSWER came over to our Port-a-Johns and smeared piss and **** all over the inside.

Forgive me if I shed no tears for people who may be offended by Ann Coulter calling them as she sees them. Insofar as McCarthy is concerned, the demonization merited refuting. History in fact has shown him to be right in many cases. Perhaps it was impolite of her to point that out.


"walford"
Yes, that's the one. She says I am guilty of treason because I have a few liberal views.She's a bit more specific than that. A classic Leftist tactic is to offer vague accusations but no specifics. We're simply supposed to take your word for it. Sorry I didn't get into specifics, now I'm a leftist? What I was refering to was I saw Ann on Fox news during the early stages of the war in Iraq and I remember her saying people who speak out against the war are commiting treason. I didn't think we should have invaded Iraq, so she was refering to people like me.I said that broad unsubstantiated characterizations are a Leftist tactic. Own the label if you like. It is not opposing Saddam's forcible removal that can be considered treason. I had concerns about the timing myself. This is the kind of crap I'm talking about...
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1723_IMG4.jpghttp://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1743_IMG.JPG
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/118-1867_IMG.JPGhttp://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/RIP_Here_Lies_George_Bush.jpg
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/Zionist_Pigs_Jew_devil.jpg

Forgive those of us who see this **** and cheer Coulter on for calling them on it.

[fremen]

The whole article (if you can call it that) is full of ****. If it were on paper I would use it to wipe my ass and mail it to that whore Ann Coulter. I hope it was posted in a spirit of humor (bad humor), because if not I have a special finger raised for the one who posted it. Good day.

[walford]

rofl

[vote for Pedro]

C'mon walford, she's a bomb thrower and you know that. I'm sure if I actually cared enough I could find same amount of quotes from an Al Franken book that would demonize consevatives. People like her always make perfect sense right until they spin off on some mental tangent. She sounds like she wanted to be Joe McCarthy's "Monica" for chrissakes.She actually has used those very words to describe herself. I recall Dan Flynn being asked why he chose the title Why the Left Hates America. His first response was that it gets attention. Then he went on to describe examples [see next paragraph] The Left detests the likes of Ann Coulter is that she not only does not apologize for being conservative, she actually has the temerity to attack people for being Leftists.

In a rally Flynn attended, one young lady said the US is a “little bitch – someone broke her nail, so [America] is blowing up the whole world.” Another youth was selling t-shirts with Bush, Cheney & Rumsfeld portrayed as icons of the true ‘Axis of Evil.’ Other shirt represented the President of the United States as today’s Hitler. With little prompting, the vendor offered that he considered America a fascist state. In rally I observed, some people with contrarian signs infiltrated a 'peace' rally (http://utopia-unmasked.us/counter-demo2003.10-25.htm) without saying a word. They were physically attacked, including pushing a pregnant woman to the ground. While I was giving a speech at a simultaneous Support the Troops rally, people from ANSWER came over to our Port-a-Johns and smeared piss and **** all over the inside.

Forgive me if I shed no tears for people who may be offended by Ann Coulter calling them as she sees them. Insofar as McCarthy is concerned, the demonization merited refuting. History in fact has shown him to be right in many cases. Perhaps it was impolite of her to point that out.


"walford"
Yes, that's the one. She says I am guilty of treason because I have a few liberal views.She's a bit more specific than that. A classic Leftist tactic is to offer vague accusations but no specifics. We're simply supposed to take your word for it. Sorry I didn't get into specifics, now I'm a leftist? What I was refering to was I saw Ann on Fox news during the early stages of the war in Iraq and I remember her saying people who speak out against the war are commiting treason. I didn't think we should have invaded Iraq, so she was refering to people like me.I said that broad unsubstantiated characterizations are a Leftist tactic. Own the label if you like. It is not opposing Saddam's forcible removal that can be considered treason. I had concerns about the timing myself. This is the kind of crap I'm talking about...
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1723_IMG4.jpghttp://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1743_IMG.JPG
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/118-1867_IMG.JPGhttp://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/RIP_Here_Lies_George_Bush.jpg
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/Zionist_Pigs_Jew_devil.jpg

Forgive those of us who see this **** and cheer Coulter on for calling them on it.

I agree with you that the above protesters are idiots, complete idiots, I just don't like being lumped together with them just because I think that segragation was bad, and it's good that women vote. Again, all people with liberal views do not join together with those idiots in the pictures, just like all conservatives aren't members of the KKK.

[Durandal]

The next retard that quotes Ann Coulter and it isn't a joke deserves to be banned. Holy Christ what an annoying ****. Funny how the same people that can goof on Al Franken and excoriate Howard Dean don't actually get the joke that Ann Coulter is a ridiculous attention whore.

Amen brother.

[Nikitaras]

Those wacky American Talibans are at it again.

"Whether they are defending the Soviet Union or bleating for Saddam Hussein, liberals are always against America.

Isn't it amazing that the same loonies that claim that the Liberals defend the Soviet Union and Saddam Hussein are also the ones that advocate the tactics of both against Liberals?

Which way is the Gulag o' gang of Christo-Fascists?

Please. If we used the tactics of leftist icons like Stalin - there would be no debate today as you all would've been liquidated decades ago. It's the left that rounds people up and commits mass murder to bring about their socialist utopia. I just wish these people would keep their word and leave.

I didn't say that the RW loons use the tactics of Stalin, but if they could get away with it they would. They despise commies and SH but they would love to use their methods.

[Nikitaras]

C'mon walford, she's a bomb thrower and you know that. I'm sure if I actually cared enough I could find same amount of quotes from an Al Franken book that would demonize consevatives. People like her always make perfect sense right until they spin off on some mental tangent. She sounds like she wanted to be Joe McCarthy's "Monica" for chrissakes.

I seem to recall a rather creepy and disturbing photograph of that skank draped over McCarthy's tombstone, looking like she's about to dry hump the bloody thing.

[California Joe]

Ok, you take a woman that has been on the cover of Time (an obvious media figure) and say she's necessary to counteract the evil of a bunch of freaks that don't like the President? It's kinda apples and oranges, they aren't in the same arena. She's carved a niche for herself. Much like G. Gordon Liddy did in radio based on slandering Clinton when not proclaiming how virile and potent he still was. It's still all a side show.

[chauncy republicans]

The next retard that quotes Ann Coulter and it isn't a joke deserves to be banned. Holy Christ what an annoying ****. Funny how the same people that can goof on Al Franken and excoriate Howard Dean don't actually get the joke that Ann Coulter is a ridiculous attention whore.
What's really funny is that people actually believe she has more credibility than Micheal Moore.

[walford]

Ok, you take a woman that has been on the cover of Time (an obvious media figure) and say she's necessary to counteract the evil of a bunch of freaks that don't like the President? It's kinda apples and oranges, they aren't in the same arena. She's carved a niche for herself. Much like G. Gordon Liddy did in radio based on slandering Clinton when not proclaiming how virile and potent he still was. It's still all a side show.I recall John Dean suing Liddy for libel on-air. He said that he was going to shove that lawsuit up his ass. The next few years saw Dean avoiding trial. Finally the charges were dropped.

If the Clintons wish to sue the G-Man for slander, they are free to do so. They won't because, as he has pointed out before, the best defense for slander/libel is to show that the statement(s) in question were in fact the truth. I defy you to name one statement that Liddy has made about the ever-truthful Clintons that was false.

Nice try, though.

[walford]

What's really funny is that people actually believe she has more credibility than Micheal Moore.The difference is that Coulter makes no effort to conceal the fact that she is a 'bomb-throwing' COMMENTATOR, while Moore [and his toadies] portray himself as a documentarian when in fact he is a shill (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-04-14) for those who are killing men, women and children in order to install a Saddamist dictatorship:...The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win...

...There is a lot of talk amongst Bush's opponents that we should turn this war over to the United Nations. Why should the other countries of this world, countries who tried to talk us out of this folly, now have to clean up our mess? I oppose the U.N. or anyone else risking the lives of their citizens to extract us from our debacle. I'm sorry, but the majority of Americans supported this war once it began and, sadly, that majority must now sacrifice their children until enough blood has been let that maybe -- just maybe -- God and the Iraqi people will forgive us in the end....

[abncougar]

What's really funny is that people actually believe she has more credibility than Micheal Moore.The difference is that Coulter makes no effort to conceal the fact that she is a 'bomb-throwing' COMMENTATOR, while Moore [and his toadies] portray himself as a documentarian when in fact he is a shill (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-04-14) for those who are killing men, women and children in order to install a Saddamist dictatorship:...The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win...

...There is a lot of talk amongst Bush's opponents that we should turn this war over to the United Nations. Why should the other countries of this world, countries who tried to talk us out of this folly, now have to clean up our mess? I oppose the U.N. or anyone else risking the lives of their citizens to extract us from our debacle. I'm sorry, but the majority of Americans supported this war once it began and, sadly, that majority must now sacrifice their children until enough blood has been let that maybe -- just maybe -- God and the Iraqi people will forgive us in the end....


Good point.

and I have to say, that there are SOME good liberal ideas, but when i say i hate the left, its the unamerican left portrayed in the pictures so nicely provided by walford. the problem is that too often moderate liberals are lumped together with the left, but who can blame them when Democrats in congress (regular liberals, not the extreme left) equate the President to Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot....

[vote for Pedro]

What's really funny is that people actually believe she has more credibility than Micheal Moore.The difference is that Coulter makes no effort to conceal the fact that she is a 'bomb-throwing' COMMENTATOR, while Moore [and his toadies] portray himself as a documentarian when in fact he is a shill (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-04-14) for those who are killing men, women and children in order to install a Saddamist dictatorship:...The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win...

...There is a lot of talk amongst Bush's opponents that we should turn this war over to the United Nations. Why should the other countries of this world, countries who tried to talk us out of this folly, now have to clean up our mess? I oppose the U.N. or anyone else risking the lives of their citizens to extract us from our debacle. I'm sorry, but the majority of Americans supported this war once it began and, sadly, that majority must now sacrifice their children until enough blood has been let that maybe -- just maybe -- God and the Iraqi people will forgive us in the end....


Good point.

and I have to say, that there are SOME good liberal ideas, but when i say i hate the left, its the unamerican left portrayed in the pictures so nicely provided by walford. the problem is that too often moderate liberals are lumped together with the left, but who can blame them when Democrats in congress (regular liberals, not the extreme left) equate the President to Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot....

Good points.

[chauncy republicans]

"It's always so comforting when Muslims cite the precise verse from the Quran that tells them killing is wrong. Don't all empathetic human beings understand that instinctively? What if they lost their Quran that day and couldn't remember?" (Ann Coulter in "My Name Is Adolf", 9/11/2002)

Apearantly Ms. Coulter is'nt an empathetic human being...

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building." (Ann Coulter in a New York Observer interview, 8/20/2002)

This lady is absolutly less credible, more anti-American and more fundamentaly radical than your average fire-brand Islamic cleric!

We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

Funny you would think somebody as smart as Coulter could be able to see the difficulties we face today are much diferent than that of sixty one years ago.
More fundamentaly fanatical than who? No way...

COULTER: I take the biblical idea. God gave us the earth.

PETER FENN (Democratic strategist): Oh, OK.

COULTER: We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees.

FENN: This is a great idea.

COULTER: God says, "Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours."

FENN: Terrific. We're Americans, so we should consume as much of the earth's resources...

COULTER: Yes! Yes.

FENN: ... as fast as we possibly can.

COULTER: As opposed to living like the Indians.


And you can't forget this one...

"I think, on the basis of the recent Supreme Court ruling that we can't execute the retarded, American journalists commit mass murder without facing the ultimate penalty," Ms. Coulter told me. "I think they are retarded. I'm trying to communicate to the American people and I have to work through a retarded person!"


Yes, Ms. Coulter has clearly established herself to be a very level headed trustworthy source of political insight. :lol:

[California Joe]

Ok, you take a woman that has been on the cover of Time (an obvious media figure) and say she's necessary to counteract the evil of a bunch of freaks that don't like the President? It's kinda apples and oranges, they aren't in the same arena. She's carved a niche for herself. Much like G. Gordon Liddy did in radio based on slandering Clinton when not proclaiming how virile and potent he still was. It's still all a side show.I recall John Dean suing Liddy for libel on-air. He said that he was going to shove that lawsuit up his ass. The next few years saw Dean avoiding trial. Finally the charges were dropped.

If the Clintons wish to sue the G-Man for slander, they are free to do so. They won't because, as he has pointed out before, the best defense for slander/libel is to show that the statement(s) in question were in fact the truth. I defy you to name one statement that Liddy has made about the ever-truthful Clintons that was false.

Nice try, though.

****, you don't see grey at all do you. I actually like G Gordon. Used to listen to him for ****s and giggles at lunch. He should blow Clinton for being in office when he started his radio gig. Gave him something to rail against. And helped him build an audience. But I don't take him or Ann Coulter or James Carville or Al Franken at face value. Jesus.

[Flagg]

great article, i love it..........so true...

Accccctually....it's not:


America is the freest nation on earth

Depends on how you measure it...but in terms of economic freedom it CERTAINLY is NOT and political freedom, at best it's in a many ways tie for first

Since 1970, Hong Kong has ranked as the world's freest economy. In the just released Economic Freedom of the World, 2004 Annual Report, Hong Kong remains number one. The report, published by The Fraser Institute in conjunction with the Cato Institute and other think tanks around the world, ranks countries on their adherence to a set of policies that measure the degree of economic freedom. Those countries that safeguard property rights, enforce contracts, allow free trade, maintain low marginal tax rates, ensure sound money, and limit the size and scope of government will score well on the Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) index.

Out of a possible score of 10 on the EFW index, Hong Kong achieved 8.7; Singapore came in a close second at 8.6; while New Zealand, Switzerland, Britain, and the United States tied for third with a score of 8.2. (There is a two-year lag in the data, so those scores are for 2002, not 2004.)

(despite liberal demands for more government control of everything). We have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation on earth,

incorrect

Australia, Austria, Ireland, New Zealand, and UK(and a few others) are all lower and have been for quite some time, based on May, 2005 data.

the largest number of self-made millionaires, and the highest average standard of living anywhere,

incorrect

# In 2004, the U.S. averaged 6.6 infant deaths per 1000 live births, a rate that was behind Australia, Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finalnd, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. (IP)

# In 2004, the average life expectancy for Americans was 77.4, a rate that was behind Australia, Austria, Canada, Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and and tied with Denmark and Ireland. (IP)

# In 2003, the U.S. had the second highest per capita income ($37,800) behind Luxembourg ($55,100). It appears that Norway ($37,700) will soon pass us as well. (IP)

# According to the 2004 U.N. Human Development Index, the U.S. ranked No. 8 on the list of "Most Livable Countries," behind Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium and Iceland (IP)

# The United States is 49th in the world in literacy (the New York Times, Dec. 12, 2004)


even the richest poor people on the planet.

incorrect

With wealth distribution quite lopsided in comparison to many other OECD nations, high per capita GDP nations in Scandinavia for example would likely beat the US handily with "the richest poor people".


We are the most generous nation because we are the most powerful nation on earth.

ehh? generous relates to giving....and in terms of giving per head....incorrect

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_eco_aid_don_cap

The US likely contributes the MOST as a nation which is something to be proud about, BUT contributions PER CAPITA are quite low compared to many other OECD nations.

It equates to Bill Gates bragging about donating $10,000 when he's worth $50 billion, and his neighbors donate $500 when they're worth $500,000.

Liberals don’t like any of it and they can’t think of one good thing to say about the founding principles of the country they love to hate.



Quite a few inaccuracies in just one paragraph.

Before I get pounded on for being anti-american...which I certainly am not.....I prefer genuine reality to overinflated Donald Trump sized bullpoop.


please do give specific examples of the above statements:

we don't have the lowest unemployment in the world. Its at about 5%, who has lower???

we do give a lot of money to other nations, that is true....the problem lies in that the Governments of those nations are corrupt and the money doesnt get to the people. But still, we give more in foreign aid than anyone else.

It's not polite to brag...especially when the bragging is a lie.

And the lie takes away from the very many good deeds performed by people other than Ann Coulter.

[Drunkensquid]

Is this for real?

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1723_IMG4.jpg

[achilles]

America is the freest nation on earth (despite liberal demands for more government control of everything). We have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation on earth, the largest number of self-made millionaires, and the highest average standard of living anywhere, even the richest poor people on the planet.

All i can say is that she is one funny lady...and not too bright either :lol:

[WarriorMonk]

I think people tend to believe Ann Coulter 'coz she's hotter than Michael Moore, duh.

My friend doesn't really believe either of them but he's got lots of pics of Miss Coulter on his hard drive...

[caridon]

great article, i love it..........so true...

Accccctually....it's not:


America is the freest nation on earth

Depends on how you measure it...but in terms of economic freedom it CERTAINLY is NOT and political freedom, at best it's in a many ways tie for first

(despite liberal demands for more government control of everything). We have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation on earth,

incorrect

the largest number of self-made millionaires, and the highest average standard of living anywhere,

incorrect

even the richest poor people on the planet.

incorrect

We are the most generous nation because we are the most powerful nation on earth.

ehh? generous relates to giving....and in terms of giving per head....incorrect

Liberals don’t like any of it and they can’t think of one good thing to say about the founding principles of the country they love to hate.



Quite a few inaccuracies in just one paragraph.

Before I get pounded on for being anti-american...which I certainly am not.....I prefer genuine reality to overinflated Donald Trump sized bullpoop.


please do give specific examples of the above statements:

we don't have the lowest unemployment in the world. Its at about 5%, who has lower???

we do give a lot of money to other nations, that is true....the problem lies in that the Governments of those nations are corrupt and the money doesnt get to the people. But still, we give more in foreign aid than anyone else.

some statistics.
unemployment 141 of 192 good but not the best. (5.8%)
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/lab_une_rat&int=-1

poverty 141 of 192 (at 12.7% poor persons)
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_pop_bel_pov_lin&int=-1

generous. 18 of 18 (last place with 3%)
this compares Aid to military expenditure you give 3% of your military budget in aid. the top country (Denmark) gives 52%
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_com_to_for_aid

that is stats aquired after a 5 min search. i'm fairly shure that more can be found. do you conceede the point ?

/C

[caridon]

The USs numbers were considerably larger, yes......with regards to percentage of GNP....so the US has a larger GNP, so even though we do give more, its irrelevant because its only a small percentage of our GNP???

im not trying to sound like jackass, im trying to learn something here

OK 'il take you upp on this. (and use the bible as an example :) )
(free from memory)
in the bible there is a storry about tha poor womman that gives a little att the temple and is abused by the priest who compare her givings to that of the rich persons. Jesus intercedes and says that her givings are worth much more becose she gives from her needed money while the rich give from their surplus.

This ilustrates a fundamental ehical point that you cant just compare the ammounts given. you must compare the number of persons giving and their welth. because a poor country giving some makes much more of a sacrifice than a rich country gicing the same amount.

Therefore Aid is normaly measyred in % of GNP and then the US dosent realy look good.

/C Atheist, Liberal and (trying to be) ethical

[2Sheds_Jackson]

What's really funny is that people actually believe she has more credibility than Micheal Moore.The difference is that Coulter makes no effort to conceal the fact that she is a 'bomb-throwing' COMMENTATOR, while Moore [and his toadies] portray himself as a documentarian when in fact he is a shill (http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-04-14) for those who are killing men, women and children in order to install a Saddamist dictatorship:

Bravo - you hit the nail on the head. The Right is full of commentators who's job it is to express their opinion. You can agree or disagree with Coulter, Rush, Hannity etc. as you please, but they clearly articulate that they are editorializing.

On the left however, we have the Michael Moore's of the world, who attempt to pre-package and serve up their opinion as something more than just their opinion. Moore sells it as "documentary". Dan Rather went on national TV news, and tried to pass off utter fabrication as fact.

Coulter is entertaining, and that's her job. But we know she's doing a "bit" just like Al Franken is. It's a pity that CBS news and the New York times didn't quite understand that concept.

[California Joe]

It's like saying anyone would take that guy 2Sheds Jackson seriously. I mean come on, he tears down political posters for fun. His IP is a Mental Institution for gawdsakes. p-)

Happy Dads day pal. I got a bike. :D

[2Sheds_Jackson]

It's like saying anyone would take that guy 2Sheds Jackson seriously. I mean come on, he tears down political posters for fun. His IP is a Mental Institution for gawdsakes. p-)

Happy Dads day pal. I got a bike. :D

Coool. I'm still waiting for my lavish and expensive present. Any minute now. Any minute.....and....and...

Well I'm sure they're just having the last few jewels put on it...

[California Joe]

They were probably gonna get you a new clutch but you went and fixed it....

[abncougar]

The USs numbers were considerably larger, yes......with regards to percentage of GNP....so the US has a larger GNP, so even though we do give more, its irrelevant because its only a small percentage of our GNP???

im not trying to sound like jackass, im trying to learn something here

OK 'il take you upp on this. (and use the bible as an example :) )
(free from memory)
in the bible there is a storry about tha poor womman that gives a little att the temple and is abused by the priest who compare her givings to that of the rich persons. Jesus intercedes and says that her givings are worth much more becose she gives from her needed money while the rich give from their surplus.

This ilustrates a fundamental ehical point that you cant just compare the ammounts given. you must compare the number of persons giving and their welth. because a poor country giving some makes much more of a sacrifice than a rich country gicing the same amount.

Therefore Aid is normaly measyred in % of GNP and then the US dosent realy look good.

/C Atheist, Liberal and (trying to be) ethical


yeah yeah, i know the story, and i knew it was only a matter of time before anyone posted it...........well done

[Durandal]

Ok, you take a woman that has been on the cover of Time (an obvious media figure) and say she's necessary to counteract the evil of a bunch of freaks that don't like the President? It's kinda apples and oranges, they aren't in the same arena. She's carved a niche for herself. Much like G. Gordon Liddy did in radio based on slandering Clinton when not proclaiming how virile and potent he still was. It's still all a side show.

no matter how much reason you throw into the discussion/argument some people will not listen Joe.

Its sad, but no more less than the truth.

You are correct though. And this discussion can be used as a base discussion for many issues in today's political world...

Gay Marriage...

Right to Die...

Church and State separation...

And many others. Both sides have extremes that make turn logical discussion into a circus event, playing on the fears of the most simple people that support them, while, I would wager most of middle America grits their teeth and tries to ignore it, hoping for the best.

[Durandal]

A perfect example...

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1723_IMG4.jpg[/quote]

http://www.site73.com/images/post_pics/rd178_7.jpg

Both are radical and melodramatic and wrong. ;)

[ramy]

Deport all your libbies... But just dont send them to Canada.
We have more than enough.

[abncougar]

Deport all your libbies... But just dont send them to Canada.
We have more than enough.

rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl

[caridon]

The USs numbers were considerably larger, yes......with regards to percentage of GNP....so the US has a larger GNP, so even though we do give more, its irrelevant because its only a small percentage of our GNP???

im not trying to sound like jackass, im trying to learn something here

OK 'il take you upp on this. (and use the bible as an example :) )
(free from memory)
in the bible there is a storry about tha poor womman that gives a little att the temple and is abused by the priest who compare her givings to that of the rich persons. Jesus intercedes and says that her givings are worth much more becose she gives from her needed money while the rich give from their surplus.

This ilustrates a fundamental ehical point that you cant just compare the ammounts given. you must compare the number of persons giving and their welth. because a poor country giving some makes much more of a sacrifice than a rich country gicing the same amount.

Therefore Aid is normaly measyred in % of GNP and then the US dosent realy look good.

/C Atheist, Liberal and (trying to be) ethical


yeah yeah, i know the story, and i knew it was only a matter of time before anyone posted it...........well done
Whell when the goal is empty, the goalie has gone out for lunch and siesta and there is a big sign saying "hit ball here" How can you NOT have a go att it :) :) :) :hug:

[golds80]

she is like rush in a way, makes good points sometimes but gets over dramatic sometimes for flair. putting her in the same category as franken is wrong imo......she is much more intelligent and witty. hannity is too bland, he only spouts republican talking points.


now michael savage...... :D

[walford]

A perfect example...
Is this for real?
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1723_IMG4.jpg

http://www.site73.com/images/post_pics/rd178_7.jpg
Both are radical and melodramatic and wrong. ;)One big difference. To answer your question Drunkensquid, it is quite real. The fact that you have to ask exemplifies the point that the media 'protects' us from what their ideological compatriots do and say -- as illustrated in the first example. We simply do not see these all-too-common images because the major networks and newspapers are fully aware that the corn-fed, NASCAR-watching, Bud Lite swilling know-nothings in flyover country simply would not properly understand such images.

While Our Betters would see a strident message from an exhuberant radical, Middle America would only see a fat hairy lezbo waving the Hammer and Sickle [which I have seen the likes of which many times here in the DC area].

BTW, before the Protest Warriors set off to infiltrate the ANSWER rally at the Washington Monument, the major networks were present in the staging area. None of them were there to record the violence (http://utopia-unmasked.us/counter-demo2003.10-25.htm) that these young Idealists visited upon them at the site, however. Not one.

[abncougar]

A perfect example...
Is this for real?
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1723_IMG4.jpg

http://www.site73.com/images/post_pics/rd178_7.jpg
Both are radical and melodramatic and wrong. ;)One big difference. To answer your question Drunkensquid, it is quite real. The fact that you have to ask exemplifies the point that the media 'protects' us from what their ideological compatriots do and say -- as illustrated in the first example. We simply do not see these all-too-common images because the major networks and newspapers are fully aware that the corn-fed, NASCAR-watching, Bud Lite swilling know-nothings in flyover country simply would not properly understand such images.

While Our Betters would see a strident message from an exhuberant radical, Middle America would only see a fat hairy lezbo waving the Hammer and Sickle [which I have seen the likes of which many times here in the DC area].

BTW, before the Protest Warriors set off to infiltrate the ANSWER rally at the Washington Monument, the major networks were present in the staging area. None of them were there to record the violence (http://utopia-unmasked.us/counter-demo2003.10-25.htm) that these young Idealists visited upon them at the site, however. Not one.

true, good **** man. its funny how the scream "no war" and "im a pacifist", and ironically these protest turn into violent demonstrations.

[HooyahCQB]

The USs numbers were considerably larger, yes......with regards to percentage of GNP....so the US has a larger GNP, so even though we do give more, its irrelevant because its only a small percentage of our GNP???

im not trying to sound like jackass, im trying to learn something here

OK 'il take you upp on this. (and use the bible as an example :) )
(free from memory)
in the bible there is a storry about tha poor womman that gives a little att the temple and is abused by the priest who compare her givings to that of the rich persons. Jesus intercedes and says that her givings are worth much more becose she gives from her needed money while the rich give from their surplus.

This ilustrates a fundamental ehical point that you cant just compare the ammounts given. you must compare the number of persons giving and their welth. because a poor country giving some makes much more of a sacrifice than a rich country gicing the same amount.

Therefore Aid is normaly measyred in % of GNP and then the US dosent realy look good.

/C Atheist, Liberal and (trying to be) ethical

I know you're not trying to do this, but we shouldn't judge the generosity of a nation by its government's givings. One must remember the additional aid given not by the government, but by sympathetic private citizens.

[Rumsfailed]

Protest warriors are young idealists!? Ship them to Iraq I say! Your country is facing a recruiting shortfall and these "idealists" are harassing other people from exercising their constitutional rights to demonstrate against the war that's causing it! Of course, they did get their asses kicked by a bunch of hippies, so the insurgency would scare them to death with the first RPG or mortar bomb...

[golds80]

Protest warriors are young idealists!? Ship them to Iraq I say! Your country is facing a recruiting shortfall and these "idealists" are harassing other people from exercising their constitutional rights to demonstrate against the war that's causing it! Of course, they did get their asses kicked by a bunch of hippies, so the insurgency would scare them to death with the first RPG or mortar bomb...


free speech goes both ways.......the liberals just tend to preach love and freedom while acting different. i espescially liked the video of the tolerant liberal man weighing about 220 or so attacking the skinny woman for disagreeing with him.

[caridon]

The USs numbers were considerably larger, yes......with regards to percentage of GNP....so the US has a larger GNP, so even though we do give more, its irrelevant because its only a small percentage of our GNP???

im not trying to sound like jackass, im trying to learn something here

OK 'il take you upp on this. (and use the bible as an example :) )
(free from memory)
in the bible there is a storry about tha poor womman that gives a little att the temple and is abused by the priest who compare her givings to that of the rich persons. Jesus intercedes and says that her givings are worth much more becose she gives from her needed money while the rich give from their surplus.

This ilustrates a fundamental ehical point that you cant just compare the ammounts given. you must compare the number of persons giving and their welth. because a poor country giving some makes much more of a sacrifice than a rich country gicing the same amount.

Therefore Aid is normaly measyred in % of GNP and then the US dosent realy look good.

/C Atheist, Liberal and (trying to be) ethical

I know you're not trying to do this, but we shouldn't judge the generosity of a nation by its government's givings. One must remember the additional aid given not by the government, but by sympathetic private citizens.
That realy depends. Should we not judge a state by the STATES actions. and then separately judge the citizens by their actions ?

One can argue that the states actions (in a democracy) is a reflection of the wishes of its citizens

Also on the practical side. state aid is easily comapired while it is allmost imposible to get correct numbers for private aid ( especialy as much of it is used both domesticaly and abroad)

/C

[drfunk]

I find it sad that so many people on this board actually believe the left and 'liberals' to be so evil and are so venemous towards them. America was founded on Liberalism, it is nothing to be ashamed of at all and liberal values are something most people in the west hold very dearly.

Dont buy into what these right-wing corporate whores are saying, because they are just trying to divide everyone. Do you really believe a liberal can hate america when many of them are fighting and debating so vigorously against things they believe are threatening the very fibre of their nation?

thanks,
drfunk

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

If it wasent for us liberals we would still be stuck in thw ****ing darkages.

[WarriorMonk]

If it wasent for us liberals we would still be stuck in thw f*** darkages.

I guess you're one of the dyslexic ones that should be deported, if you were an American citizen, what is meant to be said is that all liberals who SAID they'd leave should be deported, IE kidnapped, drugged, and paradropped into Africa. Goddamn keep your word, ****tards, and I'll make sure those recruiters can look the other way on my eyesight and asthma issue so I can waste some of your terrorist friends.

[Werewolf01]

A perfect example...

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/117-1723_IMG4.jpg

http://www.site73.com/images/post_pics/rd178_7.jpg

Both are radical and melodramatic and wrong. ;)[/quote]

I don't agree with the fact that we invaded Iraq. But I'd still like to beat this assh*le so hard the apes he evolved from would feel it, then find a rope and a niiiice tree, and..... :fork:

[Durandal]

Walford, the images we see in the larger cities, mainly New York and San Fran are a minority of liberals and you know it. These people we see pictured are RADICALS, and certainly NOT a majority of what I consider the left.

Just like the religious right, probably a larger portion of the right is still a minority and equally loony.

[Durandal]

...America was founded on Liberalism, it is nothing to be ashamed of at all and liberal values are something most people in the west hold very dearly...

Not true really. America was founded on Classic Liberalism, which is more Libertarian than anything else. Neither party TRULLY reflects this though both still have a couple of the old beliefs. MOST people in this country to reflect the beliefs this republic was founded on.


Dont buy into what these right-wing corporate whores are saying, because they are just trying to divide everyone.

Do not make the Democrats and liberals out to be something they are not. While I taking a stand against the likes of Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter, the Democrats are no less corporate whores than the Right. Do not make them out to be better than their right wing opposites.

That said, the other points of your post I agree with. Someone who suggests we deport people that said they would leave are about as un-American as you can get.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

I actually like Hannity and Colmes. It's pretty funny.

[Durandal]

I actually like Hannity and Colmes. It's pretty funny.

My only experience with Hannity is his radio program...almost everyday at work. The guy is an idiot. Why people listen to him is beyond me.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

his show with colmes on FoxNews is pretty entertaining. One supposedly a democrat one a republican.

It is good viewing. Dont get me started on O-Reilly though.

[Durandal]

Dont get me started on O-Reilly though.

rofl

That guy is losing it. The worst thing is that ass-hat claims to be a Libertarian....

rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Thats the one good thing about foxnews. It is entertaining. Me and the old man just sit back and be laughing our heads off at it.

Compared to Australian news and editorials it comes across that far fetched it's not funny.

[drfunk]

Not true really. America was founded on Classic Liberalism exactly, america was founded on liberalism by liberals. The 'liberals' you americans have problems with is called 'new liberalism' which came into force in the late 19th century. i know what i'm talkin bout :P in my country liberalism still largely means the same of classical and laissez faire liberals.



Do not make the Democrats and liberals out to be something they are not.

who ever said anything about the democrats?? my problem lies with the corporate media which is largely right wing and promotes a right-wing pro-government agenda.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Not true really. America was founded on Classic Liberalism exactly, america was founded on liberalism by liberals. The 'liberals' you americans have problems with is called 'new liberalism' which came into force in the late 19th century. i know what i'm talkin bout :P in my country liberalism still largely means the same of classical and laissez faire liberals.


Society exists on a shifting playing field - moving slowly to the left, and jerking back to the right on occasion. A "liberal" from 1800 would appear to be the most radical of right-wingers today. Hell, even Democrats from the 1960s are too conservative for today's Republican party - JFK would be thrown out of his own party for his social and economic views today. His economic policy was just about the same as Reagan's (and we all know how much he is admired by the left).

I would love to have seen Barney Frank, or Shelia Jackson Lee with the framers, going over the language and content of the founding documents. That would have been a hoot.

[Durandal]

[quote]who ever said anything about the democrats?? my problem lies with the corporate media which is largely right wing and promotes a right-wing pro-government agenda.

I guess if you listen to Fox news and most AM radio stations and a minority of News Papers...sure.

The media, on a whole, reports what the masses want to see...the negative and the violent...and in that fashion, I will agree, it is biased. But the media really is neither conservative nor liberal...its corporatized and a ratings whore.

In the United States, special interest is not about political affiliation, its about the all mighty dollar. Being Liberal and Conservative, on a whole matters little when its politics and the dollar up on the Hill. Yeah, to the public the appear to be playing the party angle, but ultimately they vote with the most dollars supporting them.

And if you doubt that...investigate into how many Congressmen and woman suddenly owned Mexican farmland and cattle after NAFTA was passed in the 90s. Political orientation is irrelevant.

That is why I am a libertarian. I believe that the federal government should get as small as possible, take the least amount of tax dollars necessary to run a VERY downsized government and let the States worry about anything that is not Foreign Trade, the Military, printing money, and roads. The rest can be left to people that better represent the whole.

Drives me goddamn nuts seeing the government corrupt as it is and all most people do is argue "Screw the liberals!" or "Screw the conservatives!"

[dangerclose]

In the 20th century alone, the left (from communists, to socialists to sympathetic liberals - who all ultimately share the same world view) have been responsible for so much death, horror and overall misery. 100+ million of their own citizens have been killed by communist governments alone and that's a conservative figure.

Cuba for example is adored as an egalitarian paradise by the mainstream media, intellectual elites and hollywood liberals but why are people risking and losing their lives to escape it? And why do communist governments have to prevent people from leaving at all? In all of human history walls have been erected to keep people out but not until after Karl Marx's vision took fruition have governments built walls and fences to keep it's citizenry from leaving. Fidel Castro can jail and execute dissidents but yet it's Bush who is hitler right? Castro is a tyranical dictator but hey .. at least they have free health care.

The former Soviet Union can invade Afghanistan without provocation and is met with tacit if not outright approval from the left yet America reacting to 9/11 and taking proactive steps to prevent the next one is villified as an international bully.

Call Ann Coulter what you want but refute any of her claims. The left have been and continue to be against America. Bad news from Iraq is good news for them and vice versa. Innocent Americans can have their heads sawed off and have explosives planted in their corpses but if a terrorist prisoner at Guantanamo has his air conditioner turned on too high or has his american taxpayer funded koran (Where's the ACLU?) mishandled in any way then it's a war crime according to the left.


The left sympathizes with these murderous terrorists for the same reason they sympathized with the old Soviet Union - they all share the same enemy.

</rant>

[Durandal]

In the 20th century alone, the left (from communists, to socialists to sympathetic liberals - who all ultimately share the same world view) have been responsible for so much death, horror and overall misery. 100+ million of their own citizens have been killed by communist governments alone and that's a conservative figure.

</rant>

Since when is being left, synonymous with be a communist or socialist?

If you follow that track, Coulter supports a tyrannical Right-wing government.

THIS is the irrational clap trap that is dividing the United States.

You, sir, are no better than those people pictured in the protests earlier in this thread.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

That is why I am a libertarian. I believe that the federal government should get as small as possible, take the least amount of tax dollars necessary to run a VERY downsized government and let the States worry about anything that is not Foreign Trade, the Military, printing money, and roads. The rest can be left to people that better represent the whole.


I'm in the other camp. Im in favour if increased taxes for universal heatcare, education, government subsidised retirenment, important infastructure owned and operated by the government, unemployment benifits and measures against full foreign ownership of companies that our Australian by nature.

[Durandal]

I'm in the other camp. Im in favour if increased taxes for universal heatcare, education, government subsidised retirenment, important infastructure owned and operated by the government, unemployment benifits and measures against full foreign ownership of companies that our Australian by nature.

I guess it depends on what model you use. France is slowly going bankrupt because of this type of system. Any time they want to make a slight modification...raising the retirement age, decreasing the half dozen vacation weeks they have, etc, they have riots of some type or another...or lower full time work week another hour or two.

It simply won't work in most nations with a top heavy modern nation...

At least it won't work with a 50% tax or less and if you go higher the tax is literally, abusive...and at that point, I would pick a minimum wage job to avoid taxation and being lazy as possible. ;)

[fremen]

I actually like Hannity and Colmes. It's pretty funny.

My only experience with Hannity is his radio program...almost everyday at work. The guy is an idiot. Why people listen to him is beyond me.

I totally disagree with the statement above. Hannity is not an idiot, he's just a moron with a brain the size of a peanut.

[abncougar]

Dont get me started on O-Reilly though.

rofl

That guy is losing it. The worst thing is that ass-hat claims to be a Libertarian....

rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl


if you would be so kind, can you please explain to me why you think he is losing it???? please cite specific examples. he may claim to be libertarian an come off as conservative, but please give me a "for instance" about why he is losing it??

IMHO, he hits the nail on the head quite often, especially with this Gitmo situation.

[walford]

Protest warriors are young idealists!? Ship them to Iraq I say! Your country is facing a recruiting shortfall and these "idealists" are harassing other people from exercising their constitutional rights to demonstrate against the war that's causing it! Of course, they did get their asses kicked by a bunch of hippies, so the insurgency would scare them to death with the first RPG or mortar bomb...All they did was carry signs that had double-take messages (http://www.protestwarrior.com/signs.php?thumb=1). They didn't say a word. During a simultaneous Support the Troops rally, a couple of their people spread piss and **** inside our Port-a-Johns. At the end of the rally, one guy stood there yelling and repeatedly shot the NAZI salute to Guardian Angels founder Curtis Sliwa during his speech. He was not touched by us. After a long time passed, a bored policeman escorted him away [no arrest].

So it's OK to disrupt free speech if it is the Other Guys.

[abncougar]

I actually like Hannity and Colmes. It's pretty funny.

My only experience with Hannity is his radio program...almost everyday at work. The guy is an idiot. Why people listen to him is beyond me.

............i bet you believe Al Franken is the best thing since sliced bread

[Thor]

............i bet you believe Al Franken is the best thing since sliced bread
Be careful...

http://img347.imageshack.us/img347/3921/plot7sz.jpg

[Atlantic Friend]

[quote=Minardiau]I guess it depends on what model you use. France is slowly going bankrupt because of this type of system. Any time they want to make a slight modification...raising the retirement age, decreasing the half dozen vacation weeks they have, etc, they have riots of some type or another...or lower full time work week another hour or two...

Riots ? Er, no, there sure are protests over these issues, but riots, no.

[Durandal]

I actually like Hannity and Colmes. It's pretty funny.

My only experience with Hannity is his radio program...almost everyday at work. The guy is an idiot. Why people listen to him is beyond me.

............i bet you believe Al Franken is the best thing since sliced bread

Crap, I never saw this reply.

That's great.

No, Al Franken is just as bad except on the other side.

See, this is what you do not seem to understand, I can criticize something without supporting the direct opposite. Something YOU do not seem to understand...nor do these radio commentators...sensationalists more like it. There is no news, its simply one big three hour op-ed piece.

Woop-tee do.

So can the "If you slight him you must be a left wing liberal wacko" banter. Its reactionary and ignorant.

You want to listen to informative radio? On Friday's, on NPR, listen to "Talk of the Nation: Science Friday". Its the single most unbiased and informative radio program on the airwaves. You can also down load it in MP3 format if you cannot get it in or have the time that day to listen. Its 2 hours long, no advertisements and you might also learn something.

[Silent 6]

Damn liberals, responsible for such heinous things as blacks voting

Not quite right...the democrats did not support the initial movement to have blacks vote. See JIM CROW laws for proof.

[Legion]

I actually like Hannity and Colmes. It's pretty funny.

My only experience with Hannity is his radio program...almost everyday at work. The guy is an idiot. Why people listen to him is beyond me.

............i bet you believe Al Franken is the best thing since sliced bread

Crap, I never saw this reply.

That's great.

No, Al Franken is just as bad except on the other side.

See, this is what you do not seem to understand, I can criticize something without supporting the direct opposite. Something YOU do not seem to understand...nor do these radio commentators...sensationalists more like it. There is no news, its simply one big three hour op-ed piece.

Woop-tee do.

So can the "If you slight him you must be a left wing liberal wacko" banter. Its reactionary and ignorant.

You want to listen to informative radio? On Friday's, on NPR, listen to "Talk of the Nation: Science Friday". Its the single most unbiased and informative radio program on the airwaves. You can also down load it in MP3 format if you cannot get it in or have the time that day to listen. Its 2 hours long, no advertisements and you might also learn something.

And when you get done with that listen to one of my personal favs Coast to Coast AM with George Noory. http://www.coasttocoastam.com/ Sometimes informative, sometimes wacky, but always entertaining. Although you have to join to get the MP3s dangit.

Sorry hijack over now, return to normal discourse.

[Durandal]

Not quite right...the democrats did not support the initial movement to have blacks vote. See JIM CROW laws for proof.

Silliness. The parties have twisted and turned so much that it is hard to describe either in the similar light of those days.

I mean, the Republicans are hardly the Party Lincoln started, nor are they the same party that they were in Roosevelt's days.

Nor are the Democrats anything like the Souther Dixie-crats of the days past.

[penna]

Damn liberals, responsible for such heinous things as blacks voting

Not quite right...the democrats did not support the initial movement to have blacks vote. See JIM CROW laws for proof.

exactly right. The Democratic Party was a stronghold for white southerners. they feared blacks voting would upset their hold on the southern states. the jim crow laws, poll taxes, literacy tests, were all ways they came up with to keep african americans from voting.

[dacanadianbomb]

Ann coulter, lol, one of the tru specimens, of stick your head up your ass, and dont come out at all costs.
extreme liberals are just as stupid as extreme conservatives.
Excess of anything isnt good.
AS Barry White ( god rest his huge lady talking soul ) said
" Too much a somethin aint good for ya baby ...mmmhmmmmm"

[penna]

Not quite right...the democrats did not support the initial movement to have blacks vote. See JIM CROW laws for proof.

Silliness. The parties have twisted and turned so much that it is hard to describe either in the similar light of those days.

I mean, the Republicans are hardly the Party Lincoln started, nor are they the same party that they were in Roosevelt's days.

Nor are the Democrats anything like the Souther Dixie-crats of the days past.

the parties are the same. since they don't want to actually be USEFUL anymore and take a clear stand on any issue, they more or less don't do anything. that way, they don't have to jeopardize their chances for re-election. they don't want to piss off their constituents.

[Durandal]

the parties are the same. since they don't want to actually be USEFUL anymore and take a clear stand on any issue, they more or less don't do anything. that way, they don't have to jeopardize their chances for re-election. they don't want to piss off their constituents.

I'd have to disagree with this. I think both parties have gone through massive changes. For example, the Republicans never had a super right wing pro-religion group. That is something new that has come up over the last 30 years.

Hell, I'm 35 and I have seen changes since I can remember my first vote and the first election I can remember (but was far to young to participate in).

[walford]

the parties are the same. since they don't want to actually be USEFUL anymore and take a clear stand on any issue, they more or less don't do anything. that way, they don't have to jeopardize their chances for re-election. they don't want to piss off their constituents.I'd have to disagree with this. I think both parties have gone through massive changes. For example, the Republicans never had a super right wing pro-religion group. That is something new that has come up over the last 30 years.

Hell, I'm 35 and I have seen changes since I can remember my first vote and the first election I can remember (but was far to young to participate in).Yes in the past generation or so, the GOP has fractured into single-issue blocs: the gun rights, anti-abortion, immigration, etc. Certain segments of their voters won't show up unless their pet issue is at stake. A major shift came when Nixon instituted a wage-price freeze which impelled the fiscal libertarians to split off and form their own party. So the party was thus abandoned to Jerry Falwell and Pat Buchanan [who left anyway]. Major internal weaknesses.

The Democrats are a diverse agglomeration of gay rights, abortion, racial, labor unioins, etc. that are united under a singular principle: the government should be the motive power behind society. Thus although certain racial groups are no more in favor of Heather's Two Mommies being taught to their children than anyone else, they are willing to hold their noses and vote for that so long as they get to feed at the public trough.

[panzerjager]

Wow, this thread is the most civil flame-fest "evar"! Thanks lads. I think MP.net is saved!

[OprahAteMyBaby]

does anyone not realize the stupidity of this article?

Where would this country be with out liberals?

Lets see, oh women couldnt vote, blacks couldnt vote, no public education, no minimum wage, child labor would be leagal, there would be sweat shops, no unions, social security wouldnt exist, do I have to go on? This country would be a very bright place without liberals.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

does anyone not realize the stupidity of this article?

Where would this country be with out liberals?

Lets see, oh women couldnt vote, blacks couldnt vote, no public education, no minimum wage, child labor would be leagal, there would be sweat shops, no unions, social security wouldnt exist, do I have to go on? This country would be a very bright place without liberals.

Try telling that to the Neocons

I'm sensible enough to know that socialism does have it's flaws. BUT a good 75% of modern society is made up of socialistic laws and regulations.

[Yarrick2]

if you kicked out all the liberals america would lose most of the i/t professionals, the gaming industry and the computer industry. also if you want to see peaceful libral protests come up to seattle (WTO doesn't count too many out of towners) you can't start riots at all... i've tried :(

[BadKarma26]

CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG???


no? fine.



ratatatatatatat goes the m249

[jedisponge]

CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG???


no? fine.



ratatatatatatat goes the m249
Wow that rhymed. Good poety BK.

[penna]

does anyone not realize the stupidity of this article?

Where would this country be with out liberals?

Lets see, oh women couldnt vote, blacks couldnt vote, no public education, no minimum wage, child labor would be leagal, there would be sweat shops, no unions, social security wouldnt exist, do I have to go on? This country would be a very bright place without liberals.

see my original post below

The Democratic Party was a stronghold for white southerners. they feared blacks voting would upset their hold on the southern states. the jim crow laws, poll taxes, literacy tests, were all ways they came up with to keep african americans from voting.

Granted FDR got the US out of the depression but he also got America into debt and got us dependent on social security.

[walford]

...Granted FDR got the US out of the depression but he also got America into debt and got us dependent on social security.This merits some correction. FDR did not get the US out of the depression, WWII did that. Indeed, the worst year of the depression was 1937. Most economists agree that FDR in fact made what would have been a short-lived recession into a depression. He increased taxes to the point that it made more sense to shelter capital in Swiss bank accounts, stamp collections etc. rather than build factories and other job-creating ventures. He got the upper limit on taxes to as high as 90% and was pushing for more.Further details can be found at Four Myths About America's Great Depression (http://www.libertyhaven.com/theoreticalorphilosophicalissues/economichistory/fourmyths.html)

And insofar as Social Security is concerned, a person would get more return from putting his/her money in a passbook savings account. The big differnce is in a savings account money would be yours and would be contributing to the economy, whereas the FICA is nothing more than a welfare program, transferring money from the young to the old. Social Security is one of the biggest swindles (http://www.mises.org/econsense/ch18.asp) ever devised by man.

[WarriorMonk]

does anyone not realize the stupidity of this article?

Where would this country be with out liberals?

Lets see, oh women couldnt vote, blacks couldnt vote, no public education, no minimum wage, child labor would be leagal, there would be sweat shops, no unions, social security wouldnt exist, do I have to go on? This country would be a very bright place without liberals.

Try telling that to the Neocons

I'm sensible enough to know that socialism does have it's flaws. BUT a good 75% of modern society is made up of socialistic laws and regulations.

then please don't try and complete the other 25% of it.

And I think this article means to refer to the extreme wackos on the left, those that have taken over the liberal side of things these days.

[penna]

...Granted FDR got the US out of the depression but he also got America into debt and got us dependent on social security.This merits some correction. FDR did not get the US out of the depression, WWII did that. Indeed, the worst year of the depression was 1937. Most economists agree that FDR in fact made what would have been a short-lived recession into a depression. He increased taxes to the point that it made more sense to shelter capital in Swiss bank accounts, stamp collections etc. rather than build factories and other job-creating ventures. He got the upper limit on taxes to as high as 90% and was pushing for more.Further details can be found at Four Myths About America's Great Depression (http://www.libertyhaven.com/theoreticalorphilosophicalissues/economichistory/fourmyths.html)

And insofar as Social Security is concerned, a person would get more return from putting his/her money in a passbook savings account. The big differnce is in a savings account money would be yours and would be contributing to the economy, whereas the FICA is nothing more than a welfare program, transferring money from the young to the old. Social Security is one of the biggest swindles (http://www.mises.org/econsense/ch18.asp) ever devised by man.

exactly

[BadKarma26]

CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG???


no? fine.



ratatatatatatat goes the m249
Wow that rhymed. Good poety BK.

;)

[Drunkensquid]

I can't believe this thread is still alive! rofl woot :hug: :fork: :-*$ :slap: :bash:


Last weekend I've seen a Jeep Cherokee with the "Future Canadian" sticker on it. rofl woot

I pulled next to them and waved good bye to them rofl

[Stolly]

Ain't they dreamy ?

http://www.stolly.org.uk/myhero.gif

When its comes to Coulter and Conservatives, i can't help thinking that they see themselves as a Captain America, to her All American wonder woman.

[walford]

When its comes to Coulter and Conservatives, i can't help thinking that they see themselves as a Captain America, to her All American wonder woman.Ann Coulter is admired/hated because she not only does not apologize for being a conservative, she actually has the temerity to attack people for being Leftists.

Last year, someone tried to hit her with a pie while she was saying that if it were not for the terrorism, the Left would hate the Wahabbis. They oppress women, are intolerant of gays...but she ducked in time. [Apparently the suggestion that a willingness to kill civilians would impel some Westerners to overlook certain other offensive qualities was too much of one audience member to take -- perhaps because it hit too close to home. If it were a truly absurd suggestion, laughter would have been the response.]

A favorite exchange involving Coulter (http://www.aim.org/aim_report/115_0_4_0_C/) was one she had with that know-nothing **** Bill O'Reilly:...O'Reilly picked the wrong person to savage when he invited Coulter on the show. His purpose was to position himself as an independent and Coulter as an extreme "right-wing pundit." But Coulter used some of the limited airtime to get into a serious discussion of the substance of her best-selling book, Treason (Crown Forum, 2003).

"I'm responding to 50 years of the liberal creation of a myth-turning an honorable American, a great American patriot Joe McCarthy, into a virtual Nazi," she said. O'Reilly responded, "I'm not going with that. I'm not going with that. A guy who used his power to do some good but a lot of bad too." Then the following exchange occurred:

Coulter: "Like what?"
O'Reilly: "He demonized people who didn't deserve to be demonized."
Coulter: "That's not true. Name one. There is not one."
O'Reilly: "I'll name one-Dalton Trumbo."
Coulter: "He had nothing to do with Dalton Trumbo."
O'Reilly: "Sure he did. It was the House of Un-American Activities Committee [sic]. And who was overseeing that?"
Coulter: "He was known as Senator McCarthy. He was in the Senate not the House. Everyone confuses him with the House Un-American Activities Committee [HUAC]."
O'Reilly: "But who was overseeing that? Come on, you know the clubhouse rules."
Coulter: "He had nothing to do with HUAC. You see this is part of the myth. Everyone says this. Everyone says HUAC."
O'Reilly: "All right, I don't want to debate McCarthy. He's dead...And I'm not debating what's in your book."

O'Reilly embarrassed himself by not having the facts. But rather than admit he may have made a mistake, he tried to move on by saying that McCarthy was dead. Yes, that's true. But the myth about McCarthy lives on in the minds of liberals and left-wingers and even Bill O'Reilly.

What's more, O'Reilly didn't have the facts about Dalton Trumbo. Rather than being an innocent victim of McCarthy or even the House Un-American Activities Committee, the facts show that he spent time in prison for refusing to testify about communist penetration of Hollywood. Steven Martinovich, who has written extensively about the Hollywood communists, says Trumbo at first denied being a communist and later admitted it.

[Nikitaras]

Mann-Whore Coulter, having thoughts of mastubatory necrophilia with the long dead alcoholic Senator Joe McCarthy.

http://www.townhall.com/acimgs/webimages/grave_bg.jpg

Coming up next on "Tales of the Clinically Insane Radical Right Wing Nuts" .....drinking baby blood out of Hitler's skull.

[California Joe]

She needs it in the bad hole.

[von_Moo142]

She needs it in the bad hole.

Who'd be brave enough to give it to her though?

[walford]

Mann-Whore Coulter, having thoughts of mastubatory necrophilia with the long dead alcoholic Senator Joe McCarthy.

http://www.townhall.com/acimgs/webimages/grave_bg.jpg

Coming up next on "Tales of the Clinically Insane Radical Right Wing Nuts" .....drinking baby blood out of Hitler's skull.Diatribes such as these say more about the Coulter-haters than about Coulter herself. I dare you to say that **** to her face. Perhaps I could arrange a meeting the next time she comes to DC. She would leave you in the fetal position, crying for mommy.

Nice adaptation of the Blood Libel (http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_blib2.htm), BTW.

[California Joe]

You want her to dress you in latex and spank you don't you wal. I can tell.

PS, she's a boney girl, not "fetal position" scary.

[walford]

You want her to dress you in latex and spank you don't you wal. I can tell. PS, she's a boney girl, not "fetal position" scary.1. Check the babes thread to see what I like. (I)
2. Her quick mind, considerable amount of information at her command and tart wit would put any of these wimps ragging her onto the floor whimpering. She could squash ten of them and be hungry for more. I've met her, I know.

[ibstolidude]

You want her to dress you in latex and spank you don't you wal. I can tell. PS, she's a boney girl, not "fetal position" scary.1. Check the babes thread to see what I like. (I)
2. Her quick mind, considerable amount of information at her command and tart wit would put any of these wimps ragging her onto the floor whimpering. She could squash ten of them and be hungry for more. I've met her, I know.

you may know her, but CaliJoe knows her....

granted he probably had to lie to her about being a shortstop; plus, it may have been either the fact that he shaves the face of Reagan into his pubes, or the half a sandwich he hids in his pants.


ahh.. who do I kid, I'd do Karl Rove if he'd just pay for drinks.
granted pitch only; if he wants me to rcv then he'd have to offer me something - like give me the name of a covert intel asset ...oh, um, nevermind.

EDIT - I JOKE - DON'T waste your time telling me what great people they are - irrelevant - I make fun of everyone, all the time. Even the handicapped. - no not reallythe handicapped

[Nikitaras]

Mann-Whore Coulter, having thoughts of mastubatory necrophilia with the long dead alcoholic Senator Joe McCarthy.

http://www.townhall.com/acimgs/webimages/grave_bg.jpg

Coming up next on "Tales of the Clinically Insane Radical Right Wing Nuts" .....drinking baby blood out of Hitler's skull.Diatribes such as these say more about the Coulter-haters than about Coulter herself. I dare you to say that **** to her face. Perhaps I could arrange a meeting the next time she comes to DC. She would leave you in the fetal position, crying for mommy.

Nice adaptation of the Blood Libel (http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_blib2.htm), BTW.

rofl Thats the funniest **** I've heard in awhile. rofl

I haven't met a Right wing nut thats ever left me crying for mommy, but it goes to show the delusional condition you guys all suffer from.

[walford]

Mann-Whore Coulter, having thoughts of mastubatory necrophilia with the long dead alcoholic Senator Joe McCarthy.

http://www.townhall.com/acimgs/webimages/grave_bg.jpg

Coming up next on "Tales of the Clinically Insane Radical Right Wing Nuts" .....drinking baby blood out of Hitler's skull.Diatribes such as these say more about the Coulter-haters than about Coulter herself. I dare you to say that **** to her face. Perhaps I could arrange a meeting the next time she comes to DC. She would leave you in the fetal position, crying for mommy.

Nice adaptation of the Blood Libel (http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_blib2.htm), BTW. rofl Thats the funniest **** I've heard in awhile. rofl I haven't met a Right wing nut thats ever left me crying for mommy, but it goes to show the delusional condition you guys all suffer from.If you're so brave, then take her on face to face. Given the fact that you Lefties are so ****e to starting with the personal attacks and logical fallacies when your argument is weak/factual support is poor [which is ALWAYS], you start off at a disadvantage.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Crap

I'm as logical as they come.

:P

[Nikitaras]

Mann-Whore Coulter, having thoughts of mastubatory necrophilia with the long dead alcoholic Senator Joe McCarthy.

http://www.townhall.com/acimgs/webimages/grave_bg.jpg

Coming up next on "Tales of the Clinically Insane Radical Right Wing Nuts" .....drinking baby blood out of Hitler's skull.Diatribes such as these say more about the Coulter-haters than about Coulter herself. I dare you to say that **** to her face. Perhaps I could arrange a meeting the next time she comes to DC. She would leave you in the fetal position, crying for mommy.

Nice adaptation of the Blood Libel (http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_blib2.htm), BTW. rofl Thats the funniest **** I've heard in awhile. rofl I haven't met a Right wing nut thats ever left me crying for mommy, but it goes to show the delusional condition you guys all suffer from.If you're so brave, then take her on face to face. Given the fact that you Lefties are so ****e to starting with the personal attacks and logical fallacies when your argument is weak/factual support is poor [which is ALWAYS], you start off at a disadvantage.

I'm not the type of guy to hang out with transvestites and I'm afraid going face to face with Mann Coulter would violate that rule. Besides, I'm sure she too busy concealing her Adam's apple, plagiarizing and trying to convince the world that Canada invaded Vietnam.

I also find it hilarious how you accuse Dems of personal attacks, when every article and book "she's" is nothing but an invective soaked, ad hominem attack.

[walford]

Mann-Whore ...thoughts of mastubatory necrophilia...alcoholic...Clinically Insane Radical Right Wing Nuts" .....drinking baby blood out of Hitler's skull....Right wing nut...hang out with transvestites ...Mann Coulter...too busy concealing her Adam's apple, plagiarizing and trying to convince the world that Canada invaded Vietnam...

I also find it hilarious how you accuse Dems of personal attacks, when every article and book "she's" is nothing but an invective soaked, ad hominem attack.And you're so much above all that, what with you're well-sourced, dispassionate prose. You are a satire of a Leftie.

[Nikitaras]

Mann-Whore ...thoughts of mastubatory necrophilia...alcoholic...Clinically Insane Radical Right Wing Nuts" .....drinking baby blood out of Hitler's skull....Right wing nut...hang out with transvestites ...Mann Coulter...too busy concealing her Adam's apple, plagiarizing and trying to convince the world that Canada invaded Vietnam...

I also find it hilarious how you accuse Dems of personal attacks, when every article and book "she's" is nothing but an invective soaked, ad hominem attack.And you're so much above all that, what with you're well-sourced, dispassionate prose. You are a satire of a Leftie.

I never claimed to be, you were the one who stated that Dems are ****e to personal attacks. This shows you are either disconnected from reality or do not actually read and listen to the trannys ramblings. I call assholes for what they are...assholes. Mr. Coulter qualifies as a first rate one at that.

You sir, are a typical parrot of the nutty Right ;)

[Aerosoul]

**** the previous 10 pages of this thread, I'm not gonna bother reading the flamefest.


Why It’s Time to Deport Liberals

But what the ****? Just goes to show there are a lot of Republicans who are so convinced they're always right. Let's deport the opposition cause we're a bunch of pansy assholes!

What a ****ing joke.

[walford]

...you were the one who stated that Dems are ****e to personal attacks. This shows you are either disconnected from reality or do not actually read and listen to the trannys ramblings. I call assholes for what they are...assholes. Mr. Coulter qualifies as a first rate one at that. You sir, are a typical parrot of the nutty Right ;)Yeah, I said that they are ****e to personal attacks in response to your personal attack. You have offered no evidence, cited no quotation, being a typical Leftie we're just supposed to take your word for it. If we don't, that is proof that we deserved to be called names also. What else can you do given that reason is not on your side? This is what Boston College professor Peter Kreeft cited (http://catholiceducation.org/articles/politics/pg0026.html) C. S. Lewis denoting their “chronological snobbery” in which... ...an idea need not be refuted, just sneered at as unfashionable; that “we are the people, and wisdom will die with us;” that history presents us with a simple “good guys vs. bad guys” scenario — not intellectually (the wise vs. the foolish) or morally (saints vs. sinners), but chronologically (the “tradition-bound,” the “primitive,” the “closed,” or the “stagnant” vs. the “enlightened,” the “nuanced,” the “open,” or the “dynamic”). They call this “the historical point of view;” I call it dissolving the rock of truth into the sands of time...Dr. Kreeft also noted puzzlement when his Leftist students...actually find Heidegger easier to understand than Aquinas, Kant than Aristotle, Dewey than James, Hegel than Plato. These students do fairly well when tested on the muddy, fuzzy ideological thinkers, but they get a mental block when they try to understand the clear, commonsensical ones. Clearly they cannot fathom clarity, and certainly not certainty. They simply cannot believe that a philosopher can be clear and certain about anything important.Oh well. Not sure if you're a Leftie? Here's a little checklist -- compiled from various sources:...you use ad hominem attacks when you are losing a debate or argument [which is nearly always].

...when you don't attack the person rather than engage the argument you are losing, you try to divert the discussion in a direction with which you are more comfortable [aka Red Herring]

...anyone who disagrees with you must be a "nazi" or a "fascist".

...you have absolutely no idea what "nazi" or "fascist" actually means, other than a word used as a perjoritive against people you dislike.

If you thought the Stars and Stripes was the enemy flag...

If you call soldiers “Baby Killers,” but not abortionists...

If you think that hatred is inexcusable – unless it's directed at President Bush...

If you have mistaken a government agency for your bank...

If you think it's okay for a girl to have *** with a Barbee – 'long as she don't play with one

If you thought “We, the people...” was someone else...

If you think you're better than everyone else but that no one should ever be allowed to win at anything...



If you think that everyone should be allowed to express themselves – but only as long as they agree with you...

If you think men and women are really alike, and/but everyone should be like women...

If you think it's okay to pull the race card - as long as you're not white...

If you wear those ugly, dark-rimmed glasses and don't need a prescription...

If you practice martial arts, but are opposed to self-defense...

If you think everyone should be allowed to act in accord with their nature – unless they're white, hetero****** males of European descent...

If the clothes you wear are ugly and mismatched, and it's on purpose...

If it's difficult to tell what *** you are...

If your girlfriend has more hair under her arms than on her head...

If you think it's good to believe stuff – as long as you don't think it's true...

If you and your boyfriend dress like twins...

If you think freedom and lawlessness are the same thing...

If you think it's wrong to kill an animal for food but okay to kill a human child for the mere sake of one's convenience...

If you call yourself “spiritual” but are against organized religion...

If you like to talk about evolving but have the diet of an extinct species of hominid...

If you think all things should be in harmony but that no one should maintain law and order...

If you abhor violence – unless it's just throwing a shrill tantrum...

If you scream about injustice but think there shouldn't be any rules...

If you think nature's way of doing things is always best – except when it comes to ******ity...

If you think killing is wrong, unless it pertains to your own children...

If you're against killing the guilty but for killing the innocent...

you've ever left your sociology class thinking, "That professor really knows what he/she/it is talking about."

you associate the words "model American" with "Bill Clinton"

you think Dan Rather represents media impartiality

your response to anything Rush Limbaugh says is, "Well, he's fat."

the first word in the description of your hair color is "neon"

you've ever tried to protect the ozone layer

you've stood for animal rights, but wear leather belts and sandals

you've ever given a dollar to a bum so he can buy more liquor ...ummm ... food

you ever use the words "Clarence Thomas" and "Uncle Tom" in the same sentence

you are a vegan

you have a bumper sticker that says "You Can't Hug With Nuclear Arms" on your car

you believe diversity represents the extinction of the white race

you pay a 185 percent markup for organically grown food

you have anything to do with the Compassionate Living Fair

you want more funding for AIDS research but less for cancer, despite the fact that cancer kills many more people per year

you abhor censorship unless it's censoring race, religion, Conservatism, or Western culture

you found yourself unemployed after this past November's election

you think the phrase, "... separation of church and state" is in the Constitution

you cry, "You can't legislate morality," but defend the Roe v. Wade decision in order to legalize your moral position on abortion

you stay informed by watching MTV News

you have an "I'm Straight But Not Narrow" button pinned to your book bag

there is a ring in any part of your head other than your ears

you think religion is bad for school kids to learn, but think condom giveaways are just what schools need

you think Jesse Jackson is a good spokesman for the black community

you think Jesse Jackson is good at anything

you've ever held up a grocery store line trying to pick between plastic, which isn't biodegradable, or paper, which cuts down innocent trees

you think the National Organization for Women is made up of average hetero****** women

banning assault weapons is your solution to end crime (what do you mean punish the criminals?)

you tell me how to live by telling me I can't tell people how to live

you think Ted Kennedy is sober and monogamous.

You think that a California condor egg needs to be protected, but don't think that a fetus is a person.

you're disgusted by child **** only because 'living wages' and health benefits aren't paid to the "actors"

You believe that 20 year old women is not old enough to own a handgun, but a 14 year old girl should be able to have an abortion without her parents knowledge or consent.

You get angry with your kid for smoking a cigarette .... until you realize it was a joint.

You have a "No Blood For Oil" sticker on your luxury car.

You think 10-year-olds have the right to download **** at the local library, but think Rush Limbaugh should be taken off the air because he practices "hate speech."

You think a crucifix in a jar of urine is "art", but think the American flag is a symbol of racism, oppression and hate.

You think a man who detonates a bomb on a bus full of Jewish schoolchildren is a "freedom fighter", but think an American soldier is a "baby killer."

You think the Boy Scouts are a greater threat to kids than NAMBLA

If your VP candidate states, "you've lost your mind" if you vote for Bush...


if you had to sneak a crib sheet into take the Global Test

If you want to outsource America's national security to an organization, that employs terrorists

If you have 20 years in the Senate, over a year on the campaign trail, with a month to go before the election and you still need to define yourself to the American public..

If you believe that businesses create oppression and but governments create prosperity...

...you have ever thought or said that "there ought to be law against" sonmething.

...you think that Hollywood helps society "grow" by producing films like "Philadelphia", but that violent films (and music) couldn't possibly be harming the nation's youth.

...you thump the 1st Amendment's phantom "separation of church and state", but support speech codes and hate-crime laws.

...you manage to convince yourself that "the right of the people" in the 2nd Amendment means something different than in the rest of the Bill of Rights.

...you think that private citizens should be disarmed, but carry a gun or have a bodyguard that does.

...you feel that the race, religion, or ****** perversion of the victim of a crime makes a difference in how it should be prosecuted.

...you feel that the race, religion, or ****** normalcy of the perpatrator of a crime makes a difference in how it should be prosecuted.

...you strongly believe in ****** harassment law and that no woman would ever lie about such matters, unless the man charged is a liberal Democrat.

...you believed Anita, but not Juanita.

...you think that Republicans are actually evil.

...you think that tobacco is evil, but other drugs are good.

...you believe that business actually pay taxes, instead of merely collecting them.

...you think that the economy is a zero-sum game.

...you think that the only reason socialism hasn't worked is because the right people haven't done it yet.

...you think that welfare has failed because we haven't spent enough money on it yet.

...you feel that we work for the government and that society is simply a management problem.

...you believe an animal has more rights than an unborn child.

...you think cutting taxes is nothing but a risky scheme.

...you believe that Communism has always failed because the "right people weren't in charge."

...You believe a "white" man should not benefit from the color of his skin, but EVERYONE ELSE should.

...you and your friends have all the right answers, and should anyone disagree, they are just dumb and don't get it.

...you believe no one else has the right to get upset but you always do.

...you believe that whatever anyone else has, they must have obtained through unfair means and that you are deserving of it as much as the person who EARNED it.

...you believe that anything that you don't understand is just stupid and probably "mean spirited".

...you believe that the extreme training that the Navy SEALS or Army Green Berets must go through to prove their abilities is just another example of the male ego, "mean spiritedness", and unnecessary violence, but you will always call on them to do your dirty work.

...you are a vegetarian, but wear leather, have a leather backpack, and have leather in your Lexus.

...you think greed is bad and you state so to your BMW dealer as you head off to your yuppie condo in the mountains for a weekend of skiing.

...you think greed is bad but you always have the trendy clothes, you know, the grunge clothes that make you look poor but costs a fortune in the trendy mall.

...you wish other people would just do something about their undisciplined kids, as you hand yours $50 to get out of the house on a school night so you can get them out of your hair.

...you drive anyway you damn well please because people are just inconsiderate if they won't let you cut across three lanes of traffic in an intersection so you can make a right hand turn from the left turn lane.

...you always think the government should "do something".

...you always refer to your days in college as an example for a statement you are trying to make, but your college days were 10 or 20 years ago. (translation: you haven't accomplished squat since college.)

...you are one of the 95% of people who are carried by the other 5% in society and business.

...your fear and ignorance of any subject, and most likely firearms and politics, leads your every decision.

...you believe anyone who is competent of a subject and passionate about their beliefs is just arrogant and talks big.

...you think anyone who has had far more experiences than you in life is just arrogant and talks big, and most likely lying about their life experiences, because you haven't accomplished squat since college or high school and can't possibly understand how anyone could do such things.

...you believe that the press would never lie to you, not could they get away with it because someone would call them on it, but if you call the press a liar they automatically think of you as a "right-wing nut".

...you believe religion is something for "right-wing nuts", and even if you are not religious but defend the rights of others to practice their religion you, too, are a "right-wing nut".

...you think that concealed weapons permits are for militia nuts.

...you really believe that guns kill more children than buckets of water, falls, and improperly used car seats.

..you honestly believe that you are a great parent with little room for improvement. (If you are that perfect, call me, I'm up for adoption.)

...you believe anything that must be learned must be learned in a college.

...you believe that as a manager you can manage anything, even if you have absolutely no technical knowledge of the subject at hand.

You've ever used the phrase "no free speech for ____." Fill in the blank with the demonization du jour - fascists, racists, sexists, anybody who disagrees with the party line.

You think PBS is "objective" because it once carried Firing Line.

You think that men have no business making abortion law, but that people who've never held a gun are the ones to write firearms legislation.

You've ever used the phrases "risky tax cut," "for the children," (other than sarcastically), "afford a tax cut," "move on," "mean-spirited," "gun violence," "gun culture," "high-capacity ammo clip," "assault weapon," "it takes a village," "a woman's right to choose," "sensible/responsible/common-sense gun control," or "power structure."

You think that having a society where only the government has guns is a society where everyone is safe.

You think that you can talk a criminal out of harming you.

You think that crime is just a result of poverty

You think that the government can better educate children thaan parents.

When someone from the government says "We are here to help you." You are excited.

You think Brokaw, Jennings, and Rather, the New York Times, and Newsweek are all unbiased, but that people who get their news from the Internet and talk radio are "brainwashed".

You think that nuclear power is more polluting than coal-fired plants.

You cheer high oil prices (which you can afford) because it will make more peons ride bicycles.

You favor benefits for illegals and want to keep them here as you save money on gardening and house-keeping expenses.

You want to breach dams that offer hydroelectric power and bemoan burning coal and gas for energy.

you think the forest should be off limits to loggers, hunters, and recreational use for all but back-packers. But you do like the look of wood in your home.

You believe Government education needs more money, and government teachers should have tenure and not be tested, but think home-educators shouldn't get tax deductions and home-educators should be tested.

...you want to take away our right to defend ourselves "for the children" yet you don't mind killing them before they're born.

You pale at the execution of child killers, but defend the killing of unborn children as an expression of choice.

You think trees have feelings, animals can conceptualize and the fetus is a blob of protoplasm.

You are convinced that Frank Capra films and Norman Rockwell
paintings are lies and distortions but "Platoon," "Dances with Wolves," and "Thelma and Louise" are real

You thought Walt Disney was saccharine sweet and terminally cutesy-pie - until it made "Pocahontas."

You think a moment of silent prayer at the beginning of the school day constitutes government indoctrination and an intrusion on parental authority, while *** education, condom distribution and multiculturalism are values

You agonize over threats to the natural environment (acid rain, toxic waste) but are oblivious to threats to the social environment (****ography, promiscuity, and family dissolution

You want to legalize cocaine and outlaw handguns.

You think cops are pigs and criminals are products of their environment.

You believe the National Rifle Association helps criminals while the American Civil Liberties Union protects the innocent.

You think Rush Limbaugh is responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing but are outraged by suggestions that Ted Kaczynski (the suspected Unabomber) and Al Gore have anything in common

Jesse Jackson makes sense to you. Barbra Streisand makes even more sense.

You believe corporate profits are obscene but government spending is too low and the American people are undertaxed.

You think deficits are caused by tax loopholes.

You think marriage is obsolete - except for homo******s.

You think AIDS is spread by insufficient funding.

You considers the Catholic bishops noble and idealistic when they oppose capital punishment and welfare cuts but dangerous fanatics trying to legislate their theology when they defend the right

You are convinced that proponents of welfare reform hate the poor and opponents of affirmative action hate minorities, but AIDS activists who bash the Pope and People for the American Way types who go psycho over Protestant "fundamentalists" are guardian angels

You attribute every minority problem to entrenched, institutional racism and the legacies of slavery and segregation.

You think the black middle class is a myth created by Newt Gingrich.

You view race riots as justifiable expressions of rage over injustice and fail to see the similarities between a black mob burning a Korean store and a white mob in the Jim Crow era lynching a black man

You don't understand all of the whining about affirmative action and are more than willing to sacrifice someone else's employment or education opportunity to assuage your conscience

You see no correlation between welfare and the rise of illegitimacy,
judicial leniency and surging crime rates, or addiction and an entertainment industry that glorifies drug abuse.

You think those child-abusing, religious fanatics at Waco had it coming but the illegal immigrants roughed up by California deputies - after leading them on a high-speed chase - are the victims of the system

[California Joe]

Methinks walford loves her long time.

[EvanL]

I cant wait until congress enacts the "Ban old farts from using the internet" bill. Maybe then Walford will stop copying/pasting everything.

[Nikitaras]

What a waste of bandwidth.

I don't need to cite any quotations to prove Mannie is a crackpot. She does a fine job of that by her lonesome everytime she writes a column or spews out her literary diarrhea, which you and the rest of the RW Nut sycophants seem to buy into.

[Nikitaras]

Methinks walford loves her long time.

Who do you think plays the girl in that relationship?

[walford]

Methinks walford loves her long time.She is a self-proclaimed 'bomb-thrower' and makes no apologies for it. But I am not a big fan of hers and disagree with her on some important issues. Since the last time I've seen her [at a NCPAC conference], she said that she thought that the solution for Iraq is to Christianize it.

The next time I see her, I will not be afraid to tell her to her face that I think that what she advocates will inflame the entire Islamic world against us -- it will be counterproductive. Instead what they need -- and indeed the entire world needs -- is freedom [and no, not Western-style parliamentarianism. Freedom can be adapted to any culture].

These wimps who are calling her all of these names wouldn't have the balls to say that **** to her in person. THAT is what I have a problem with.

[walford]

I cant wait until congress enacts the "Ban old farts from using the internet" bill. Maybe then Walford will stop copying/pasting everything....you've ever said, there out to be a law...
I believe this thread is entitled Why It's Time to Deport the Liberals, no? F*ck you if you can't take a joke. And FYI: I drafted some of those myself, Mr. Creativity. Such as "you're against killing the guilty but for killing the innocent"

Some of those really sting, no? That's because they're so true, they practically write themselves.

[big_les]

Methinks walford loves her long time.She is a self-proclaimed 'bomb-thrower' and makes no apologies for it. But I am not a big fan of hers and disagree with her on some important issues. Since the last time I've seen her [at a NCPAC conference], she said that she thought that the solution for Iraq is to Christianize it.

The next time I see her, I will not be afraid to tell her to her face that I think that what she advocates will inflame the entire Islamic world against us -- it will be counterproductive. Instead what they need -- and indeed the entire world needs -- is freedom [and no, not Western-style parliamentarianism. Freedom can be adapted to any culture].

These wimps who are calling her all of these names wouldn't have the balls to say that **** to her in person. THAT is what I have a problem with.

That's cool and all, but she's clearly a mentalist. 'nuff said.

[walford]

That's cool and all, but she's clearly a mentalist. 'nuff said.Mentalist (http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&oi=defmore&q=define:Mentalist):In parapsychology, a Mentalist, as opposed to a psychic, is defined as someone who is believed not only to be able to read information mentally, but also to alter that information.????

[walford]

Some more mean-spirited bandwidth wastage:

You might be a Leftie if:You think that freedom is only applicable in certain cultures while tyranny is more universal – and thus should be left alone.

For Third World countries [not your own of course], you prefer the ‘stability’ of dictatorship to the ‘uncertainty’ of democracy.

You think that only rich countries can ‘afford’ freedom, but don’t understand that dictatorship kills economic growth.

You think that economic ups and downs come in ‘cycles’ that have nothing to do with government action – that taxing, spending and/or regulation have no effect on the economy. So we might as well soak the rich.

You consider anyone who presents hard evidence that your ideas don’t work in practice to be ‘mean-spirited’ or lacking in enlightenment.

You think that it is possible to appease, contain or otherwise live in peace with dictators, but would do anything to overthrow George W. Bush.

You sincerely believe George W. Bush to be the worst head of state in the history of mankind, or at least far more evil/dangerous than Kim Jong-Il, Castro, Saddam, the Iranian mullahs, etc.

You think the Afghans would be better off with the Taliban.

You think the Iraqis would be better off with Saddam.

You think that an indigenous government held into place by force has more legitimacy than a limited representative government fostered with outside help – but don’t see the logical conclusion that Hitler, Tojo and Mussolini should have been left in power.

You don’t realize that the National Socialist Workers’ Party’s political agenda [private ownership/government control, total opposition to anything but government-run schools, euthanasia, vast public works projects, government being the engine of social change, trusting government way above private enterprise, holding that gov't should step in to protect the little guy from the fat cats, etc.] was far more similar to that of the modern Left than Conservatives/Libertarians.

Those who espouse hatred for America arouse your reflexive sympathy: “They likely have legitimate grievances that we should consider.” Those who espouse love for America arouse your reflexive derision. “What a bunch of idiots!”

If someone dares post anything positive about the situation in Iraq in a message board, you cannot let that slide w/o ‘balancing’ it with something negative.

You consider the bombings, beheadings, kidnappings, etc. done by thousands in Iraq to be what’s important, but the voting, rebuilding, educating, fostering democracy, etc. done by millions to be beside the point.

You consider government spending on social programs to be ‘investment’ while you hold private companies’ outlays and individuals' stock purchases to be ‘speculation.’

[walford]

Ah, reflection on discussions past brings up more defining attributes...You consider CNN to be objective because [among other things] it tells only the bad news about Iraq and you consider Fox News to be biased because it tells the bad AND the good news about Iraq.

You have no problem if goons rough-up peaceful counter-demonstrators at your 'anti-war' rally and have further no problem with your people smearing bodily excreta inside the porta-johns at a simultaneous Support the Troops rally. [This actually happened (http://utopia-unmasked.us/counter-demo2003.10-25.htm) in Washington DC.]

Your assertions require no substantiation, but others require exhaustive sourcing for theirs -- and you must approve of their sources.

Others must prove themselves right. If not, they are by default wrong. You on the otherhand must be proven wrong. If not, you are by default right.

If a group of taxpayers try to de-fund/remove from a government installation something you agree with [such as an American flag or Christian symbol desecration], that's censorship. If a group of lawyers try to de-fund/remove from a government installation something you don't agree with [such as a nativity scene, American flag motif display or Ten Commandments], that's sensible.

If you're a supervisor and someone has an American flag desecration display at his/her workdesk, that is free expression. If someone has a American flag display at his/her workdesk, you will insist that it be remove lest it offend other workers. If the employee does not remove it, you will take it down yourself. This actually happened (http://www.academia.org/news/dan_flynn.php) at Holy Cross College.

[Durandal]

She needs it in the bad hole.

rofl rofl rofl

[panzerjager]

She needs it in the bad hole.

rofl rofl rofl

Which hole is the "bad" hole?

[Durandal]

Which hole is the "bad" hole?

rofl rofl rofl

[walford]

Why Ann Coulter is hated so by the Left:Liberals become indignant when you question their patriotism, but simultaneously work overtime to give terrorists a cushion for the next attack and laugh at dumb Americans who love their country and hate the enemy.

Even Islamic terrorists don't hate America like liberals do. They don't have the energy. If they had that much energy, they'd have indoor plumbing by now.

If liberals were prevented from ever again calling Republicans dumb, they would be robbed of half their arguments. To be sure, they would still have "racist," "fascist," "homophobe," "ugly," and a few other highly nuanced arguments in the quiver. But the loss of "dumb" would nearly cripple them.

Democrats couldn't care less if people in Indiana hate them. But if Europeans curl their lips, liberals can't look at themselves in the mirror.

If John Kerry had a dollar for every time he bragged about serving in Vietnam - oh wait, he does.

If we're so cruel to minorities, why do they keep coming here? Why aren't they sneaking across the Mexican border to make their way to the Taliban?

The New York Times ran a Tom Tomorrow cartoon sneering about Americans who believe with 'unwavering faith in an invisible omniscient deity who favors those born in the middle of the North American land mass.' This is how liberals conceive of America: an undifferentiated land mass in the middle of North America.

We've finally given liberals a war against fundamentalism, and they don't want to fight it. They would, except it would put them on the same side as the United States. rofl

[walford]

You might be a Leftie if......you perfectly understand why people would fight to install a dictatorship but cannot fathom why people would fight to foster democracy -- and don't believe that is what they are really up to anyway.

...you see a foreign-supported insurgency that is fighting to install a dictatorship as legitimately home-grown and see efforts to foster democracy with foreign help as illegitimate imperialism that can only result in a puppet government.

...you view what the US is doing in Iraq as essentially the same thing as what the late 19th century Belgians did to the Congo and the mid 20th century Japanese did to China -- and you say so often.

...you view terrorism with sympathy toward the perpetrators. "What else can they do?" You view any forcible response to terrorism with disdain. "Violence never solved anything...We shouldn't bully those who kill us...We're only creating more terrorists by killing them."

...you think that killing terrorists creates more of them, while letting them live creates less.

[rotncore]

Walford, you've degraded this forum from an honest (albeit heated) discussion to a Jeff Foxworthy-eske joke. As an outside (and a Canadian) observer, I'll say a few things. I won't respond to a quote pasted, just 1st person discussion.

Firstly, Canadian and Communists are not one and the same. While it may be true that we do take a more socialist position on many issues, we also have a broad array of political parties across the spectrum. Please don't misrepresent us.

Are you surprised people talk about leaving your country when you publicly proclaim that they should be sent to Gitmo? Think about it for a second...if your neighbors and coworkers advocated shipping you to a concentration camp, you may want to move too. If informed criticism of the current state of politics in your country is deemed un-American and unpatriotic, maybe they are taking it to heart, and no longer agree with your definition of patriotism. And with partisan clowns ruling the airwaves, applying the Jerry Springer model of entertainment to the political forums it truly is a sad state of affairs, especially when the politicians don't come out and dismiss the s**t flung in their names for what it is.

I agree with the earlier statements that the left or right, take it or leave it model of one's political position needs to be expanded.

[digrar]

This looks like it has turned into a one man thread. Locked.