Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » OT: Political IQ Test
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67287] |
Wed, 18 February 2004 19:35   |
 |
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Crimson |
I have heard, however, that it's been disproven now that Kerry sat with Jane Fonda and that it was just a clever Photoshop job. It's those radicals that make the rest of us look bad. 
|
I've heard that the photo is real from some sources, I've heard it's fake from others, who the hell knows, who the hell cares. If it's fake, it's irrelevant; if it's real, it's STILL irrelevant. Took place thirty-five years ago; has no effect in today's world whether or not John Kerry went to an anti-war rally with Jane Fonda (though it wouldn't surprise me if he did).
P.S. Sorry for the double post .
Didn't realize until it was too late  .
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
 (<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
 (<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67295] |
Wed, 18 February 2004 20:44 |
Llama Man 451
Messages: 79
Registered: February 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
hydra- its funny you should bring up trusting a liar, because look who weve got in office!!!
how can you be an athist supporter of bush???? there is just nothing else to say, ill leave it at that.
you know what is also funny (going back to NCLB) i am currently reading a book entitled Fahrenheit 451 (you may have heard of it, i think it is supposed to be pretty well known) and basically it is saying that in the future we burn books and ignore good education because smart people, different races, people with different views, etc., etc. could not keep up with it, so the gov't decided to make everything happy and easy. Seeing a slight resemblance here??? the whole point is that is BAD. that is what could very wel happen if the NCLB thing keeps going on.
yeeeeeeaaaaaaaahhhhhhh . . . everyone got tax cuts, that is true, and it is also true that the majority went to the rich, but put this in perspective.. the poor got A LITTLE money back (they need it the most). the middle class got SOME money back (they need a lot because more people are in this category and end up paying a whole lot) the rich get a TON of money back (yeah . . . they're RICH) they dont need the money they can have a nice life without $300!!!! the idiocy is actually sort of amusing!!!!
hey guys i just figured out why bush's name is bush!!!!!! it isnt really a name it is an acronym!!!
Braindead
Unintelligent
Sociopathic
Hick
It all makes sense!!!!!!
[Updated on: Wed, 18 February 2004 20:46] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67297] |
Wed, 18 February 2004 20:48 |
Llama Man 451
Messages: 79
Registered: February 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
what question, oh the whole why do you pretend to be thing???
oh, firstly i never did tpretend to beanything (except that whole intern thing) i have never played renegades in my entire life, i just go to the politics forum.
PS- that was a pretty crappy comeback!
|
|
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67301] |
Wed, 18 February 2004 21:07 |
|
Hydra
Messages: 827
Registered: September 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Llama Man 451 (I'll be referring to this bozo as "Retard Man IQ-of-1) |
hydra- its funny you should bring up trusting a liar, because look who weve got in office!!!
|
Oh please, spare me the "Bush is a liar!" argument. That's been tried so many times, it's not even funny.
Tell me the undeniable truths that Bush lied about. You can't use, "There weren't any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, so Bush lied!" because that is not an undeniable truth.
| Retard Man IQ-of-1 |
yeeeeeeaaaaaaaahhhhhhh . . . everyone got tax cuts, that is true, and it is also true that the majority went to the rich, but put this in perspective.. the poor got A LITTLE money back (they need it the most). the middle class got SOME money back (they need a lot because more people are in this category and end up paying a whole lot) the rich get a TON of money back (yeah . . . they're RICH) they dont need the money they can have a nice life without $300!!!! the idiocy is actually sort of amusing!!!!
|
George W. Bush proposed a tax cut, not an income redistribution program. The poor do not pay ANY taxes WHATSOEVER!!!! The middle class pay only a minimum amount of taxes!!! "RICH" PEOPLE PAY THE MOST IN TAXES!!!
Think about this: people are where they are in life because of their own personal actions. In other words, rich people are rich because they repeatedly do the things that make them rich; poor people are poor because they repeatedly do the things that make them poor.
| Retard Guy IQ-of-1 |
hey guys i just figured out why bush's name is bush!!!!!! it isnt really a name it is an acronym!!!
Braindead
Unintelligent
Sociopathic
Hick
It all makes sense!!!!!!
|
That is just stupid. Just plain stupid. Not funny, just stupid. This just proves you are an idiot.
Walter Keith Koester: September 22, 1962 - March 15, 2005
God be with you, Uncle Wally.
(<---New(ish) Prayer Group Forums)
(<---Archived Prayer Group Forums)
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67377] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 13:35 |
 |
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Quote: |
how can you be an athist supporter of bush???? there is just nothing else to say, ill leave it at that.
|
Easy. I support Bush, and I'm an atheist. Ever hear of separation of church and state? I do not apply religion to politics, only common sense.
| Quote: |
you know what is also funny (going back to NCLB) i am currently reading a book entitled Fahrenheit 451 (you may have heard of it, i think it is supposed to be pretty well known) and basically it is saying that in the future we burn books and ignore good education because smart people, different races, people with different views, etc., etc. could not keep up with it, so the gov't decided to make everything happy and easy. Seeing a slight resemblance here??? the whole point is that is BAD. that is what could very wel happen if the NCLB thing keeps going on.
|
OK, I have read Fahrenheit 451, and I must say I see no connection at all between burning books and NCLB. I do not believe in that aprticular program, but how you could possibly draw that connection boggles my mind. There is a vast difference between a program that attempts to make everyone learn at the same speed (yeah, right...even though I support Bush in general, that is not going to ever work) and the stifling of all written literature.
| Quote: |
the poor got A LITTLE money back (they need it the most). the middle class got SOME money back (they need a lot because more people are in this category and end up paying a whole lot) the rich get a TON of money back (yeah . . . they're RICH)
|
The taxes some rich people pay exceed the annual income of many poor families. Let's remember here, they may have tons of money to blow, but IT'S STILL THEIR MONEY! You can't justify taking more of it away because someone else doesn't make as much in a year- that's a step towards communism.
Say you made 7 figures a year, and a friend of your made only 5 figures a year. Both of you must pay an approximate 30% income tax. According to your logic, the person with the lower income should get back...maybe 2%, while you would get only 1% back. Is that fair? No, it isn't- it would be flat out unconstitutional, because it would be favoring one group over another. The tax cuts are balanced in that every person gets the same PERCENTAGE of their taxes back(not the same amount). You put more in, you get more out. Putting pennies into a change machine and expecting quarters to fall back out is ludicrious, but that seems to be what you're expecting.
Don't believe for a second that a person who is poor will stay that way simply because they don't have the money to do better- that just is not true. If you have the will to do better, you will do better. If you do not, no amount of tax cuts will get you out of your rut, because you simply do not want it bad enough. Catch my drift? That is not to say all poor people are poor because they want to be- but they all have the potential to go out and succeed. A greater tax cut would only serve to reduce that drive, because people would then know that their government would be able to do everything for them.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67384] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 14:03 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
Yes, I'm a atheist and support Bush as well. though I wouldn't say that I am so in the sense that I do not believe there is truly a god, but I don't specifically DISbelieve.
I guess I just feel that the Democrats seem to want ME to pay back the debts with my money, but I would rather they spend the money they ARE getting more intelligently. Throwing more money at the problem isn't going to change the fact that it's being spent on the wrong things. We need to get the Old Guard republicans like Dole out of there and get fresh thinking.
Knowing that I'm working for my money, giving about 25% of it to the IRS every quarter (of course I will probably get a refund but I'm being careful) -- to know that some of that is going for the STUPIDEST shit like rebuilding the childhood home of Lawrence Welks who I don't really give a damn about.
What happened to churches helping the poor, and people donating to the churches for that purpose? What happened to it being MY choice whether I want to give some of my money to those less fortunate? WHY should the government decide it for me?
Rush Limbaugh has a few articles on his site today and after I read them, I was thinking "I thought the same thing!!". All I read on CNN each day is "yet another Kerry victory". All these polls about him being a contender for the Oval Office. And yet we sit here and talk and none of you Democrats are enthusiastic about Kerry. There's no excitement about him.
So basically if I were to make a poll for who would vote for whom... instead of "Bush" or "Kerry", I would have to put "Bush" or "Not Bush" and the votes would be more accurate. I greatly fear people voting for the WRONG man just because he's "Not Bush".
Those who actually do their own digging and don't just read CNN will find a lot of bad PROVABLE lies being told by Kerry.
http://magic-city-news.com/article_944.shtml
Here you can see that he has voted FOR things that he is now saying he's against, and voting AGAINST things that he says he supports. Remember, this is not opinion. This is fact. It can be looked up and verified how he voted on these issues. And now he's saying the opposite? Hmm...
But it doesn't really matter, does it?? He's not Bush, so you'll vote for him if it's said that he's "electable".
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67391] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 14:39 |
|
|
| Crimson |
Yes, I'm a atheist and support Bush as well. though I wouldn't say that I am so in the sense that I do not believe there is truly a god, but I don't specifically DISbelieve.
|
Then that means you're agonstic.
| Crimson |
Rush Limbaugh has a few articles on his site today and after I read them, I was thinking "I thought the same thing!!". All I read on CNN each day is "yet another Kerry victory". All these polls about him being a contender for the Oval Office. And yet we sit here and talk and none of you Democrats are enthusiastic about Kerry. There's no excitement about him.
So basically if I were to make a poll for who would vote for whom... instead of "Bush" or "Kerry", I would have to put "Bush" or "Not Bush" and the votes would be more accurate. I greatly fear people voting for the WRONG man just because he's "Not Bush".
.....Here you can see that he has voted FOR things that he is now saying he's against, and voting AGAINST things that he says he supports. Remember, this is not opinion. This is fact. It can be looked up and verified how he voted on these issues. And now he's saying the opposite? Hmm...
But it doesn't really matter, does it?? He's not Bush, so you'll vote for him if it's said that he's "electable".
|
Very true, The Left is so desperate for a leader they'd choose anybody (besides Bush). And who did that sort of thing too? That's right, the Germans. They were so desperate they chose Hitler.
Kerry's also very political, meaning he'd do or say anything to stay in power. I'm not saying only Democrats are like that, Bush doesn't stick what he says much either.
And that's reminds me, I'm pretty pissed about Congress making the decision to autorize the president to go war. Why? Because they made such an important decision without thinking through. Why weren't the investigations and such done BEFORE the war? Kerry, Edwards and and many others made the decision a year ago (or close to it), and now they're complaining. Would you vote for somebody who voted to go to war, then chaning his mind months later? That doesn't show very consistent behavior, does it?
God is the "0wnage". Plain and Simple.
Visit http://www.theoriginalmrbob.com
"If there's one freak to be, it's a Jesus freak"
All your base are belong to us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67444] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 16:21 |
|
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Excellent point on the Democratic candidates...Bush wanted to go to war, but it was Congress that approved it. They could have said no, but they didn't. Kerry said yes, go to war. Which is worse, a liar, or a liar who is also a hypocrite? Kerry and Edwards are the front runners in the Democratic primaries, and you would be advised to think carefully before voting for someone who changes their mind that easily. At least Bush makes up his mind and sticks with it; you know where you stand with him. Kerry is indecisive, and so is Edwards- and the last thing this country needs is a president who cannot make up his mind (or who talks out both sides of his mouth, saying one thing and meaning another).
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67447] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 16:35 |
Llama Man 451
Messages: 79
Registered: February 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
^^^^
the way bsh said there were indefinately WMD'S in Iraq and now is saying he didnt say it?
also, i am going to have to agreee that we, as democrtas, are desperate for a leader . . . ANYONE on teh democrats is better than bush even though they REALLY should be classified as republican. i think our economy is hopeless now that dean has dropped out. we can only hope sharpton gets it (which wont happen on account of all the hicks in this country)
i can see how you can compare the democratic leader to hitler, they worked hard and took a long, decisive, intelligent route to where they get, whereas bush just got his dady's name stamped on his resume.
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67452] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 16:57 |
 |
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
WHY RUSH LIMBAUGH IS BAD
He either doesn't know much about the government or he just wont talk straight.
| Rush Limbaugh |
With the exception of the military, I defy you to name one government program that has worked and alleviated the problem it was created to solve. Hhhmmmmmmm? I'm waiting. . . . Time's up.
|
Now, here are some government programs important conservatives say have worked:
George F. Will: The Interstate Highway System.
Rep. John Kasich: National Institutes of Health, Youth Summer Jobs Program.
Ben Stein: Social Security, Medicare, Head Start, Food Stamps.
And that's only a few.
Rush Limbaugh is a hypocrite. He S poor people. In his book The Way Things Ought to Be, he says that the poor are the biggest piglets at the mother pig's s. But, funnily enough, he was at one time on welfare because he was too lazy to get a job. He wasn't physically disabled or anything.
People who listen to Rush Limbaugh's radio show are stupid and don't understand politics.
| Kathleen Hall Jamieson of the University of Pennsylvania |
We just concluded a study of 360 people. whom we watched watch the health care reform debate for nine months. At the end of that period, we took the people who said they relied on talk radio, and by this, we mean primarily Rush Limbaugh. . . . And we asked them how well informed they felt. . . . Of all the people we watched, they said they were the best informed. And of all the people we watched, they were the least informed.
|
Why? Because Limbaugh's radio show sucks. Just like everything Limbaugh says.
Let's take a look at some stupid things Rush has said about liberals:
| Rush Limbaugh |
Liberals love misery. It makes them feel necessary.
|
| Rush Limbaugh |
Liberals don't want the homeless to hold a job that has any real promise.
|
| Rush Limbaugh |
Some of them-many of them, perhaps-are just plain diabolical and dishonest to the core.
|
Stupid? Yes. Right? Wrong.
Rush knows that other people know that he is full of trash, so when asked if he would want to appear on "Indecision '92", he demanded that no one be on the camera with him at the same time. Also, no one could comment on anything he said. He never appeared on the show.
Some stupid things that Rush Limbaugh said:
In April of 1994, Rush said "there is no conclusive proof that nicotine's addictive. . . . And the same thing with cigarettes causing emphysema, lung cancer, heart disease."
On June 9, 1994, Rush said that there is a federal regulation which says if you have a Bible at your desk at work, then you're guilty of religious harassment.
In See, I Told You So, Rush said, "There are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived." Actually, in 1492 there were 5-15 million indians in America, but today there are fewer then 2 million.
In 1992 Rush said it didn't matter if the polar ice caps melted because "Even if the polar icec caps melted, there would be no rise in ocean levels. . . . After all, if you have a glass of water with ice cubes in it, as the ice melts, it simply turns to liquid and the water level in the glass remains the same." But, most of the world's ice is on land, not in the water. If the ice caps melted, the sea level would go up roughly 200 feet.
In 1991, Rush said Styrofoam was biodegradeable and paper wasn't.
That's all for now.
Moving on...
| MrBob |
And who did that sort of thing too? That's right, the Germans. They were so desperate they chose .
|
Hitler didn't come in to power because Germans were crazy loony birds. He slowly crept up the power chain by first taking over the police force. He became head of the police and appointed his own crazy guys to control the police, which did his dirty work. When the party got in to power, there were O.K. people and there were crazy loony retards like . One night, called the Night of the Long Knives or something, ordered the of all the normal s. About 150 political figures died that night. Then, the party felt it should make Chancellor. Also, 's propaganda minister figured out that if you say something long enough and loud enough, people will start to believe it no matter how crazy it is. Republicans are doing this now with "Liberals America" and they used to be doing it with "Flag Burning"
| Crimson |
I guess I just feel that the Democrats seem to want ME to pay back the debts with my money
|
Well, SOMEONE's got to pay back Bush's big deficit. OH MY GOD, ITS THE TAX PAYERS!
| Crimson |
And yet we sit here and talk and none of you Democrats are enthusiastic about Kerry. There's no excitement about him.
|
I think Kerry would make a great president. He's a great campaigner, and he's winning everything. You know, right now Kerry AND Edwards are up in popularity from Bush. It's just that the conversation hasn't veered that way until now. Here: YAYAYAYAY KERRY IS COOL!
| Crimson |
Those who actually do their own digging and don't just read CNN will find a lot of bad PROVABLE lies being told by Kerry.
|
As bad as not including the War in Iraq to the 2004 budget? As bad as INCLUDING tax money in the 2004 budget that no one gets any more because of Bush's short-sighted tax cuts?
| NukeIt15 |
Ever hear of separation of church and state? I do not apply religion to politics, only common sense.
|
I know, that's why it makes me really mad that a lot of America is really religiously biased. Rush Limbaugh opens his radio show "With talent on loan from god..." And Bush is always saying "God bless America"
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67457] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 17:53 |
|
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Quote: |
I know, that's why it makes me really mad that a lot of America is really religiously biased. Rush Limbaugh opens his radio show "With talent on loan from god..." And Bush is always saying "God bless America"
|
It's a hard habit to break, when the vast majority of the government is Protestant Christian...and the rest is either Catholic (a minority) or Jewish (an even smaller minority). I've never heard of a Muslim, Pagan, Atheist, Buddist, or other religion being followed by a US politician, correct me if I'm wrong...it is interesting to note that prior to the 1960's, there was no "under God" in the pledge of allegiance- that part was added by a Democratic president. It's also interesting to note that despite a growing number of non-Christian US citizens, you still swear on a Bible in court, swearing you will tell the truth "so help you God." Religion, more specifically Christianity, is very deeply imbedded in how American politics work- the simple reason being that our government has always been dominated by them. It's a sad truth that you'll never find a government that is truly separated from a religious bias, but it seems pathetic that the single most diverse country in the world would not be a bit more secular. 
| Quote: |
we can only hope sharpton gets it (which wont happen on account of all the hicks in this country)
|
Sharpton is far too extreme to be electable. If extreme conservatives(not the more moderate ones, the old-school suit-and-tie ones) weren't religiously biased enough already, every single thing that man does is based on his religion. We do NOT need a preacher for a president. See above^.
| Quote: |
I think Kerry would make a great president. He's a great campaigner, and he's winning everything.
|
I think Kerry would make a horrible president. Yes, I do think that photo of him protesting with Jane Fonda is that important- anyone who hangs around with a traitor willingly and knowingly should never be allowed to campaign for the highest office in the nation. That goes for anyone- if it was ever revealed that Bush did anything similar, I'd be voting independent. I also believe he's one hell of a bullshit artist- he's just a little bit smoother at doing it than Bush is, being very photogenic(read that- he always smiles for the camera) and co-ordinated. I don't think for a second that he would carry out a single one of his promises.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67476] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 19:58 |
jorge the man
Messages: 3
Registered: February 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Maybe the bush administration should stop and think before we go to war. See, if you look at past wars, in which countries have tried to impose a government on a people, just because the government works for them things have not ended up pretty. Take ww2 for example, the Nazis try to take over, and impose their communist gov't on the world. Didn't work. Now the Nazis are considered evil, But maybe in the Nazis opinion they were doing the right thing, and trying to convert the lesser gov'ts.
As a metaphor Africans were considered heathens for hundreds of years, because their religion was muslim, and the whites in power were christian. Slave traders brought them over to utilize their labor, and convert them to christianity. They thought that they were doing the right thing, and saving them from the heathen land. Now racists are considered evil.
We go into Iraq to take out the leader who is corrupt, but also to change the government to a democracy. We go over to utilize oil, and convert the gov't. We are considered evil over there because maybe, just maybe what works for us does not work for them. Where one form of democracy works for us (republic), it might not work for them. We say gosh, i wonder why they are mad at us. Hmmmm... maybe it's because they don't want their country to be taken over, and converted into a democracy, maybe its because we haven't been able to do what we tried.
See a similarity between the examples and the war on iraq, maybe there is a reason they hate us. Could it be that we think we are better than them, and the rest of the non democratic countries, and want them all to be a democracy, so that everyone will just get along.
Of course we are going to try and act like the good guys, and try to "rebuild the country" This means rebuilding buildings that WE bombed, possibly setting an economy that was not perfect when we arrived, but was a lot worse after we killed thousands, and dropped hundreds of missles. What we don't have to do is impose our government in their country.
Reasons for going to war with iraq:
To take out Saddam
To rebuild the government into a democracy
To rebuild the economy
To rid of Al queda links
To rid of WMD's
First thing we did when we arrived:
Took over all the oil mines to make sure that they were not harmed.
Well, golly, I didn't see "make sure that the oil supply for the US was safe, so that we could drive or eight mile to the gallon SUVs." First we make sure that the oil mines are not harmed at all, saying that it is an important strategic factor in the war, and that it is a key factor to rebuilding their economy. Then, we bomb the crap out of the capitol, kill hundreds of innocent people search for WMDs, take over Bahgdad, search for WMDs, capture saddam, search for WMDs some more, finnally tell the world about the false intelegence, blaim it on the CIA. Man... i don't know about you guys but this war to me seems to be just a little bit faulty, and a benefit to us more than Iraq. That's just possibly ironic, seeing as the war was started for "the Iraqi's well being."
Just becasue my name is jorge doesn't mean that i am an illegal immagrant.
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67477] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 20:17 |
|
|
| Quote: |
| NukeIt15 |
Ever hear of separation of church and state? I do not apply religion to politics, only common sense.
|
I know, that's why it makes me really mad that a lot of America is really religiously biased. Rush Limbaugh opens his radio show "With talent on loan from god..." And Bush is always saying "God bless America"
|
"Wow, Bush says "God bless America," he must be a right-wing extremist evangelist Christian! Oh nos"! :rolleyes:
Seriously, I'm so sick of this "secular" bullshit. It's only "evidence" are some things taken out of context. Many claim that the word "God" never appears in the Constitution. Well, "Seperation of church and state, isn't mentioned in the Constitution either. You have to truly look at the works of the Founding Fathers, you have to look at what they really meant.
First, saying that many legislators and such have "religous bias" while wanting America to be "secular" is a contradiction. Atheism is a "religion", you're believing that there is no God, without absolute proof. By making America "secular," you are putting your own "religous bias" on America.
Furthermore, things such as the Ten Commandments at public buildings is not wrong. Of course, it would be wrong if only the Ten Commandments were allowed, but there was nothing retricting anybody putting up a Muslim, Hindu, or even an atheist object. And, isn't prohibiting anything "religous" forcing Athesim on the people?
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future...upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to substain ourselves, according to the Ten Commandments of God." - James Madison, 1778
Now what exactly was he saying? If this is true, why aren't the Ten Commandments part of the Constitution? Because if you ever studied American religion, many people would fight over (rather small) religous differences. They had the same foundation of belief and Divine Law, The Bible, yet there were so many interpretations. Many of the colonies had religous laws that forced people to go to "approved" churches every sunday, and so on. So instead of having the government force little things down people's thoats, they can govern themselves according to their own belief.
There's nothing about forcing public officials to not say "God" or pray while doing their job. Would you want somebody to sacrifice their most personal and core beliefs for "statesmanship," the fancy word for doing whatever appears neccessary? How would you like it if I forced you to keep your atheist beliefs "at home?"
God is the "0wnage". Plain and Simple.
Visit http://www.theoriginalmrbob.com
"If there's one freak to be, it's a Jesus freak"
All your base are belong to us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67492] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 21:36 |
|
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
Yes, I actually consider myself agnostic but the word "atheist" was the discussion point.
Obviously someone doesn't remember their history lessons. I know, 1991 was a long time ago. :rolleyes: I was about 11 when we went to war with Iraq and the biggest thing I can remember is that Saddam burned several oil fields. So if I were Commander in Chief of the military, I'd secure those first. There's no reason to waste a valuable resource like oil no matter what. Saddam had done enough damage to Iraq, our job was to put a stop to it, and one of those things to stop was him burning away the oil.
Just remember that about 2% of our oil comes from Iraq. Do you really think we'd go through all this trouble for a little oil? C'mon...
Remember, I've said this like twice now. I don't expressly agree with Rush Limbaugh, nor do I worship him. Hell, I don't even LISTEN to him. I just read his website among many others that I get my news from, including CNN. Let me say that again, in bold, so you might read it, because you don't read much that I type. I do not listen to Rush Limbaugh, I simply read his material. Last I checked, reading one guy's opinions does NOT in fact make me worship him.
That said, you can stuff all your anti-Rush shit right back from where you pulled it because it's irrelevant. What IS relevant is that I happened to agree with a couple of his articles, most specifically the one about lack of enthusiasm about Kerry. I can say he's in a position to know. He finds all this information about Kerry and puts together interesting articles, but the phone calls just aren't there for him to talk about Kerry. They're very rare, according to him. I can't prove this because once again, I don't listen to his show, but it sounds believable considering the only cheering I've heard for Kerry is from you. So now answer this, and tell the truth... have you wanted to vote for Kerry since he put his name on the ballot, or are you more of a fair-weather fan who just goes for the front runner on the Dem side?
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67493] |
Thu, 19 February 2004 21:44 |
|
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
Ergh, I forgot one more point.
We the taxpayers do not have to pay more taxes to make up the deficit. We've got plenty of our hard-earned cash going their way. They just need to make better decisions on where to spend it. Remember that the deficit number is not a finite figure of how much we the country owe. It's the difference between the expected revenue from taxes and the expected money that's to be spent in that same time period.
Problem is, a roaring economy doesn't so us much good when we don't protect our citizens and our borders. If terrorists start picking off office buildings and other nations come and destroy our cities then all that money won't really do much. Bush doesn't fuck around. He told them they messed with the wrong guy after September 11th, and he sure as heck went out there and started taking care of business. And so far, he's done a great job, considering we haven't had any more planes hijacked and slammed into buildings.
And save the human rights whining for another day. You can't pretend you really care about some random guy being locked up when he's innocent. Yeah, it sucks, but I'd rather lock up an innocent guy for a while than to let a guilty one come take our planes.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67547] |
Fri, 20 February 2004 10:40 |
jorge the man
Messages: 3
Registered: February 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Hopefully the people who voted for bush in the previous election, and realize that they don't want a president that lies to them. Now many of you may say that Clinton lied to us, and I agree that was bad. But, Clinton lying to us was about a sex scandal. Bush lying to us was about information on WMD. Both were lies, one lead us to war, was it bush, or was it Clinton. It was bush. If you're president lies to you about something, and then you go to war over it, despite the minority of votes in the UN, then change the reason’s for going to war, once some are proved wrong is an obvious reason not to vote for him again. 
Just becasue my name is jorge doesn't mean that i am an illegal immagrant.
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67553] |
Fri, 20 February 2004 12:10 |
|
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
Clinton lied about a LOT more than just getting head in the Oval Office, pimpboyjoe.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| OT: Political IQ Test [message #67573] |
Fri, 20 February 2004 14:31 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Crimson |
Clinton lied about a LOT more than just getting head in the Oval Office, pimpboyjoe.
|
Clinton lied about a lot more stuff.....like what? You mean all that crap your daddy came up with that isn't true? If it isn't true, then Clinton didn't lie about it.
Just so you know, here's some stuff Clinton did to thwart terrorism:
Thrity-eight days after Clinton took office the World Trade Center was attacked for the first time. [No, not with planes, it was a truck bomb that was detonated in the underground parking complex.] Thus, Clinton swept in to action. He captured, tried, convicted, and imprisoned Ramzi Yousef, Abdul Hakim Murad, and Wali Khan Amin Shah, those who were responsible for the bombing. And he never even had to go to war. These terrorists were also involved in plots to assassinate the pope and blow up 12 airliners simultaneously. But these never happened. Perhaps they would have, if Clinton hadn't been President.
Some other things Clinton thwarted:
1) Bomb attack against UN Headquarters
2) Bomb attack against the FBI Building
3) Bomb attacj against the Israeli embassy in Washington
4) Bomb attack against the LA and Boston Airports
5) Bomb attack against the Lincoln and Holland tunnels
6) Bomb attack against the George Washington bridge
The U.s. wouldn't have been a happy place if all of these terrorist attacks had occured.
How did he do it? He tripled the counterterrorism budget for the FBI. He doubled counterterrorism funding overall. He rolled up Al Qaeda cells in more than 20 countries. He created a top-level national security post to coordinate all federal counterterrorism activity. His first and second crime bills contained stringent antiterrorism legislation. He created a national stockpile of drugs and vaccines, which included 40 million doses of smallpox vaccines.
| Barton Gellman of the Washington Post |
By any measure availible, Clinton left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him.
|
You think Republicans were cooperating with what Clinton was doing? Hell no. The same people who said Clinton didn't do enough to stop terrorism days after 9/11 were the ones who were fighting his terrorism decisions in Congress. When Clinton asked for more terrorism funding in 1996, Orrin Hatch said, ""The administration would be wise to utilize the resources Congress has already provided before it requests additional funding." After the Oklahoma City bombing, which happened a year before that, Clinton proposed to expand the intelligence agencie's wiretap authority to combat terrorism. On FOX News Sunday, Newt Gingrich said,
| Newt Gingrich, the guy who divorced his wife while she was recovering from cancer |
When you have an agency that turns nine hundred personell files over to people like Craig Livingstone. . . . it's very hard to justify giving that agency more power
|
Gingrich was referring to Filegate, one of the many FOX-hyped investigations that yielded zip and then quietly went away.
Right after terrorists attacked US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Clinton issued a presidential directive to authorize the assassination of Osama bin Laden. Sean Hannity [a conservative crackpot] always brings up Reagan's Executive Order 12333, which prohibits assassinating foreign heads of state. The only thing is, Osama bin Laden isn't a foreign head of state.
The final major attack during the Clinton era was when terrorists bombed the USS Cole, killing 17 US sailors. That got Clinton pissed. Instead of funding them and giving them weapons like Reagan, Clinton set out to destory them. He assigned Richard Clarke in charge of creating a plan to eliminate al Qaeda. This became a cover story for Time Magazine [August 12, 2002]. Clarke produced a strategy paper that he gave to Sandy Berger and other national security principals on December 20, 2002. Here's what the plan detailed:
Systematically attack financial support for al Qaeda terrorist activities.
Break up al Qaeda cells and arrest their members.
Freeze al Qaeda assets and stop funding through fake charities.
Give aid to governments having trouble with al Qaeda.
Scale up covert action in Afghanistan to eliminate the training camps and reach bin Laden himself.
But this plan was never put in to action. Because Clinton's two terms were up. And even though he lost the election, President Bush came in to office. The only reason the plan was not implemented is because the Clinton administration didn't want a hand Bush a war when he got in to office. And Bush never used the plan, either. Clinton gave the plan to Bush and trusted him to protect America. Instead, all Bush did was launch a big hyped-up war to make people think he's doing all he can.
The End.
Moving on...
ACK, actually, looking back on history is a prime way to avoid making the mistakes of the past in the future. Although Hitler and the Nazi party have nothing to do with the current Democratic presidential candidates.
| Crimson |
And save the human rights whining for another day. You can't pretend you really care about some random guy being locked up when he's innocent. Yeah, it sucks, but I'd rather lock up an innocent guy for a while than to let a guilty one come take our planes.
|
Yeah, I mean, who cares about the rules of the United States of America? The president should be whatever he wants to do whenever he feels like it. Come to think of it, why shouldn't the U.S. be a dictatorship?
Rules are there for a reason.
| Crimson |
Just remember that about 2% of our oil comes from Iraq. Do you really think we'd go through all this trouble for a little oil? C'mon...
|
About 2% of our oil comes from Iraq. That DOES NOT mean that there is a small amount of oil in Iraq. It means they don't want to sell us much. If we come in and take it, it will turn in to a lot more than 2%.
| Crimson |
but the phone calls just aren't there for him to talk about Kerry. They're very rare, according to him.
|
You want to know why? Because Limbaugh carefully screens all of his callers so only the stupidest conservatives in the world ever get to talk on his show.
| Crimson |
have you wanted to vote for Kerry since he put his name on the ballot, or are you more of a fair-weather fan who just goes for the front runner on the Dem side?
|
Well, actually, I would have voted for Dean, but since he dropped out, I would definitely vote for Kerry. He's been in the Senate for a long time, and knows a lot about government.
| MrBob |
"Wow, Bush says "God bless America," he must be a right-wing extremist evangelist Christian! Oh nos"!
|
It shows his biases, that's for sure.
| Crimson |
I do not listen to Rush Limbaugh, I simply read his material.
|
So listening to material and reading material are entirely different things?
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue May 14 12:20:19 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01649 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
