Religions > Atheism > John McCain: Zell Miller's Train Wreck Could Hurt AWOL Bush (Sort of Like Iraq When You Think About It)
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Yang, AthD h.c" |
| Date: |
04 Sep 2004 02:36:32 AM |
| Object: |
John McCain: Zell Miller's Train Wreck Could Hurt AWOL Bush (Sort of Like Iraq When You Think About It) |
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0409030259sep03,1,1523380.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: -3 million jobs and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -978 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
.
|
|
| User: "Hanoi Jane Fonda" |
|
| Title: Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals |
04 Sep 2004 02:54:08 AM |
|
|
Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals
.... or they're scared to admit it.
Yesterday we found out that the Democrats were going to call their
liberal talk radio network "Central Air." It's amazing ... they have
to begin the dishonesty in the very name they give to their talk radio
network! They don't even have the courage to give it the "liberal"
title that they are all so very proud of.
Here's a better name, just call it "Ignorance in Broadcasting."
Conservative talk show hosts such as Limbaugh, Hannity and Boortz
don't have to go out there and actually buy radio stations, as the
left has done, in order to get our shows aired. The difference
between our stations and the stations that will be owned by these
Democrat Party activists is that our stations air our programs because
their listeners want to listen to us. The Democrat's stations will
air the liberal talk shows because the have to.
Liberals can't compete because nobody wants tune in and hear how much
their country sucks for three hours.
--
Left-wing liberals are EVERYTHING they accuse the right of being. They
are mean, vicious, hateful, greedy, cold-hearted, closed-minded,
selfish, intolerant, bigoted and racist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals |
04 Sep 2004 04:02:16 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 03:54:08 -0400, Hanoi Jane Fonda
<hanoi_jane@N0SPAM.C0M> wrote:
Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals
... or they're scared to admit it.
Nope. Proud liberal reporting for duty. Now go crawl back under your
rock.
Yesterday we found out that the Democrats were going to call their
liberal talk radio network "Central Air."
Probably because the Democratic Party drifted noticeably to the center
under Clinton (while the Republican Party drifted noticeably to the
right).
It's amazing ... they have
to begin the dishonesty in the very name they give to their talk radio
network! They don't even have the courage to give it the "liberal"
title that they are all so very proud of.
When Fox News replaces its "Fair and Balanced" slogan with the more
honest "Blatant Right-Wing Propaganda", you might have a case. Until
then, the pot is calling the kettle black.
Here's a better name, just call it "Ignorance in Broadcasting."
Fox has that trademarked already.
Conservative talk show hosts such as Limbaugh, Hannity and Boortz
don't have to go out there and actually buy radio stations, as the
left has done, in order to get our shows aired.
Which completely demolishes the "liberal media" lie that the right is
so fond of repeating...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hydroxy" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals |
04 Sep 2004 09:04:36 AM |
|
|
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:hj1jj0pppt73f9n5p1ea67nh4h1rol1ng1@4ax.com...
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 03:54:08 -0400, Hanoi Jane Fonda
<hanoi_jane@N0SPAM.C0M> wrote:
Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals
... or they're scared to admit it.
Nope. Proud liberal reporting for duty. Now go crawl back under your
rock.
Yesterday we found out that the Democrats were going to call their
liberal talk radio network "Central Air."
Probably because the Democratic Party drifted noticeably to the center
under Clinton (while the Republican Party drifted noticeably to the
right).
It's amazing ... they have
to begin the dishonesty in the very name they give to their talk radio
network! They don't even have the courage to give it the "liberal"
title that they are all so very proud of.
When Fox News replaces its "Fair and Balanced" slogan with the more
honest "Blatant Right-Wing Propaganda", you might have a case. Until
then, the pot is calling the kettle black.
Here's a better name, just call it "Ignorance in Broadcasting."
Fox has that trademarked already.
Conservative talk show hosts such as Limbaugh, Hannity and Boortz
don't have to go out there and actually buy radio stations, as the
left has done, in order to get our shows aired.
Which completely demolishes the "liberal media" lie that the right is
so fond of repeating...
no, it doesn't
because everybody who claims the "liberal media" exists readily admits that
talk radio is an EXCEPTION
also noted that there are many LIBERALS that believe the media is
left-biased, so it's not just the right that repeats it
note that the public editor of the NYT admitted that about the NYT (liberal
bias), and the LA Times (a particularly egregious example) actually sent a
memo to their employees try to correct some of their bias
whit
.
|
|
|
| User: "George Grapman" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals |
04 Sep 2004 09:59:36 AM |
|
|
It is the GOP that his the anti-choice, anti gay rights speakers from
prime time.
--
To reply via e-mail please delete 1 c from paccbell
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals |
04 Sep 2004 10:15:19 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 07:04:36 -0700, "Hydroxy" <hydro@earthlink.net>
wrote:
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:hj1jj0pppt73f9n5p1ea67nh4h1rol1ng1@4ax.com...
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 03:54:08 -0400, Hanoi Jane Fonda
<hanoi_jane@N0SPAM.C0M> wrote:
Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals
... or they're scared to admit it.
Nope. Proud liberal reporting for duty. Now go crawl back under your
rock.
Yesterday we found out that the Democrats were going to call their
liberal talk radio network "Central Air."
Probably because the Democratic Party drifted noticeably to the center
under Clinton (while the Republican Party drifted noticeably to the
right).
It's amazing ... they have
to begin the dishonesty in the very name they give to their talk radio
network! They don't even have the courage to give it the "liberal"
title that they are all so very proud of.
When Fox News replaces its "Fair and Balanced" slogan with the more
honest "Blatant Right-Wing Propaganda", you might have a case. Until
then, the pot is calling the kettle black.
Here's a better name, just call it "Ignorance in Broadcasting."
Fox has that trademarked already.
Conservative talk show hosts such as Limbaugh, Hannity and Boortz
don't have to go out there and actually buy radio stations, as the
left has done, in order to get our shows aired.
Which completely demolishes the "liberal media" lie that the right is
so fond of repeating...
no, it doesn't
because everybody who claims the "liberal media" exists readily admits that
talk radio is an EXCEPTION
That's a very sweeping generalization
also noted that there are many LIBERALS that believe the media is
left-biased, so it's not just the right that repeats it
The media, especially television and radio, are generally owned by
huge conglomerates, who by their very nature, tend to favor the right,
not the left.
note that the public editor of the NYT admitted that about the NYT (liberal
bias), and the LA Times (a particularly egregious example) actually sent a
memo to their employees try to correct some of their bias
Citations?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hydroxy" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals |
04 Sep 2004 10:41:43 AM |
|
|
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:usmjj05vq30ftj6h554ob7a0kkjt0l87tj@4ax.com...
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 07:04:36 -0700, "Hydroxy" <hydro@earthlink.net>
wrote:
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:hj1jj0pppt73f9n5p1ea67nh4h1rol1ng1@4ax.com...
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 03:54:08 -0400, Hanoi Jane Fonda
<hanoi_jane@N0SPAM.C0M> wrote:
Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals
... or they're scared to admit it.
Nope. Proud liberal reporting for duty. Now go crawl back under your
rock.
Yesterday we found out that the Democrats were going to call their
liberal talk radio network "Central Air."
Probably because the Democratic Party drifted noticeably to the center
under Clinton (while the Republican Party drifted noticeably to the
right).
It's amazing ... they have
to begin the dishonesty in the very name they give to their talk radio
network! They don't even have the courage to give it the "liberal"
title that they are all so very proud of.
When Fox News replaces its "Fair and Balanced" slogan with the more
honest "Blatant Right-Wing Propaganda", you might have a case. Until
then, the pot is calling the kettle black.
Here's a better name, just call it "Ignorance in Broadcasting."
Fox has that trademarked already.
Conservative talk show hosts such as Limbaugh, Hannity and Boortz
don't have to go out there and actually buy radio stations, as the
left has done, in order to get our shows aired.
Which completely demolishes the "liberal media" lie that the right is
so fond of repeating...
no, it doesn't
because everybody who claims the "liberal media" exists readily admits
that
talk radio is an EXCEPTION
That's a very sweeping generalization
sure it is. but it's true
and even a cursory listen to talk radio will support that.
also noted that there are many LIBERALS that believe the media is
left-biased, so it's not just the right that repeats it
The media, especially television and radio, are generally owned by
huge conglomerates, who by their very nature, tend to favor the right,
not the left.
on certain pro-corporate issues, i agree.
but when we are talking bread and butter social issues, such as gun control,
abortion, etc. that is not the case.
i am well aware of the ownership issue. i think that issue is well
addressed by goldberg, and not so by alterman
the primary concern of huge conglomerates is making money, not pushing a
pro-corporate agenda (although i agree that in general, media may be less
likely to slag big business, for the reason of their own ownership_
when (as has been demonstrated exhaustively), the VAST majority of reporters
are left-of-center, that self-confessed liberals VASTLY outnumber
self-confessed conservatives in the media (which is the opposite of society
at large, where recent polling data showed significantly more people
self-identified as conservatrive vs liberal), you can't help but have a
groupthink sort of mentality that results in a pervasive, if often subtle ,
left bias
note that the public editor of the NYT admitted that about the NYT
(liberal
bias), and the LA Times (a particularly egregious example) actually sent
a
memo to their employees try to correct some of their bias
Citations?
sure. but IF you are actually arguing the position that the media is NOT
left-biased, you should have known about this...
http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html
(you'll have to register)
here's an article referencing the public editor's admission
http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_luskin/luskin200407290744.asp
it's a weak admission, but an admission nonetheless
here's the LA times one
http://www.laobserved.com/carrollmemo.html
also, when i use term media, i MEAN media. not just news media. the news
media is, imo, left-biased. but, it pales in comparison to popular media -
movies, tv shows (sitcoms etc.) which is FAR more left-biased.
i think it's most obvious in how it handles gun control/CCW's.
whit
.
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Liberals ASHAMED to be Liberals |
04 Sep 2004 07:51:53 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 08:41:43 -0700, "Hydroxy" <hydro@earthlink.net>
wrote:
Which completely demolishes the "liberal media" lie that the right is
so fond of repeating...
no, it doesn't
because everybody who claims the "liberal media" exists readily admits
that
talk radio is an EXCEPTION
That's a very sweeping generalization
sure it is. but it's true
and even a cursory listen to talk radio will support that.
That wasn't my point. My point was that your statement that "everybody
who claims the liberal media exists readily admits that talk radio is
an exception" is a pretty sweeping generalization. Have you surveyed
everyone to make sure? Facetious, perhaps, but keeping you honest.
also noted that there are many LIBERALS that believe the media is
left-biased, so it's not just the right that repeats it
The media, especially television and radio, are generally owned by
huge conglomerates, who by their very nature, tend to favor the right,
not the left.
on certain pro-corporate issues, i agree.
but when we are talking bread and butter social issues, such as gun control,
abortion, etc. that is not the case.
I think you're badly missing the point by thinking that corporate
issues are not as important. Ultimately, they have a far more
significant impact on people's lives.
i am well aware of the ownership issue. i think that issue is well
addressed by goldberg, and not so by alterman
I'm not familiar with the work of either; could you provide a
reference?
the primary concern of huge conglomerates is making money, not pushing a
pro-corporate agenda
The former virtually guarantees the latter.
(although i agree that in general, media may be less
likely to slag big business, for the reason of their own ownership_
Agreed.
when (as has been demonstrated exhaustively), the VAST majority of reporters
are left-of-center, that self-confessed liberals VASTLY outnumber
self-confessed conservatives in the media (which is the opposite of society
at large, where recent polling data showed significantly more people
self-identified as conservatrive vs liberal), you can't help but have a
groupthink sort of mentality that results in a pervasive, if often subtle ,
left bias
Except that you're overlooking that reporters aren't independent
entities. They're overseen by corporate editors, who aren't being paid
to advance a left-wing agenda; quite the opposite, actually.
note that the public editor of the NYT admitted that about the NYT
(liberal
bias), and the LA Times (a particularly egregious example) actually sent
a
memo to their employees try to correct some of their bias
Citations?
sure. but IF you are actually arguing the position that the media is NOT
left-biased, you should have known about this...
http://www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html
(you'll have to register)
here's an article referencing the public editor's admission
http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_luskin/luskin200407290744.asp
it's a weak admission, but an admission nonetheless
Probably the weakest admission I've ever seen. Were we reading the
same articles?
here's the LA times one
http://www.laobserved.com/carrollmemo.html
*Very* disingenuous, in that the author assumes that pro-choice is a
"liberal" position, and by implication, anti-choice a conservative
one. Guess what: there are plenty of liberals who oppose abortion, and
plenty of conservatives who favor a woman's right to choose. Try
again.
also, when i use term media, i MEAN media. not just news media. the news
media is, imo, left-biased. but, it pales in comparison to popular media -
movies, tv shows (sitcoms etc.) which is FAR more left-biased.
I'm not qualified to judge, so I'll won't respond.
i think it's most obvious in how it handles gun control/CCW's.
Since I don't actually watch TV normally, I can't say I'm qualified to
comment on that, but I'm curious as to what "CCW's" is.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "W=Waffler" |
|
| Title: Re: John McCain: Zell Miller's Train Wreck Could Hurt AWOL Bush (Sortof Like Iraq When You Think About It) |
04 Sep 2004 02:43:55 AM |
|
|
Yang, AthD (h.c) wrote:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0409030259sep03,1,1523380.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed
You should have said it is a registration-required site! Please provide
a summary of the article.
James
.
|
|
|
| User: "Yang AthD h.c" |
|
| Title: Re: John McCain: Zell Miller's Train Wreck Could Hurt AWOL Bush (Sort of Like Iraq When You Think About It) |
04 Sep 2004 11:46:50 AM |
|
|
W=Waffler <jwa1968@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<%me_c.7054$w%6.6061@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
Yang, AthD (h.c) wrote:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0409030259sep03,1,1523380.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed
You should have said it is a registration-required site! Please provide
a summary of the article.
James
CAMPAIGN 2004: REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION KEYNOTE ADDRESS REACTION
McCain: Miller's attack on Kerry could hurt Bush
By Janet Hook
Tribune Newspapers: Los Angeles Times
Published September 3, 2004
NEW YORK -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has pushed for more
civility in this year's presidential race, is warning that the biting,
angry attack on Sen. John Kerry by a fellow Democrat at the Republican
National Convention on Wednesday night might harm President Bush's
efforts to woo swing voters.
McCain said the keynote address by Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.) could
prove as controversial as a speech by Patrick Buchanan at the 1992 GOP
convention in Houston.
"I think it backfires," McCain said of Miller's rhetorical assault on
Kerry. He added that it "makes Buchanan's speech look milquetoast."
McCain made his comments to reporters at a party he held after the
convention's Wednesday session ended.
Buchanan's speech, in which he declared a "culture war" was under way
in America, was thought by many Republicans to have hurt the
re-election bid of Bush's father, then-President George H.W. Bush. The
elder Bush lost the November vote to Democrat Bill Clinton.
Miller's keynote address was laced with harsh criticism of Kerry's
legislative record on military issues. Marshall Wittmann, McCain's
spokesman, said the senator favors a less divisive approach to
political debate.
"This is not his style," Wittmann said. "He would prefer to see
Democrats not as our enemies, but rather as Americans who have good
intentions but policy differences" with Republicans.
McCain has campaigned for the younger Bush's re-election and continues
that effort in coming days, appearing on the president's behalf in New
Mexico and Wisconsin.
But he also has denounced ads by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
criticizing Kerry's military service in Vietnam and his protests
against that war. McCain has urged the White House to condemn the ads.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Marxist Moore" |
|
| Title: GOD HAS WRATH AGAINST ATHEISTS & LIBERALS! |
04 Sep 2004 02:51:00 PM |
|
|
GOD HAS WRATH AGAINST ATHEISTS & LIBERALS!
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness
and unrighteousness of ATHEISTS who suppress the truth in
unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident
within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation
of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine
nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been
made, so that ATHEISTS are without excuse. For even though ATHEISTS
know God, they do not honor Him as God or
give thanks, but they have become futile in their speculations, and
their foolish heart are darkened. Professing to be wise, they are
fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image
in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals
and crawling creatures. Therefore God has given ATHEISTS over in the
lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies will be
dishonored among them. For they exchange the truth of God for a lie,
and worship and serve the creature rather than the Creator, who is
blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God has given them over to
degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for
that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned
the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward
one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in
their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as ATHEISTS
do not see fit to acknowledge God, God has given them over to a
depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, being filled
with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy,
murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, slanderers, haters
of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient
to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving,
unmerciful; and although ATHEISTS know the ordinance of God, that
those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do
the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Galehouse" |
|
| Title: Re: GOD HAS WRATH AGAINST ATHEISTS & LIBERALS! |
04 Sep 2004 05:22:38 PM |
|
|
"Michael Marxist Moore" <mmmoore@N0TSPAM.0RG> wrote in message
news:u37kj09n6r8ahot31et14g7l37e9pm2nj0@4ax.com...
GOD HAS WRATH AGAINST ATHEISTS & LIBERALS!
Bring it on!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peanutjake" |
|
| Title: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
05 Sep 2004 02:27:07 PM |
|
|
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Alder" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
06 Sep 2004 03:11:52 PM |
|
|
"Peanutjake" <peanutjakeNO@usa.com> wrote in news:2q185uFqgkotU1@uni-
berlin.de:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
The only "second coming" Clinton ever experienced involved a blue dress.
--
"I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more
strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches
out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to
American values in history." John Kerry at the Unity 2004 Journalists
of Color conference.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Four More MONTHS! _" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
06 Sep 2004 08:00:41 PM |
|
|
Jim Alder wrote:
"Peanutjake" <peanutjakeNO@usa.com> wrote in news:2q185uFqgkotU1@uni-
berlin.de:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
The only "second coming" Clinton ever experienced involved a blue dress.
As opposed to multiple ***** shots from Limbaugh into
Alder's fat mouth..
--
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful.
And so are we..
Our enemies never stop thinking about ways to harm our country and our
people.
And neither do we.."
-George W. Bush, August 5, 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Alder" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
06 Sep 2004 10:45:12 PM |
|
|
"Four More MONTHS!" <_> wrote in news:413d0709@nntp.zianet.com:
Jim Alder wrote:
"Peanutjake" <peanutjakeNO@usa.com> wrote in news:2q185uFqgkotU1@uni-
berlin.de:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
The only "second coming" Clinton ever experienced involved a blue
dress.
As opposed to multiple ***** shots from Limbaugh into
Alder's fat mouth..
Post them, you foul mouthed lying psycho.
--
"I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more
strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches
out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to
American values in history." John Kerry at the Unity 2004 Journalists
of Color conference.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Four Moron MONTHS! _" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
08 Sep 2004 03:39:07 AM |
|
|
Jim Alder wrote:
"Four More MONTHS!" <_> wrote in news:413d0709@nntp.zianet.com:
Jim Alder wrote:
"Peanutjake" <peanutjakeNO@usa.com> wrote in news:2q185uFqgkotU1@uni-
berlin.de:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
The only "second coming" Clinton ever experienced involved a blue
dress.
As opposed to multiple ***** shots from Limbaugh into
Alder's fat mouth..
Post them, you foul mouthed lying psycho.
YOU'RE the one obsessed with Clinton's Penis,
***** Lick.
Sorry, but that's what continously sucking right wing
***** on the internet gets you, Alder.
--
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful.
And so are we..
Our enemies never stop thinking about ways to harm our country and our
people.
And neither do we.."
-George W. Bush, August 5, 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Alder" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
08 Sep 2004 10:37:59 AM |
|
|
"Four Moron MONTHS!" <_> wrote in news:413ec400@nntp.zianet.com:
Jim Alder wrote:
"Four More MONTHS!" <_> wrote in news:413d0709@nntp.zianet.com:
Jim Alder wrote:
"Peanutjake" <peanutjakeNO@usa.com> wrote in news:2q185uFqgkotU1@uni-
berlin.de:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
The only "second coming" Clinton ever experienced involved a blue
dress.
As opposed to multiple ***** shots from Limbaugh into
Alder's fat mouth..
Post them, you foul mouthed lying psycho.
YOU'RE the one obsessed with Clinton's Penis,
***** Lick.
Sorry, but that's what continously sucking right wing
***** on the internet gets you, Alder.
You would know. You're a sick little pervert, and now you're history.
<plonk>
--
"I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more
strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches
out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to
American values in history." John Kerry at the Unity 2004 Journalists
of Color conference.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alfred Carlson" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
05 Sep 2004 09:45:12 PM |
|
|
Hey you liberal puke, leave Jesus out of your wacko politics!
Peanutjake wrote:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chimera" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
06 Sep 2004 02:42:25 AM |
|
|
Alfred Carlson <wa7uhr@nwinfo.net> wrote in message news:<413BCF38.8FE7C39C@nwinfo.net>...
Hey you liberal puke, leave Jesus out of your wacko politics!
Peanutjake wrote:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
While I am a fierce capitalist and atheist, Jesus was a liberal; that
is were liberal morality derived from. Jesus represents the ideal
selfless (Neo)-liberal who cares not for himself, but is concerned
with "helping" others, thus creating a mental state that he can be
trampled on by governments or rulers with out noticing he is a slave.
This moral code is similar to the collectivist morality that Rand and
Orwell (though Orwell was a socialist) warned against. All of you
"liberals" (I hate that the word liberal has been hi-jacked by
socialist who have no true concept of liberty, when liberal's
dictionary meaning is a more to the center) should go read Nietzsche,
and reconsider why you believe certain concepts to be "Morally good or
evil".
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wexford" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
06 Sep 2004 02:02:28 AM |
|
|
Alfred Carlson <wa7uhr@nwinfo.net> wrote in message news:<413BCF38.8FE7C39C@nwinfo.net>...
Hey you liberal puke, leave Jesus out of your wacko politics!
Peanutjake wrote:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
Why should he? The Right sure as hell doesn't.
Wexford
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Four More MONTHS! _" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
05 Sep 2004 11:18:02 PM |
|
|
Alfred Carlson wrote:
Hey you liberal puke, leave Jesus out of your wacko politics!
Peanutjake wrote:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
Hey you right wing fuckhead, shove it up your
fascist white "Christian" *****.
--
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful.
And so are we..
Our enemies never stop thinking about ways to harm our country and our
people.
And neither do we.."
-George W. Bush, August 5, 2002
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "CJT" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
05 Sep 2004 10:40:11 PM |
|
|
Alfred Carlson wrote:
Hey you liberal puke, leave Jesus out of your wacko politics!
Do conservatives leave him out of THEIR wacko politics?
Peanutjake wrote:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Danzig" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
06 Sep 2004 03:30:06 PM |
|
|
CJT wrote:
Alfred Carlson wrote:
Hey you liberal puke, leave Jesus out of your wacko politics!
Do conservatives leave him out of THEIR wacko politics?
Got a point there.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: JESUS WAS A LIBERAL |
05 Sep 2004 10:54:29 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 19:45:12 -0700, Alfred Carlson <wa7uhr@nwinfo.net>
wrote:
Hey you liberal puke, leave Jesus out of your wacko politics!
What did he say that was incorrect? Be specific.
Peanutjake wrote:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Marxist Moore" |
|
| Title: IF JESUS WAS A LIBERAL, THEN WHY DO LIBERALS HATE HIM??? |
05 Sep 2004 04:49:10 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 15:27:07 -0400, "Peanutjake" <peanutjakeNO@usa.com>
wrote:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
Liberals have chased JESUS out of our schools!
Liberals have chased JESUS off of the steps of southern court houses.
Liberals go nuts when they see "IN GOD WE TRUST" printed on anything!
LIBERALS ARE HYPOCRITES!
LIBERALS HATE AMERICA!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pvt. Joker" |
|
| Title: Re: Why do neocons use the name of Jesus to support their agenda? |
05 Sep 2004 08:14:24 PM |
|
|
"Michael Neocon *****" <mmmooreDick@Bootlick.0RG> wrote in message
news:h72nj0h3cquljtduuagpvmg5f35bettqdj@4ax.com...
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 15:27:07 -0400, "Peanutjake" <peanutjakeNO@usa.com>
wrote:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
Neocons invoke the name of Jesus to support policies which hurt the poor,
the elderly, and the working man.
Neocons are blasphemers.
Neocons are coke-snorting wastes.
Neocons hate America and Jesus...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: IF JESUS WAS A LIBERAL, THEN WHY DO LIBERALS HATE IDIOTS |
06 Sep 2004 01:01:28 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 17:49:10 -0400, Michael Marxist Moore
<mmmoore@N0TSPAM.0RG> wrote:
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 15:27:07 -0400, "Peanutjake" <peanutjakeNO@usa.com>
wrote:
JESUS WAS A LIBERAL
He healed the sick
He fed the poor.
He chased the money-changing
capitalists from the temple.
He was opposed by the conservatives of his day.
Liberals have chased JESUS out of our schools!
Liberals have made it okay for EVERYONE to feel safe in our schools.
Religious extremists aren't good for kids.
Liberals have chased JESUS off of the steps of southern court houses.
Key word; "Courthouses" Religion and government don't mix.
Even dumb assholes can see the models of Iran and Afghanistan to know
what utter nonsense religious nuts can think up.
Liberals go nuts when they see "IN GOD WE TRUST" printed on anything!
Be glad to print it on your dumb ***** after it gets kicked ! !
=========================================================
After being told by an aide; "America is under attack", George
Bush, (supposed protector of America/leader) sat in a silent stupor
for 7 minutes, frozen like a deer in a cars headlights. Sources say that
it was more like 26 minutes because after he left the "kiddies"
he had no idea what to do.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Slade Farney" |
|
| Title: Re: IF JESUS WAS A LIBERAL, THEN WHY DO LIBERALS HATE IDIOTS |
06 Sep 2004 12:33:15 PM |
|
|
wrote in message news:<c9vnj0dbdbocrkv3755dj27eicn8397b4d@4ax.com>...
Even dumb assholes can see the models of Iran and Afghanistan to know
what utter nonsense religious nuts can think up.
Can those same dumb assholes look at Teineman Square and the rivers of
blood throughout the former Soviet Union to know what utter nonsense
atheist nuts think up?
Religious nuts have no copyright on nonsense. Anybody and everybody
shares in the bounty of stupidity, and vicious blood and slaughter.
Oh, by the way: Most of the blood shed in Afghanistan was spilled by
American bombs and guns. Stupidity and viciousness abound.
--Slade
.
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: IF JESUS WAS A LIBERAL, THEN WHY DO LIBERALS HATE IDIOTS |
06 Sep 2004 12:50:25 PM |
|
|
On 6 Sep 2004 10:33:15 -0700, (Slade Farney)
wrote:
archie-Leach@spankrightwing.com wrote in message news:<c9vnj0dbdbocrkv3755dj27eicn8397b4d@4ax.com>...
Even dumb assholes can see the models of Iran and Afghanistan to know
what utter nonsense religious nuts can think up.
Can those same dumb assholes look at Teineman Square and the rivers of
blood throughout the former Soviet Union to know what utter nonsense
atheist nuts think up?
The difference being that these weren't done in the name of atheism.
Religious nuts have no copyright on nonsense. Anybody and everybody
shares in the bounty of stupidity, and vicious blood and slaughter.
Oh, by the way: Most of the blood shed in Afghanistan was spilled by
American bombs and guns. Stupidity and viciousness abound.
--Slade
.
|
|
|
| User: "Slade Farney" |
|
| Title: Re: IF JESUS WAS A LIBERAL, THEN WHY DO LIBERALS HATE IDIOTS |
07 Sep 2004 01:54:47 AM |
|
|
raven1 <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message news:<j39pj0hep7i59ribhaoqadui53ivk7s78d@4ax.com>...
On 6 Sep 2004 10:33:15 -0700, (Slade Farney)
wrote:
archie-Leach@spankrightwing.com wrote in message news:<c9vnj0dbdbocrkv3755dj27eicn8397b4d@4ax.com>...
Even dumb assholes can see the models of Iran and Afghanistan to know
what utter nonsense religious nuts can think up.
Can those same dumb assholes look at Teineman Square and the rivers of
blood throughout the former Soviet Union to know what utter nonsense
atheist nuts think up?
The difference being that these weren't done in the name of atheism.
That would hardly make a difference to the victims, but you are still
wrong. Communism was radically and fanatically atheist. That was a
basic plank of both Maoist and Soviet Communism. Atheism was
essential to both forms of Communism.
And I gave you a break. I should have included the Red Terror in
1917, the Lenin purges, the Stalin purges and show trials, and the
Ukrainian Holocaust of the 1930s. I should have included the 30
millions who were killed in the Maoist revolution, the mop-up purges
that followed, and the Cultural Revolution under the Gang of Seven.
And I should have included the Pol Pot purges in Cambodia that killed
about 8,000,000 citizens, though that figure has been revised downward
because it cast a shadow over the Nazi-Jewish Holocaust.
And those are just the big massacres that were given names. We could
also include the Massacre of the Katyn Forest, the Siberian death
camps, and the brutal conquests of neighboring countries, including
Hungarian Revolution and the bloody attack on Afghanistan.
All those murders were in the name of the Communist Ideal. Every one.
Many Christians were murdered simply because they were Christians.
And the Jews say the same for Jewish victims. Those were purely
religious persecutions. Or anti-Religious, if you prefer. Either
way, they were in the pure, sweet, and gentle name of Atheism.
Atheism had a golden opportunity to strut its humanitarian colors, and
it ran red with blood for seventy years. Communists were so proud of
the death count, Red was chosen as the International Color for
Communism. Death and massacre were also major planks in the Communist
doctrine.
Religious nuts have no copyright on nonsense. Anybody and everybody
shares in the bounty of stupidity, and vicious blood and slaughter.
Oh, by the way: Most of the blood shed in Afghanistan was spilled by
American bombs and guns. Stupidity and viciousness abound.
(I had forgotten all the Afghanis killed by the sweet and gentle
Soviets.)
--Slade
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
