| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Kurt Nicklas" |
| Date: |
12 Oct 2006 06:26:46 AM |
| Object: |
#Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
.
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 08:39:55 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 12 Oct 2006 04:26:46 -0700, "Kurt Nicklas"
<nicklask@bellsouth.net> let us all know that:
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
Who cares? There's more than just the conservative/liberal two
sides of the same coin, since there are more coins. Of course, there's
only one coin which is valuable; the rest are made from worthless
plastic.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ghod" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 01:20:44 PM |
|
|
"Don Kresch" <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote in message
news:3bhsi2to73ome543grq4cpbk09l7mati60@4ax.com...
In alt.atheism On 12 Oct 2006 04:26:46 -0700, "Kurt Nicklas"
<nicklask@bellsouth.net> let us all know that:
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
Who cares? There's more than just the conservative/liberal two
sides of the same coin, since there are more coins. Of course,
there's
only one coin which is valuable; the rest are made from worthless
plastic.
And I have that coin....and I'm keeping it for myself.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 08:54:21 AM |
|
|
In article <1160652406.677846.190810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nicklask@bellsouth.net says...
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
It doesn't seem to bother you that you have cited no evidence whatsoever.
It does, however, make your scurrilous charges less than credible.
Nobody believes that Streisand or Moore or Franken hate black people,
while you and senator macaca want to bring back the confederacy, black
slavery, etc.
--
"I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort
to take away the power of rational decision, to
drain people of their free will--and a hell of a
lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in
their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all.
For most people, religion is nothing more than a
substitute for a malfunctioning brain." --Gene Roddenberry
.
|
|
|
| User: "ken marino" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 09:57:12 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 07:54:21 -0600, quibbler wrote:
In article <1160652406.677846.190810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nicklask@bellsouth.net says...
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support affirmative
action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
It doesn't seem to bother you that you have cited no evidence whatsoever.
It does, however, make your scurrilous charges less than credible. Nobody
believes that Streisand or Moore or Franken hate black people, while you
and senator macaca want to bring back the confederacy, black slavery, etc.
Try reading "do as I say not as I do"--- accusations are backed up with
the research expected.
Ken
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 06:34:50 PM |
|
|
quibbler wrote:
In article <1160652406.677846.190810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nicklask@bellsouth.net says...
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
Nobody believes that Streisand or Moore or Franken hate black people,
while you and senator macaca want to bring back the confederacy, black
slavery, etc.
I don't think the charge was that they "hate black people". The charge
seems to be that some or all of the above are hypocrites. Maybe
they're not really interested in the plight of blacks. Maybe they just
want to get out and sling mud at someone like the rest of us. Why not?
Mud slinging is fun! One can gain power over others through mud
slinging.
What a rush! Power is the wind beneath the wings of humanity. Would
the Pyramids have been built without power? What about the hover dam?
What about the civil rights movement? Without someone barking out the
orders the rest of us poor slobs wouldn't know what to do would we?
I'm still not convinced that there are any "anarchists" in this forum.
Maybe there are civil rights advocates...but "anarchists"?
If those above indeed support black people, then surely they must hire
them in some kind of reasonable proportion to whites. Otherwise it
would sort of be like dear old dad--"do as I say, not as I do."
.
|
|
|
| User: "No 33 Secretary" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 06:40:31 PM |
|
|
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160696090.606392.248370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
What about the hover dam?
Wouldn't a damn that hovers rather defeat the point?
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 06:52:40 PM |
|
|
No 33 Secretary wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160696090.606392.248370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
What about the hover dam?
Wouldn't a damn that hovers rather defeat the point?
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
My apologies, the Hoover Dam. You didn't really think I mean't a dam
that hovers, though, did you? No. I don't think you have a
sufficient, reasonable answer to my post. So you made a funny instead.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Terry Austin" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 08:58:37 PM |
|
|
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160697160.656383.117450@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
No 33 Secretary wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160696090.606392.248370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
What about the hover dam?
Wouldn't a damn that hovers rather defeat the point?
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
My apologies, the Hoover Dam. You didn't really think I mean't a dam
that hovers, though, did you? No. I don't think you have a
sufficient, reasonable answer to my post. So you made a funny instead.
I don't really care what you had to say. And *you* made the funny.
--
Terry Austin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 09:06:29 PM |
|
|
Terry Austin wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160697160.656383.117450@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
No 33 Secretary wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160696090.606392.248370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
What about the hover dam?
Wouldn't a damn that hovers rather defeat the point?
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
My apologies, the Hoover Dam. You didn't really think I mean't a dam
that hovers, though, did you? No. I don't think you have a
sufficient, reasonable answer to my post. So you made a funny instead.
I don't really care what you had to say. And *you* made the funny.
--
Terry Austin
If you don't care what I have to say, then why are you answering?
Sounds like you must care to me.
I guess the egg is on me then. I said hover instead of Hoover. You've
proved your point. I'll concede defeat to that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "No 33 Secretary" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
13 Oct 2006 11:14:41 AM |
|
|
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160705189.312770.172570@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Terry Austin wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160697160.656383.117450@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
No 33 Secretary wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160696090.606392.248370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
What about the hover dam?
Wouldn't a damn that hovers rather defeat the point?
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
My apologies, the Hoover Dam. You didn't really think I mean't a
dam that hovers, though, did you? No. I don't think you have a
sufficient, reasonable answer to my post. So you made a funny
instead.
I don't really care what you had to say. And *you* made the funny.
--
Terry Austin
If you don't care what I have to say, then why are you answering?
It amuses me to taunt the foolish.
Sounds like you must care to me.
No doubt.
I guess the egg is on me then.
Indeed.
I said hover instead of Hoover.
You've proved your point. I'll concede defeat to that.
Yes.
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
13 Oct 2006 08:12:14 PM |
|
|
No 33 Secretary wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160705189.312770.172570@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Terry Austin wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160697160.656383.117450@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
No 33 Secretary wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160696090.606392.248370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
What about the hover dam?
Wouldn't a damn that hovers rather defeat the point?
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
My apologies, the Hoover Dam. You didn't really think I mean't a
dam that hovers, though, did you? No. I don't think you have a
sufficient, reasonable answer to my post. So you made a funny
instead.
I don't really care what you had to say. And *you* made the funny.
--
Terry Austin
If you don't care what I have to say, then why are you answering?
It amuses me to taunt the foolish.
Sounds like you must care to me.
No doubt.
I guess the egg is on me then.
Indeed.
I said hover instead of Hoover.
You've proved your point. I'll concede defeat to that.
Yes.
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
You don't even have an argument! So you throw out taunts to try to win
a debate. Are you interested in truth or are you just interested in
winning?
.
|
|
|
| User: "No 33 Secretary" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
16 Oct 2006 11:01:59 AM |
|
|
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160788334.132109.55380@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
No 33 Secretary wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160705189.312770.172570@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Terry Austin wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160697160.656383.117450@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
No 33 Secretary wrote:
"Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com> wrote in
news:1160696090.606392.248370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
What about the hover dam?
Wouldn't a damn that hovers rather defeat the point?
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
My apologies, the Hoover Dam. You didn't really think I mean't a
dam that hovers, though, did you? No. I don't think you have a
sufficient, reasonable answer to my post. So you made a funny
instead.
I don't really care what you had to say. And *you* made the funny.
--
Terry Austin
If you don't care what I have to say, then why are you answering?
It amuses me to taunt the foolish.
Sounds like you must care to me.
No doubt.
I guess the egg is on me then.
Indeed.
I said hover instead of Hoover.
You've proved your point. I'll concede defeat to that.
Yes.
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
You don't even have an argument!
Why would I need one? I'm not arguing. I'm making fun of you.
So you throw out taunts to try to win
a debate. Are you interested in truth or are you just interested in
winning?
I'm interested in amusing myself. What part of that don't you understand,
moron?
--
"What is the first law?"
"To Protect."
"And the second?"
"Ourselves."
Terry Austin
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 09:08:13 PM |
|
|
In article <1160696090.606392.248370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
grchildrss@aol.com says...
quibbler wrote:
In article <1160652406.677846.190810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nicklask@bellsouth.net says...
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
Nobody believes that Streisand or Moore or Franken hate black people,
while you and senator macaca want to bring back the confederacy, black
slavery, etc.
I don't think the charge was that they "hate black people".
But you managed to miss the point that other people like senator macaca
do hate black people. Certainly they aren't going to be hiring
significant number of people, except the occasional showboat oreo like
colon powell or cunnilingus rice.
The charge
seems to be that some or all of the above are hypocrites.
The "charge" is made with zero credible evidence.
Maybe
they're not really interested in the plight of blacks. Maybe they just
want to get out and sling mud at someone like the rest of us.
Is that what turns you on?
What a rush! Power is the wind beneath the wings of humanity.
ummmmm.....put your hands in the air and step away from the bong.
Would
the Pyramids have been built without power?
Yikes, you're not Scary Gary Childress, with the pyramids and atlantis
and all that BS, are you?
What about the hover dam?
You mean Hoover Dam?
What about the civil rights movement?
Yeah, how about it. People like Streisand helped keep the movement
going, while mealy-mouthed right wingers try to take pot shots.
Without someone barking out the
orders the rest of us poor slobs wouldn't know what to do would we?
I'm still not convinced that there are any "anarchists" in this forum.
Good for them. Maybe we finally have some adults then.
--
"I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort
to take away the power of rational decision, to
drain people of their free will--and a hell of a
lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in
their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all.
For most people, religion is nothing more than a
substitute for a malfunctioning brain." --Gene Roddenberry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 09:25:07 PM |
|
|
quibbler wrote:
In article <1160696090.606392.248370@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
grchildrss@aol.com says...
quibbler wrote:
In article <1160652406.677846.190810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nicklask@bellsouth.net says...
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
Nobody believes that Streisand or Moore or Franken hate black people,
while you and senator macaca want to bring back the confederacy, black
slavery, etc.
I don't think the charge was that they "hate black people".
But you managed to miss the point that other people like senator macaca
do hate black people. Certainly they aren't going to be hiring
significant number of people, except the occasional showboat oreo like
colon powell or cunnilingus rice.
But that wasn't the original point of the thread. I think you probably
know that.
Is "showboat oreo" a non-racist term?
The charge
seems to be that some or all of the above are hypocrites.
The "charge" is made with zero credible evidence.
I can see potential worth in this rebuttal but the stuff below seems
irrelevant and childish!
Maybe
they're not really interested in the plight of blacks. Maybe they just
want to get out and sling mud at someone like the rest of us.
Is that what turns you on?
What a rush! Power is the wind beneath the wings of humanity.
ummmmm.....put your hands in the air and step away from the bong.
Would
the Pyramids have been built without power?
Yikes, you're not Scary Gary Childress, with the pyramids and atlantis
and all that BS, are you?
What about the hover dam?
You mean Hoover Dam?
What about the civil rights movement?
Yeah, how about it. People like Streisand helped keep the movement
going, while mealy-mouthed right wingers try to take pot shots.
Without someone barking out the
orders the rest of us poor slobs wouldn't know what to do would we?
I'm still not convinced that there are any "anarchists" in this forum.
Good for them. Maybe we finally have some adults then.
--
"I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort
to take away the power of rational decision, to
drain people of their free will--and a hell of a
lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in
their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all.
For most people, religion is nothing more than a
substitute for a malfunctioning brain." --Gene Roddenberry
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 07:36:57 PM |
|
|
On 12 Oct 2006 16:34:50 -0700, "Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com>
wrote:
quibbler wrote:
In article <1160652406.677846.190810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nicklask@bellsouth.net says...
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
Nobody believes that Streisand or Moore or Franken hate black people,
while you and senator macaca want to bring back the confederacy, black
slavery, etc.
I don't think the charge was that they "hate black people". The charge
seems to be that some or all of the above are hypocrites. Maybe
they're not really interested in the plight of blacks. Maybe they just
want to get out and sling mud at someone like the rest of us. Why not?
Mud slinging is fun! One can gain power over others through mud
slinging.
What a rush! Power is the wind beneath the wings of humanity. Would
the Pyramids have been built without power? What about the hover dam?
What about the civil rights movement? Without someone barking out the
orders the rest of us poor slobs wouldn't know what to do would we?
I'm still not convinced that there are any "anarchists" in this forum.
Maybe there are civil rights advocates...but "anarchists"?
You could say that idealistically I'm an anarchist, but realistically
I know there are too many people in the world who just wouldn't play
nice if we didn't have at least a few rules and a means of enforcing
them.
Complete freedom from authority is a nice idea in principle, but
there's no way it could ever work in practice.
If those above indeed support black people, then surely they must hire
them in some kind of reasonable proportion to whites. Otherwise it
would sort of be like dear old dad--"do as I say, not as I do."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 08:02:05 PM |
|
|
John Baker wrote:
On 12 Oct 2006 16:34:50 -0700, "Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com>
wrote:
quibbler wrote:
In article <1160652406.677846.190810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nicklask@bellsouth.net says...
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
Nobody believes that Streisand or Moore or Franken hate black people,
while you and senator macaca want to bring back the confederacy, black
slavery, etc.
I don't think the charge was that they "hate black people". The charge
seems to be that some or all of the above are hypocrites. Maybe
they're not really interested in the plight of blacks. Maybe they just
want to get out and sling mud at someone like the rest of us. Why not?
Mud slinging is fun! One can gain power over others through mud
slinging.
What a rush! Power is the wind beneath the wings of humanity. Would
the Pyramids have been built without power? What about the hover dam?
What about the civil rights movement? Without someone barking out the
orders the rest of us poor slobs wouldn't know what to do would we?
I'm still not convinced that there are any "anarchists" in this forum.
Maybe there are civil rights advocates...but "anarchists"?
You could say that idealistically I'm an anarchist, but realistically
I know there are too many people in the world who just wouldn't play
nice if we didn't have at least a few rules and a means of enforcing
them.
Complete freedom from authority is a nice idea in principle, but
there's no way it could ever work in practice.
And who is going to choose these few rules? Who is going to enforce
them? "Anarchists?" It sounds like pretty much anyone could be an
anarchist. Just believe in the right things and you can rule all over
the "bad guys" who don't believe in them to your heart's content. What
kind of "anarchy" is that!
If those above indeed support black people, then surely they must hire
them in some kind of reasonable proportion to whites. Otherwise it
would sort of be like dear old dad--"do as I say, not as I do."
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
13 Oct 2006 09:12:03 AM |
|
|
On 12 Oct 2006 18:02:05 -0700, "Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com>
wrote:
John Baker wrote:
On 12 Oct 2006 16:34:50 -0700, "Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com>
wrote:
quibbler wrote:
In article <1160652406.677846.190810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nicklask@bellsouth.net says...
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
Nobody believes that Streisand or Moore or Franken hate black people,
while you and senator macaca want to bring back the confederacy, black
slavery, etc.
I don't think the charge was that they "hate black people". The charge
seems to be that some or all of the above are hypocrites. Maybe
they're not really interested in the plight of blacks. Maybe they just
want to get out and sling mud at someone like the rest of us. Why not?
Mud slinging is fun! One can gain power over others through mud
slinging.
What a rush! Power is the wind beneath the wings of humanity. Would
the Pyramids have been built without power? What about the hover dam?
What about the civil rights movement? Without someone barking out the
orders the rest of us poor slobs wouldn't know what to do would we?
I'm still not convinced that there are any "anarchists" in this forum.
Maybe there are civil rights advocates...but "anarchists"?
You could say that idealistically I'm an anarchist, but realistically
I know there are too many people in the world who just wouldn't play
nice if we didn't have at least a few rules and a means of enforcing
them.
Complete freedom from authority is a nice idea in principle, but
there's no way it could ever work in practice.
And who is going to choose these few rules? Who is going to enforce
them? "Anarchists?" It sounds like pretty much anyone could be an
anarchist. Just believe in the right things and you can rule all over
the "bad guys" who don't believe in them to your heart's content. What
kind of "anarchy" is that!
If missing the point ever becomes an Olympic event, you'll be a
shoo-in for the gold.
If those above indeed support black people, then surely they must hire
them in some kind of reasonable proportion to whites. Otherwise it
would sort of be like dear old dad--"do as I say, not as I do."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
13 Oct 2006 08:09:52 PM |
|
|
John Baker wrote:
On 12 Oct 2006 18:02:05 -0700, "Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com>
wrote:
John Baker wrote:
On 12 Oct 2006 16:34:50 -0700, "Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com>
wrote:
quibbler wrote:
In article <1160652406.677846.190810@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
nicklask@bellsouth.net says...
Who says conservatives are racist because they don't support
affirmative action but has an abysmal record of hiring blacks?
1. Barbra Streisand
2. Michael Moore
3. Al Franken
4. All of the above
Nobody believes that Streisand or Moore or Franken hate black people,
while you and senator macaca want to bring back the confederacy, black
slavery, etc.
I don't think the charge was that they "hate black people". The charge
seems to be that some or all of the above are hypocrites. Maybe
they're not really interested in the plight of blacks. Maybe they just
want to get out and sling mud at someone like the rest of us. Why not?
Mud slinging is fun! One can gain power over others through mud
slinging.
What a rush! Power is the wind beneath the wings of humanity. Would
the Pyramids have been built without power? What about the hover dam?
What about the civil rights movement? Without someone barking out the
orders the rest of us poor slobs wouldn't know what to do would we?
I'm still not convinced that there are any "anarchists" in this forum.
Maybe there are civil rights advocates...but "anarchists"?
You could say that idealistically I'm an anarchist, but realistically
I know there are too many people in the world who just wouldn't play
nice if we didn't have at least a few rules and a means of enforcing
them.
Complete freedom from authority is a nice idea in principle, but
there's no way it could ever work in practice.
And who is going to choose these few rules? Who is going to enforce
them? "Anarchists?" It sounds like pretty much anyone could be an
anarchist. Just believe in the right things and you can rule all over
the "bad guys" who don't believe in them to your heart's content. What
kind of "anarchy" is that!
If missing the point ever becomes an Olympic event, you'll be a
shoo-in for the gold.
What point have I missed? How many times have I missed the point in
this thread which would constitute "Olympic" qualification? Where's
your evidence to back this claim?
If those above indeed support black people, then surely they must hire
them in some kind of reasonable proportion to whites. Otherwise it
would sort of be like dear old dad--"do as I say, not as I do."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
13 Oct 2006 08:39:54 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:34:50 -0700, Gary Childress wrote:
I'm still not convinced that there are any "anarchists" in this forum.
Maybe there are civil rights advocates...but "anarchists"?
Depends on what you mean, given you put "anarchists" in quotes...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: #Liberal Hypocrites - 2 |
13 Oct 2006 08:35:55 PM |
|
|
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:34:50 -0700, Gary Childress wrote:
I'm still not convinced that there are any "anarchists" in this forum.
Maybe there are civil rights advocates...but "anarchists"?
Depends on what you mean, given you put "anarchists" in quotes...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
I assume "anarchists" don't believe in rulers. Is that a reasonable
assumption?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 08:13:07 PM |
|
|
Kurt Nicklas wrote:
Who says conservatives are racist because they
don't support affirmative action but has an
abysmal record of hiring blacks?
Huh? You listed individuals, not businesses!
Why would you intentionally twist things in such a
dishonest way, unless you have NOTHING decent
to be saying about the Republicans.
You know who the Republicans are, right?
They hired the gay male prostitute & violated
regulations to get him into the Whitehouse, just
so he could pretend to be a reporter and write
nice things about Bush.
Hmm... gay male prostitute...
Gee, suddenly the fact that they protected Foley for
years -- even honored him while they knew what he
was doing -- doesn't seem so out of character.
The same Republicans who hired a gay male
prostitute to pose as a reporter in the Whitehouse
did all in their power to keep Foley's secret...
Nope. Nothing the least bit inconsistant there!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 08:43:21 PM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
Kurt Nicklas wrote:
Who says conservatives are racist because they
don't support affirmative action but has an
abysmal record of hiring blacks?
Huh? You listed individuals, not businesses!
How does that matter? Individuals hire people for things too. Did
Michael Moore have a reasonable number of blacks working on the set of
Roger and Me? Doesn't anyone have an answer to Mr. Nicklas'
accusation? Inquiring individuals like me want to know!
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 10:37:30 PM |
|
|
Gary Childress wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Huh? You listed individuals, not businesses!
How does that matter? Individuals hire people for things too.
We're not speaking of a hypothetical here.
Michael Moore have a reasonable number of blacks
working on the set of Roger and Me?
Set? He was an unemployed autoworker who had never
made more than $20 thousand dollars in a single year.
He didn't have a set. he didn't have employees. He didn't
have a company.
If the Republicans are really as bad as you people appear
to believe, instead of smearing others you should find a
new party.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 11:15:13 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Gary Childress wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Huh? You listed individuals, not businesses!
How does that matter? Individuals hire people for things too.
We're not speaking of a hypothetical here.
Michael Moore have a reasonable number of blacks
working on the set of Roger and Me?
Set? He was an unemployed autoworker who had never
made more than $20 thousand dollars in a single year.
He didn't have a set. he didn't have employees. He didn't
have a company.
What about Fahrenheit 9/11 or Canadian Bacon? Did he have a set and
employees? If so were there reasonable numbers of blacks involved in
those films?
If the Republicans are really as bad as you people appear
to believe, instead of smearing others you should find a
new party.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 11:25:28 PM |
|
|
Gary Childress wrote:
What about Fahrenheit 9/11 or Canadian Bacon?
What about them.
You're not chicken *****, are you? You're not a *****, right?
So put up. I say that you're a cowardly ***** -- a real ***** --
who knows the Republicans are so pathetic that he has
to smear others in order to make them look better in
comparison.
Put your cards on the table. Show us what you've got. Borrow
some balls from a real man and spell out for us EXACTLY
what kind supporting evidence you have for your baseless
charges.
How's it feel having to stoop so low? I'm not a Republican so
I wouldn't know. Tell us. What's it like knowing you threw your
lot in with such corrupt bastards that the only way you can
make them look good is by inventing smears about others?
Crawl out of that pit and tell us. Go on, I dare you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 11:28:36 PM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
Gary Childress wrote:
What about Fahrenheit 9/11 or Canadian Bacon?
What about them.
You're not chicken *****, are you? You're not a *****, right?
So put up. I say that you're a cowardly ***** -- a real ***** --
who knows the Republicans are so pathetic that he has
to smear others in order to make them look better in
comparison.
Put your cards on the table. Show us what you've got. Borrow
some balls from a real man and spell out for us EXACTLY
what kind supporting evidence you have for your baseless
charges.
How's it feel having to stoop so low? I'm not a Republican so
I wouldn't know. Tell us. What's it like knowing you threw your
lot in with such corrupt bastards that the only way you can
make them look good is by inventing smears about others?
Crawl out of that pit and tell us. Go on, I dare you.
What baseless charges have I made?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "2755 Dead" |
|
| Title: Re: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 11:15:23 PM |
|
|
On 12 Oct 2006 18:43:21 -0700, "Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com>
wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Kurt Nicklas wrote:
Who says conservatives are racist because they
don't support affirmative action but has an
abysmal record of hiring blacks?
Huh? You listed individuals, not businesses!
How does that matter? Individuals hire people for things too. Did
Michael Moore have a reasonable number of blacks working on the set of
Roger and Me? Doesn't anyone have an answer to Mr. Nicklas'
accusation? Inquiring individuals like me want to know!
Dunno. Why don't you and "Mr. Nicklas" pony up some hard numbers for
us?
Does that sound like a PLAN, sweetheart?
--
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gary Childress" |
|
| Title: Re: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
12 Oct 2006 11:26:08 PM |
|
|
2755 Dead wrote:
On 12 Oct 2006 18:43:21 -0700, "Gary Childress" <grchildrss@aol.com>
wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Kurt Nicklas wrote:
Who says conservatives are racist because they
don't support affirmative action but has an
abysmal record of hiring blacks?
Huh? You listed individuals, not businesses!
How does that matter? Individuals hire people for things too. Did
Michael Moore have a reasonable number of blacks working on the set of
Roger and Me? Doesn't anyone have an answer to Mr. Nicklas'
accusation? Inquiring individuals like me want to know!
Dunno. Why don't you and "Mr. Nicklas" pony up some hard numbers for
us?
Does that sound like a PLAN, sweetheart?
--
Why ask me? I'm not the one making the accusation.
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
13 Oct 2006 11:44:57 AM |
|
|
JTEM wrote:
Kurt Nicklas wrote:
Who says conservatives are racist because they
don't support affirmative action but has an
abysmal record of hiring blacks?
Huh? You listed individuals, not businesses!
Why would you intentionally twist things in such a
dishonest way, unless you have NOTHING decent
to be saying about the Republicans.
You know who the Republicans are, right?
They hired the gay male prostitute & violated
regulations to get him into the Whitehouse, just
so he could pretend to be a reporter and write
nice things about Bush.
Yeah, watching the hysterical liberals prove they were disgusting
homophobes was hilarious. Almost as great as watching the racist left
deride Powell and Rice! Continue panicking :)
Hmm... gay male prostitute...
Gee, suddenly the fact that they protected Foley for
years -- even honored him while they knew what he
was doing -- doesn't seem so out of character.
The same Republicans who hired a gay male
prostitute to pose as a reporter in the Whitehouse
did all in their power to keep Foley's secret...
Nope. Nothing the least bit inconsistant there!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gandalf Grey" |
|
| Title: Re: GOP Sex Maniacs - 2 |
13 Oct 2006 12:11:46 PM |
|
|
<omarenoryt@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1160757897.367948.49820@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
JTEM wrote:
Kurt Nicklas wrote:
Who says conservatives are racist because they
don't support affirmative action but has an
abysmal record of hiring blacks?
Huh? You listed individuals, not businesses!
Why would you intentionally twist things in such a
dishonest way, unless you have NOTHING decent
to be saying about the Republicans.
You know who the Republicans are, right?
They hired the gay male prostitute & violated
regulations to get him into the Whitehouse, just
so he could pretend to be a reporter and write
nice things about Bush.
Yeah, watching the hysterical
Yeah, watching the hysterical GOPs trying to cover up their sexual
predations is pretty amusing, Omar.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
