- Moderator
- #101
Yeah. Nothing at all of substance. Well said.
I'll await your brilliance. When does it start?
Would you recognize brilliance if you saw it? Im not so sure. But you could surprise me.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah. Nothing at all of substance. Well said.
I'll await your brilliance. When does it start?
Yeah. This should be in the flame zone. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.
This very simple ( described as such in the OP ) thread has, very simply, shone a light on some very simple differences between liberals and nutters. Simple.............true..................thus flame-worthy.
Right. Because you got four of your five statements you seem to think are about me wrong.Yeah.......I know. I'm a simpleton who just happens to have found a very simple way to demonstrate what a nasty, intolerant, bigoted, afraid and greedy asshole you are. Sue me.
Good job, idiot.
Getting four out of five wrong is simple and that perfectly suits LonelyLaughable.
There has been quite a bit of discussion here lately about what defines a liberal. I thought I'd use recent events to construct a SIMPLE chart that illustrates the differences between liberals and nutters. Forgive me if this chart has formatting issues. I'm not sure how it will display. There are many more............here are just a few.
Liberal / Nutter
Knee-jerk response is to defend: Martin / Zimmerman
Feels sorry for: Fluke / Limbaugh
Thinks medical care is: A right / A privilege
Thinks 2 people who love each other need: Just love / Only 1 penis.
It would be great if the world had: Religious freedom / One religion
No.....it stands. It was simple. But it has yet to be challenged.
You are a fun guy. And smart too. I can't wait to have lots of long talks with you. I'm sure I'll learn a whole bunch of neat stuff!
I get what i deserve? And what is that? Are you going to say mean things about me? Heaven forbid!
How's about telling me how you personally feel about the five simple examples that I listed from current news items? Have I unfairly attributed one or more of the "nutter" column to you?
The first thing you should consider is that I did not direct my original comments at anyone in particular. I simply made a few observations.
Whether or not YOU took a position on Martin/Zimmerman this week, many, many people did. And of those people, the ones who landed on martin's side......the dead kid's side.....are very likely liberals. The ones who determined that the shooter.......the stalking shooter.....deserves compassion.......just happen to be, overwhelmingly, nutters.
Whether or not YOU took pity on Fluke or Rush......it is clear that liberals, in general, find that Rush was out of line, dishonest and took advantage of this young woman. Nutters, on the other hand, consumed themselves with whining about how Rush was being treated unfairly by the media.
Regardless of how YOU feel about medical care as stated, liberals think everyone deserves it while nutters think some do, while some, don't. Liberals are not OK with the fact that American working people go bankrupt due to medical bills. Nutters seem to be fine with that.
Again....while YOU may be in favor of gay rights..........you cannot argue that if the country were run by liberals, gay marriage would be legal everywhere. And if run by nutters, it would be legal nowhere.
Finally, while YOU may be open minded regarding religious freedom, nutters have been claiming that this is a 'christian nation' for as long as I have been alive. It isn't.....and, in general, liberals would welcome the day that religion is stricken from the world of politics and rendered a purely personal matter.
Now.....I realize that some of the people who have been "tearing me apart" are, in fact, nutters. If they were honest.......a trait not found in most nutters.......they would own it instead of whining like little bitches. The simple list that I have presented remains valid.
You people sure are impressed by Dean and Chris ( who's Chris? ). They are on your minds all the time, it seems.
The first thing you should consider is that I did not direct my original comments at anyone in particular. I simply made a few observations.
How's about telling me how you personally feel about the five simple examples that I listed from current news items? Have I unfairly attributed one or more of the "nutter" column to you?
Whether or not YOU took a position on Martin/Zimmerman this week, many, many people did. And of those people, the ones who landed on martin's side......the dead kid's side.....are very likely liberals. The ones who determined that the shooter.......the stalking shooter.....deserves compassion.......just happen to be, overwhelmingly, nutters.
Whether or not YOU took pity on Fluke or Rush......it is clear that liberals, in general, find that Rush was out of line, dishonest and took advantage of this young woman. Nutters, on the other hand, consumed themselves with whining about how Rush was being treated unfairly by the media.
Regardless of how YOU feel about medical care as stated, liberals think everyone deserves it while nutters think some do, while some, don't. Liberals are not OK with the fact that American working people go bankrupt due to medical bills. Nutters seem to be fine with that.
Again....while YOU may be in favor of gay rights..........you cannot argue that if the country were run by liberals, gay marriage would be legal everywhere. And if run by nutters, it would be legal nowhere.
Finally, while YOU may be open minded regarding religious freedom, nutters have been claiming that this is a 'christian nation' for as long as I have been alive. It isn't.....and, in general, liberals would welcome the day that religion is stricken from the world of politics and rendered a purely personal matter.
Now.....I realize that some of the people who have been "tearing me apart" are, in fact, nutters. If they were honest.......a trait not found in most nutters.......they would own it instead of whining like little bitches. The simple list that I have presented remains valid.
The first thing you should consider is that I did not direct my original comments at anyone in particular. I simply made a few observations.
No what you did is you characterized an entire group of people based on the attitudes of a very few. Furthermore, when you attempt to deflect on the basis that you were not calling me out personally, I beg to differ.
How's about telling me how you personally feel about the five simple examples that I listed from current news items? Have I unfairly attributed one or more of the "nutter" column to you?
Well that sure sounds to me like you are directing it toward me personally, so your following points about "well you might not feel that way but everyone else does" are irrelevant to the point you challenged me with. Notwithstanding, I will be delighted to educate you on each of the points and what the general opinions really are as opposed to what your biased mind thinks they are.
First, in regards to all the points you make I would like to see you back up your claims with documentation. Give me links to reliable sources of information that support your arguments. Without it, you are just blathering your useless opinion.
Ok as I said provide evidence to support your claim. Give me a link that shows that Republicans do not support Martin, but instead support Zimmerman. I know of no polls on the topic but I would be willing to bet that most Republicans believe that the "stand your ground law" does not apply if, as it appears, Zimmerman initiated hostilities. In fact, I believe the law is written in that way. I would also bet that a large majority support the "stand your ground" law to some degree although they probably feel that this is a poor example of the intent of the law in actual practice. I would also guess that most whites (Republican or Democrat) were particularly annoyed that the press turned it into a racial issue of black vs. white when it was actually black vs. Hispanic.
My ass. Look at the threads here. That is what my comments were based on and the evidence is clear.
I heard very few Republicans (except "dittoheads" of course) defend Rush's comments. Now I did hear them bitch a lot about liberal hypocrisy; that when a liberal says similar or worse stuff it's completely ignored. But simply because a Republican points out the double standards of liberals, it doesn't mean they necessarily endorse Rush's position. Why must it always be so black and white with people like you? Ahhh....see the above point I suppose.
The dittoheads are who I am talking about. Nutters. Dittoheads. Now you are getting the point.
And you would be wrong again. The overwhelming majority of Republicans feel that the health care system in the United States requires reform...they are just opposed to the methodology used in Obamacare.
Really? Where did the seed that became Obamacare first get planted?
We believe there's a way to go about it that will a) actually work, b) avoid screwing everyone in an attempt to save them, c) preserves personal freedom, and d) will pass constitutional muster. None of the above apply to Obamacare. Republicans endorse the goal...it's the method we oppose.
Bull. Obamacare is Republican plan. You have been duped.
Oh I highly doubt that. Proposition 8 and Proposition 22 which banned the right of homosexuals to marry sure passed with flying colors in the California elections now didn't it? Surely you are not going to argue that the Republicans were the ones solely responsible for voting to eliminate gay marriage in ultra-liberal California where Republicans are ridiculously outnumbered. Ballot Measure 36 passed in Oregon banning gay marriage with 57% of the vote. I live in Oregon. I can guarantee you that Oregon is about the most liberal state you could ever find and yet even ultra-liberal Oregon banned gay marriage. For two years the liberals had the White House and super-majorities in both houses of Congress. I didn't see any gay rights legislation during that time. I didn't see liberals do a fucking thing in regards to gay rights.
You think democrats in congress are liberals? Funny guy.
Finally, while YOU may be open minded regarding religious freedom, nutters have been claiming that this is a 'christian nation' for as long as I have been alive. It isn't.....and, in general, liberals would welcome the day that religion is stricken from the world of politics and rendered a purely personal matter.
The United States isn't a Christian nation? Really? Well Gallup disagrees with you:
"78% of Americans identify with some form of Christian religion, a proportion that has been declining in recent decades."
This Christmas, 78% of Americans Identify as Christian
ABC News seems to disagree with you too:
"Eighty-three percent of Americans identify themselves as Christians. Most of the rest, 13 percent, have no religion. That leaves just 4 percent as adherents of all non-Christian religions combined Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and a smattering of individual mentions."
Poll: Most Americans Say They're Christian - ABC News
Maybe Pew will be on your side:
"Major Religious Traditions in the U.S. Among all adults...
Christian 78.4%"
Well......I guess not
http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/report-religious-landscape-study-full.pdf
Now as far as Republicans wanting religion in politics...only the most extreme evangelical christian or religious activist is going to endorse that kind of bullshit and of course there are plenty of people who identify as both liberal and ultra-religious. Jimmy Carter immediately pops to mind. Additionally, only a small portion of the Republican party are religious extremists. They are simply the ones who make all the noise and get all the press. That makes it easy for the media to paint the entire party as a bunch of nuts in order to influence people who lack the ability to think for themselves (you would be a great example of that demographic).
Being a country where a majority of people are christian does not make the country christian. This nation is secular. The laws that govern it pay no heed to any religion.
And the extremists are the nutters. Have you figured that out yet?
Now.....I realize that some of the people who have been "tearing me apart" are, in fact, nutters. If they were honest.......a trait not found in most nutters.......they would own it instead of whining like little bitches. The simple list that I have presented remains valid.
I think what's been effectively demonstrated LL is the only suggestion made on this thread that is valid is the one about you being completely ignorant. Certainly, your arguments above don't hold a great deal of merit.
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
Treaty of Tripoli
Liberalism is a stepping stone for Elitism. Not a good thing.
Why be liberal if you don't have to be? It makes no sense to me at all. I say this with Sincerity, not animosity.
I'm not talking social issues. I have no problem with folks just being who they are.
Liberalism is a stepping stone for Elitism. Not a good thing.
Why be liberal if you don't have to be? It makes no sense to me at all. I say this with Sincerity, not animosity.
I'm not talking social issues. I have no problem with folks just being who they are.
LOL, during the 80,s and 90's, republican ideologs (extremist) were known as and called, elitist. In the 2000's, republicans decided that their new strategy would be to become projectionist. Call anyone in opposition exactly what they themselves are knowing their reactionary base would suck it up.
Liberalism is a stepping stone for Elitism. Not a good thing.
Why be liberal if you don't have to be? It makes no sense to me at all. I say this with Sincerity, not animosity.
I'm not talking social issues. I have no problem with folks just being who they are.
LOL, during the 80,s and 90's, republican ideologs (extremist) were known as and called, elitist. In the 2000's, republicans decided that their new strategy would be to become projectionist. Call anyone in opposition exactly what they themselves are knowing their reactionary base would suck it up.
Honestly, your last statement is awesome. Wish more people had no problem with people being who they are. As long as you are not harmed in any way, live and let live. Life is so much more rewarding with that attitude.
First, in regards to all the points you make I would like to see you back up your claims with documentation. Give me links to reliable sources of information that support your arguments. Without it, you are just blathering your useless opinion.
My ass. Look at the threads here. That is what my comments were based on and the evidence is clear.
The dittoheads are who I am talking about. Nutters. Dittoheads. Now you are getting the point.
Really? Where did the seed that became Obamacare first get planted?
Bull. Obamacare is Republican plan. You have been duped.
You think democrats in congress are liberals? Funny guy.
Being a country where a majority of people are christian does not make the country christian. This nation is secular. The laws that govern it pay no heed to any religion.
This could never end.
I never used the term "Republican" in the OP. You have done a great job of reciting their talking points...and it is clear that you have no other basis for your comments. Why not just refer me to the GOP website?
Allow me to direct everyone to Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli which ended the First Barbary war.
It was submitted to the Senate by President John Adams, receiving ratification unanimously from the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797 and signed by Adams, taking effect as the law of the land on June 10, 1797
It reads:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
Treaty of Tripoli
There is black and white is the decision of our Founding Fathers. While the majority of the country, myself incoude, may identify themselves as Christians, the Government is NOT.
We are therefore NOT a Christian nation.