An Observation

[Modbert]

I already quoted your edit time. You edited while I was writing a post. I do not need to back track. You are a creep I have no need to just "try to call" you one. That is of course how your cute picture came to be months ago.

My original post: 7:00 PM

My edit time: 7:05 PM

Your Post: 7:16 PM

So again, **** you. YOU are the dishonest creep. Just because you look like an ignorant ****, you accuse me of taking things out of context? No.

Show me what in the post you originally quoted that I changed in the edit. Go ahead, show me.

Because I already showed you.

 

[RodISHI]

The Republican party is deeply divided as to whether or not the crackpot wing is going to run the GOP for the foreseeable future.

Which radical wing, the log cabin crew or the ones y'all are claiming that wants to force Christianity down every ones throat?

Is there a link to prove that's actually happening? Somewhere besides in lib dreams, I mean? I've never seen one. Just a bunch of whining about how prevalent it is. No actual evidence.

Not sure but you do here them whining a lot about it here on this forum.

 

[Modbert]

Not sure but you do here them whining a lot about it here on this forum.

Says the one who seems to have the idea that Gays = Outdoor Sex.

 

[Intense]

Which radical wing, the log cabin crew or the ones y'all are claiming that wants to force Christianity down every ones throat?

Is there a link to prove that's actually happening? Somewhere besides in lib dreams, I mean? I've never seen one. Just a bunch of whining about how prevalent it is. No actual evidence.

Not sure but you do here them whining a lot about it here on this forum.

I want Conservative Principles served. Enumerated Powers, by the consent of the Governed, Stronger Protection on Recognized Liberties. Consideration on more Protected Rights, like Privacy. I want Protection from Government and Corporate Abuse. I want recourse, when wronged. What do You want?

 

[RodISHI]

Not sure but you do here them whining a lot about it here on this forum.

Says the one who seems to have the idea that Gays = Outdoor Sex.

More like a few experiences throwing their nasty asses off public property when they thought they had the right to strip one another bare in and on those public facilities.. I'll put a few of those details in that book when I get it written, along with the court cases of the ones that were prosecuted at other sites which we did not maintain. I would have done the same if hetros had acted the same way.


You want to know which post you edited at 6:05 you need to go look for yourself it's there still page one two...you'll find it...You really are making yourself look as much of the idiot that you actually are.

 

[Modbert]

More like a few experiences throwing their nasty asses off public property when they thought they had the right to strip one another bare in and on those public facilities.. I'll put a few of those details in that book when I get it written, along with the court cases of the ones that were prosecuted at other sites which we did not maintain. I would have done the same if hetros had acted the same way.


You want to know which post you edited at 6:05 you need to go look for yourself it's there still page one two...you'll find it...You really are making yourself look as much of the idiot that you actually are.

You're accusing me of editing my post with something I didn't say. I have NEVER been for the banning of words in this country. I have always found saying those words as both rude and wrong however. ANYONE who has had a conversation with me can tell you that. Just like I said at my post at 7:26 or 6:26, it's all about the context of words. I obviously didn't call for the banning of any words.

Just because you've acted ignorant, doesn't mean you can accuse me of trying to rid this great country of freedom of speech. If you noticed, I NEVER mentioned anything about outside sex nor decency laws. YOU are the ones who equaled Homosexuals with Outside Sex and not following decency laws. ANYONE can tell you by looking at the posts that it was completely random on your part.

Would anyone who is a 3rd party in this situation verify that?

Edit (one minute after): I'm sorry if you also consider it wrong to fix my grammar mistakes in my posts when I see it. However, YOU should of taken the PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to make sure that I did not edit my post to fix something grammar wise. You failed to do so. So YOU are ACCOUNTABLE for your words.

You know those words right? Personal Responsibility and Accountability. It's what I hear often on this board.

 

[Intense]

You are saying that they want to "ban" something that did not exist until most recently in a few areas where there were massive lobbying areas. Obviously the majority did not agree with GM as a feasible or reasonable expectation.

Force what in school? The majority simply do not want to be harassed for their beliefs. The majority still believes that they have the right to determine what is acceptable for their children. Teaching them "fisting" and other sex techniques in a public school setting is not acceptable, damn that is radical and right wing.

If a judge has the ten commandments in his courtroom it is too much for Christian haters. You surely would not think that believers would not fight back against the hate that has been spewed out at them for the last fifty years and getting more rabid by the day from many of these people out there.

Homosexuality has always existed. It was kept hidden by people so they wouldn't be lynched or outcasted in a society of the same people who are keeping this banned. So sorry if they didn't want to die all those years beforehand. Gay Marriage is just another right for people who are different, it's no different than Marriage except who's getting married. Besides, the best solution would be to erase Marriage from the legal terms and just everyone be EQUAL under the law with civil unions.

What we have Republicans now is proposing systems where Gay couples would be "Separate but Equal." Now where have I heard that term before?

Separate but equal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Once upon a time, the majority did not think women should have the right to vote, that blacks should not have the right to vote, OR that Whites and Non-Whites should not get married. Times have changed.

Now to move on to my second point, you are obviously ignoring the whole idea of Creationism trying to be forced into schools. Plus school prayer which would be wrong to force kids to do. As much as you'd want to act like the GOP is only trying to stop that, you'd be wrong. Plus, the GOP are the ones against such bills that would teach that it's wrong to call people "faggots" or to discriminate. "How dare they want our kids not want to be ignorant as us!"

On to my third point, if Christians in general and the GOP are not discriminating against those non-Christians, then perhaps you can explain this:

Some Americans Reluctant to Vote for Mormon, 72-Year-Old Presidential Candidates

The 33% of Liberals in this poll who said they wouldn't vote for Atheists are frauds. However, notice only TWENTY NINE (29%) of Conservatives would even vote for an Atheist. As a group in general, 53% of this country would not vote for an Atheist. While 43% of Americans would not vote for a Homosexual and only 36% of Republicans would.

So this issue goes FAR BEYOND just Gay Marriage when it comes to the GOP problem with Atheists and Homosexuals. Whether you care to admit it is up to you.

My vote here is that You make up a ******* Name of Your own, talk it over with your friends so every one is on the same page, and parallel it to marriage, which here is between one man and one woman. Enjoy the headache.

P.S. Public Sex on Parade, like in the Village is rude. Persistently Propositioning People whom have no interest is rude. This is about Manners, Gay or Straight. If it doesn't apply, power to you. Outing People and Black Mailing them is, not nice either. Instructing our Kids, or daring them to try something is recruiting, and that is a big big No. What goes on in private is no one's business. Build on that.

 

[Modbert]

My vote here is that You make up a ******* Name of Your own, talk it over with your friends so every one is on the same page, and parallel it to marriage, which here is between one man and one woman. Enjoy the headache.

P.S. Public Sex on Parade, like in the Village is rude. Persistently Propositioning People whom have no interest is rude. This is about Manners, Gay or Straight. If it doesn't apply, power to you. Outing People and Black Mailing them is, not nice either. Instructing our Kids, or daring them to try something is recruiting, and that is a big big No. What goes on in private is no one's business. Build on that.

The easiest way to fix this whole situation would to just eliminate "marriage" from legal terms. Make every union a civil union. If people want to get "married" they can go to the church. Simple as that, and it keeps up Separation of Church and State.

Rod is the one who brought up the whole public sex thing. I NEVER said Public Sex was alright. It's rude to others. I'm not saying to tell kids to try homosexuality either. I would say that it'd be alright to tell kids what homosexuality is at a decent age. That way they aren't ignorant as to what it is. It would be no different from telling kids that hating people because they're different races is wrong. What goes on in private is no one's business, I can agree. However, when you take the ignorance to the public, then it becomes the people whom you are offending's business. Especially if someone goes out of the way to insult them.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

The odds of being sent to Vietnam as a member of the Air Force was a hell of a lot higher than being sent if you were in the Air National Guard.

would you say that Clinton had no right to bomb Iraq or go after Bosnia because he dodged the draft?
and wasn't Bush's plane supposed to go to Vietnam?

Clinton was elected president, and in holding that office was commander-in-chief. Same goes for Bush. My issue is with Bush trying to pretend like he was some great military hero.

and where .... exactly did President Bush make himself out to be "some great military hero".

Seems to me Kerry was the one doing that until he got his lying ass "swiftboated".

 

[mskafka]

I think you are in error. In Iowa there is a movement by Republicans to do away with Republicans that do not represent the desires of the majority of Republicans. They are fed up with getting fed full of shit and sold out the back door.

Really now? Do tell me, what are the "desires" of the majority of Republicans? From what I can see, it's basically as radical as the current fringe of the party except they are just more quiet about it and a few different variations.

The GOP is a lost party, and trying to redeem it is a lost cause. People trying to defend the Democratic and Republican parties saying that they are redeemable is like defending a spouse after getting a beating from them. When will you learn? Once it's too late?

You're right. Imagine the democrats as divided as the GOP. Imagine if we had a large group of radical left wingers. Radically pro-abortion, pro-assisted suicide, radical atheists, shouting, "this is not a republic, it is a socialist state". Everyone has to give up their guns. They would probably cut out completely our defense budget, and homeland security budget and label them as "pork-barrel" spending. They could potentially obstruct all efforts at development...etc... Now if the left were that radical, I would leave the party.

The GOP amazes me at how radical they are now. I haven't seen the likes of this in my lifetime. This is the way that many democrats view the GOP now. The extreme opposite of what I listed above as the radical left.

Moderation, like in every other aspect of life is the logical answer. Noone likes their taxes getting raised. Most don't like logging in the national forests of America. (which I've witnessed first hand) Funding for the department of the interior being cut for the department of homeland security. We're going to have to come to a compromise. Too much to write. I'll clamp it off for now.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

You're right. Imagine the democrats as divided as the GOP. Imagine if we had a large group of radical left wingers.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm your party is......and your party does.

 

[Intense]

My vote here is that You make up a ******* Name of Your own, talk it over with your friends so every one is on the same page, and parallel it to marriage, which here is between one man and one woman. Enjoy the headache.

P.S. Public Sex on Parade, like in the Village is rude. Persistently Propositioning People whom have no interest is rude. This is about Manners, Gay or Straight. If it doesn't apply, power to you. Outing People and Black Mailing them is, not nice either. Instructing our Kids, or daring them to try something is recruiting, and that is a big big No. What goes on in private is no one's business. Build on that.

The easiest way to fix this whole situation would to just eliminate "marriage" from legal terms. Make every union a civil union. If people want to get "married" they can go to the church. Simple as that, and it keeps up Separation of Church and State.

Rod is the one who brought up the whole public sex thing. I NEVER said Public Sex was alright. It's rude to others. I'm not saying to tell kids to try homosexuality either. I would say that it'd be alright to tell kids what homosexuality is at a decent age. That way they aren't ignorant as to what it is. It would be no different from telling kids that hating people because they're different races is wrong. What goes on in private is no one's business, I can agree. However, when you take the ignorance to the public, then it becomes the people whom you are offending's business. Especially if someone goes out of the way to insult them.

Again. My Opinion is that You create a term or word, to describe the Union, that is new. Start there.

 

[Intense]

You're right. Imagine the democrats as divided as the GOP. Imagine if we had a large group of radical left wingers.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm your party is......and your party does.

I can't possibly imagine the possibility of the 16% lunatic fringe that hi-Jacked the DNC for 6 years...

Ye Haaaaaa!!!!! Simply not Believable..... Or Is It

 

[mskafka]

You're right. Imagine the democrats as divided as the GOP. Imagine if we had a large group of radical left wingers.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm your party is......and your party does.

I don't see that. But obviously you do. You are conservative or libertarian, right? Or something close.

We dems are known as the bleeding-heart liberals-supposedly ALL radically pro-abortion (not all are), radically anti-gun (not all of us), anti-Christianity (wrong again), anti-business (not entirely), pro-tax (no).

Cons come across as having an unhealthy obsession with our personal lives-what we do with our bodies, whom we sleep with, forcing religion and your concept of morality on the rest of the country and world, yelling, screaming, suing, bombing or shooting anyone who disagrees with you or again, your concept of morality.

Now, is all of this true, or is it an unfair stereotype-like the one constantly attached to moderates or liberals?

Our fringe and extremists are people like Michael Moore, Al Sharpton, etc... And though some of may agree with SOME of their beliefs, most of us don't agree with all of them.

I keep hearing: "I want my country back." Where did it go? What is it that you want? What more are you willing to give up than what you gave up the last 8 years? We gave up a lot of freedom for the sake of being "safe". Did it keep us safe?

I personally did not want to support a party based on so many of the principles of "The Project for the New American Century", that " American leadership is good both for America and for the world...". I don't agree with that.

Seriously, besides the deficit issue...the deficit that has been growing for 9 years... and the spending, what are you concerned about? We would like to know, because this talk of state secession has many of us concerned. If my state secedes, I will go with my country. I would have done the same under Bush. Country first? Remember that?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

You're right. Imagine the democrats as divided as the GOP. Imagine if we had a large group of radical left wingers.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm your party is......and your party does.

I don't see that. But obviously you do. You are conservative or libertarian, right? Or something close.

We dems are known as the bleeding-heart liberals-supposedly ALL radically pro-abortion (not all are), radically anti-gun (not all of us), anti-Christianity (wrong again), anti-business (not entirely), pro-tax (no).

Cons come across as having an unhealthy obsession with our personal lives-what we do with our bodies, whom we sleep with, forcing religion and your concept of morality on the rest of the country and world, yelling, screaming, suing, bombing or shooting anyone who disagrees with you or again, your concept of morality.

Now, is all of this true, or is it an unfair stereotype-like the one constantly attached to moderates or liberals?

Our fringe and extremists are people like Michael Moore, Al Sharpton, etc... And though some of may agree with SOME of their beliefs, most of us don't agree with all of them.

I keep hearing: "I want my country back." Where did it go? What is it that you want? What more are you willing to give up than what you gave up the last 8 years? We gave up a lot of freedom for the sake of being "safe". Did it keep us safe?

I personally did not want to support a party based on so many of the principles of "The Project for the New American Century", that " American leadership is good both for America and for the world...". I don't agree with that.

Seriously, besides the deficit issue...the deficit that has been growing for 9 years... and the spending, what are you concerned about? We would like to know, because this talk of state secession has many of us concerned. If my state secedes, I will go with my country. I would have done the same under Bush. Country first? Remember that?

It's not hard to see when you look at the divisions over healthcare, gun regulation and a host of other issues.

 

[Polk]

would you say that Clinton had no right to bomb Iraq or go after Bosnia because he dodged the draft?
and wasn't Bush's plane supposed to go to Vietnam?

Clinton was elected president, and in holding that office was commander-in-chief. Same goes for Bush. My issue is with Bush trying to pretend like he was some great military hero.

and where .... exactly did President Bush make himself out to be "some great military hero".

Seems to me Kerry was the one doing that until he got his lying ass "swiftboated".

Yeah, clearly Kerry was the one lying, when none of those guys served with him, their stories were full of holes so big you could drive a truck through them, and one of them later admitted that his story was a pure fabrication.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Clinton was elected president, and in holding that office was commander-in-chief. Same goes for Bush. My issue is with Bush trying to pretend like he was some great military hero.

and where .... exactly did President Bush make himself out to be "some great military hero".

Seems to me Kerry was the one doing that until he got his lying ass "swiftboated".

Yeah, clearly Kerry was the one lying, when none of those guys served with him, their stories were full of holes so big you could drive a truck through them, and one of them later admitted that his story was a pure fabrication.

When one rides in a military jet one has to have THE PROPER SAFETY GEAR AND FLIGHT SUIT you knucklehead!!!! Even if your chicken shit ass was to somehow get a ride in a military jet you would be required to wear the SAME gear.

 

[Polk]

Why was he flying in a fighter plane in the first place? Political theater.

 

[elvis]

Why was he flying in a fighter plane in the first place? Political theater.

I remember Chris mathews calling him a hero after that.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Why was he flying in a fighter plane in the first place? Political theater.

When one flies ONTO THE DECK OF AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER you cannot land Air Force One on it so you take the next best available means of transportation....a military jet DESIGNED TO LAND AND TAKE OFF FROM A CARRIER.

and he was NOT on a fighter jet. He flew in on an S-3 Viking anti-submarine warfare jet as the co-pilot with 3 other crew members.