Defeating Hate Talk Radio

Tinka wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, over here it's the Libs that are concerned with so many things, trying to get one thing or another banned...I think many are very Christian oriented...Am I wrong in thinking so?
I could be...
The libs I am used to are mainly focused on rights for everyone, not just a certain group...But all orientated toward Government...The ones I am used to have more of a Social worker mentality...But a real good one you know...

To most liberals in this country...to be religious is to be a conservative republican. Religion has no place in the liberal agenda. I'm not for religion having an impact on policy, but it seems that libs in the U.S. now disdane Christianity. Special interest groups and unions rule the day for democrats in tis century. Much has changed since the early '70's with the Democratic Party.

ritedownthemiddle wrote:

<quoted text>To most liberals in this country...to be religious is to be a conservative republican. Religion has no place in the liberal agenda. I'm not for religion having an impact on policy, but it seems that libs in the U.S. now disdane Christianity. Special interest groups and unions rule the day for democrats in tis century. Much has changed since the early '70's with the Democratic Party.

One more post for tonight...
I just read up on Liberalism
http://www.armchairviews.com/commie.htm

So what's the ACLU and certain groups, like outlawing smoking in a whole town etc...Are they not Liberal?

I always thought they were more on that line...

And how about gay right's people what are they, aren't most seeming they are Liberal?

I think it's all gotten way to messed up...

Maybe there's something to Scientology...ha ha

I'd like a people's party plain and simple...Live and let live...the most damage you could do to yourself would be if you tortured or murdered an innocent being for the pure joy of it...
Those things would have strict consequences...

Jorge wrote:

Keep that gun away from RJ Hasan!

If our soldiers had been armed they could have defended themselves.
One armed lady stopped his despicable ass.

Ctinman wrote:

<quoted text>
If our soldiers had been armed they could have defended themselves.
One armed lady stopped his despicable ass.

Thanks, Jimmy Carter. He disarmed out soldiers.

reeltime wrote:

excuse me...the third.
'We're Going to Have to Have More Stimulus, More Spending,' Donaldson Contends
http://www.mrc.org/biasalert/2009/20091108080...

Just what we need, more corporate welfare. More money for Goldman Sach, Forest City and all of Obama's other campaign contributors.

Anybody who believes more stimulus will lower the unemployment rate is dumber than dumb can be. Hope you lefties are happy now.

Though I'll reconsider this statement if Obama actually surprises us and gives stimulus directly to small businesses and individual households. Fat chance.

Florida wrote:

<quoted text>The Messiah Obama
Obama's Heritage is NOT of Negro Slaves of America. Obama is NOT an authentic, true, bonafide descendent of Black U.S. History, but only "OUTSOURCED" with a Muslim Heritage and USED by the Bigots of Democratic Liberalism, to fool the black Race.
The Liberals Trojan Horse Obama is NOT the Savior, Salvation or Paycheck for enslaved liberalism.
Butt, only a "fanciful" wishful desire by White Master Elites to use him for power, to pretend, make delusions and misrepresent him to white and black sheep.
To fool the Black Community and white unconscious fanciful by the lies and deception of Plantation Liberalism... The lies the Slave Masters tell their slaves to keep their from running away...
The New Order and Poison of Plantation Liberalism

Amen! Well said! Obama, the chameleon, should maybe get a job in Hollywood... being the big drama queen that he is!

ritedownthemiddle wrote:

<quoted text>RJF, you and I are on the same page of music for all things political. In the interest of respectful dialogue with others I will often try to use restraint. If you throw a bomb you will usually hear a bang. To clarify, with you, I will say that I highly SUSPECT Obama is out to screw us....but that is just my opinion and I'm sure my suspicions will be proved or disproved in a pretty short amount of time. It's better to give the benefit of a doubt when debating with someone on the other side of the fence you actually want to understand and listen to. Otherwise, the conversation will turn into a grudge match of insults. Not that I don't enjoy "beetch slappin" morons on Topix that deserve it from time to time, but besides venting I like to learn from the varied interactions of Topix as well.

Hmmm, this post of yours is certainly worth thinking about. I can understand where you're coming from. But will those totally on the other side of the fence listen if we use tact in our approach? And, those a little more open minded and at least willing to listen to our side of it, might need to feel more of sense of urgency. So which one of us is right on our approach? I honestly don't know. I do know though that people on the same team who play "good cop, bad cop" with the opposition often acheive good results. Therefore I think you should continue telling those on the left that Obama's intentions are good, while I'll continue to tell them Obama is an evil turd. Ö¿Ö

"Live and let live...the most damage you could do to yourself would be if you tortured or murdered an innocent being for the pure joy of it...
Those things would have strict consequences..."

Tinka, you think? :-)

Of course torture comes in many forms. We can argue that the government and Corporate America are putting a lot of people through financial torture.

I'm still waiting for an Obama supporter to justify the wallet fattening of Wall Street and Corporate America at the expense of Main Street. Yeah, Bush did the same albeit at a slower pace. But Obombastic promised "change" not more of the same at an even faster pace.

I'm on board with that. As close to individual anarchy as we can get, but maintain a framework of laws so that we stay civil. I think that was the plan at the get go.

Tinka wrote:

And how about gay right's people what are they, aren't most seeming they are Liberal?
I think it's all gotten way to messed up...
Maybe there's something to Scientology...ha ha
I'd like a people's party plain and simple...Live and let live...the most damage you could do to yourself would be if you tortured or murdered an innocent being for the pure joy of it...
Those things would have strict consequences...

Florida wrote:

<quoted text>The Messiah Obama
Obama's Heritage is NOT of Negro Slaves of America. Obama is NOT an authentic, true, bonafide descendent of Black U.S. History, but only "OUTSOURCED" with a Muslim Heritage and USED by the Bigots of Democratic Liberalism, to fool the black Race.
The Liberals Trojan Horse Obama is NOT the Savior, Salvation or Paycheck for enslaved liberalism.
Butt, only a "fanciful" wishful desire by White Master Elites to use him for power, to pretend, make delusions and misrepresent him to white and black sheep.
To fool the Black Community and white unconscious fanciful by the lies and deception of Plantation Liberalism... The lies the Slave Masters tell their slaves to keep their from running away...
The New Order and Poison of Plantation Liberalism

This is dead on! Unfortunately Obama is a very, very, very good orator. The best that has come along in my lifetime at least. And, I'm certainly no youngster. How does he do it? He's destroying our country bit by bit, piece by piece, yet almost half of America is still supporting him?? We need a master hypnotist to break their trance.

To me gay rights are common sense. So much so that we shouldn't even have to isolate and label them. Why does government favor marriage and families? I usually get an answer about stability. If we want to stabilize our families I think we should make marriage a matter of contract. A marriage license is just another tax, a contract signifies an agreement. As long as the parties are 18 or older they can enter into a contract with whomever or how many whomevers they choose. If you don't have a contract then you deserve whatever the court is going to end up deciding about your property and child custody.
Taxes and health insurance should be individual too. I acknowledge that we have progressed as a nation, but our solutions don't have to abandon our founding principles of individual liberties.

Tinka wrote:

And how about gay right's people what are they, aren't most seeming they are Liberal?
I think it's all gotten way to messed up...
Maybe there's something to Scientology...ha ha
I'd like a people's party plain and simple...Live and let live...the most damage you could do to yourself would be if you tortured or murdered an innocent being for the pure joy of it...
Those things would have strict consequences...

We've got problems with the extremes from both parties, but the dems in the '70's makes me nostalgic for those days of yore when I thought we were going to take down the suits in the establishment. The establishment is winning in leaps and bounds now. I think we need to organize a sit in and play some Bob Dylan.

ritedownthemiddle wrote:

<quoted text>To most liberals in this country...to be religious is to be a conservative republican. Religion has no place in the liberal agenda. I'm not for religion having an impact on policy, but it seems that libs in the U.S. now disdane Christianity. Special interest groups and unions rule the day for democrats in tis century. Much has changed since the early '70's with the Democratic Party.

So do you think anybody noticed that I went flippin' livid?:)

RJF Dupage wrote:

<quoted text>
Hmmm, this post of yours is certainly worth thinking about. I can understand where you're coming from. But will those totally on the other side of the fence listen if we use tact in our approach? And, those a little more open minded and at least willing to listen to our side of it, might need to feel more of sense of urgency. So which one of us is right on our approach? I honestly don't know. I do know though that people on the same team who play "good cop, bad cop" with the opposition often acheive good results. Therefore I think you should continue telling those on the left that Obama's intentions are good, while I'll continue to tell them Obama is an evil turd. Ö¿Ö

taxpayer wrote:

So do you think anybody noticed that I went flippin' livid?:)
<quoted text>

I'm a bad influence on you. You used to be one of the "good cops." lol

taxpayer wrote:

We've got problems with the extremes from both parties, but the dems in the '70's makes me nostalgic for those days of yore when I thought we were going to take down the suits in the establishment. The establishment is winning in leaps and bounds now. I think we need to organize a sit in and play some Bob Dylan.
<quoted text>

Even most of the 80's weren't too bad for small businesses. Starting with the Bush Sr. administration Corporate America started really taking control. During the Slick Willie administration they really started growing, but people didn't notice because of the Dot.com explosion. Bush did nothing to help small business and the inevitable crash happened at the end of his 2nd term. I was hoping Obama was going to bring us back to the America of the 50's to 80's but we know better now.

Tinka wrote:

<quoted text>
One more post for tonight...
I just read up on Liberalism
http://www.armchairviews.com/commie.htm
So what's the ACLU and certain groups, like outlawing smoking in a whole town etc...Are they not Liberal?
I always thought they were more on that line...

This post and the one following are good questions. Thanks for the link, too. It's a slippery slope with Modern Liberalism. Most of us feel that people should be able to lead their lives as they wish so long as it doesn't impact the lives of others. Read the link again, and you might better understand the collectivism approach of liberalism today and how it exploits this premise.
Without bringing Christianity, or any religion for that matter, into the debate.....Modern liberalism is opposed to morality in general. The lack of morality has a negative impact on society as a whole, and unercuts the foundation of indiviualism. This has been brought to light with our current economic collpase in myriad ways.
the ACLU is a tool for modern liberalism. Rarely are their motives directly for the benefit of the individual, even though they portray themselves under that guise. The ACLU is a disgusting organization, in my opinion, that exploits our system of law.

Ctinman wrote:

<quoted text>
If our soldiers had been armed they could have defended themselves.
One armed lady stopped his despicable ass.

At least two of our soldiers were.

The Sage wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks, Jimmy Carter. He disarmed out soldiers.

Not all of them.

taxpayer wrote:

We've got problems with the extremes from both parties, but the dems in the '70's makes me nostalgic for those days of yore when I thought we were going to take down the suits in the establishment. The establishment is winning in leaps and bounds now. I think we need to organize a sit in and play some Bob Dylan.
<quoted text>

We've allowed our government to become unaccountable for their actions. But, it's a reflection of our society as a whole. The redeeming consequence of our current economic malaise is that finally enough people are beginning to have enough of their shit. Republicans and Democrats alike.
I wonder how many incumbents will be sent packing in '10 and '12?
Fiscal conservatives and moral leaders will have a good opportunity to take a place in government again soon.....I hope.