Right-wing Christians beginning to lean left

lily of the Valley wrote:

<quoted text>
You for one are one of the biggest egotists I’ve seen here so far.
Have a good life. Bye.

Thanks for sharing at least ONE valuable insight.

Now, for part 2 of the question that you still haven't answered----which POW do you think deserves the spotlight more than McCain and why?

To whom it may concern:

Meanwhile FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE OF OUR SOLDIERS were ABORTED in IRAQ merely to satisfy a certain mans EGO.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING AND MERRY CHRISTMAS????????

ADIOS…

Obama Lies wrote:

Very rarely, do I meet a liberal that can hold an intelligent conversation and argue a particular point rationally. Now, I do have some friends (believe it or not) that can participate in a rational debate without getting too emotional. This post is not about them/you. This is for the liberal that believes everything they hear; never questions the source and never thinks logically about the big picture; which is indeed a huge part the problem. These are real examples from real people liberals that I have encountered throughout my life experience.
These are the liberals that believe in global warming just because Al Gore says its a problem. The fact is that there are just as many scientists that disagree with global warming as there are who agree with it. It’s an ongoing debate. If there was any SOLID scientific evidence to support either side, there wouldn’t be a disagreement. It’s the media that hypes it up.
These are the liberals that still believe that President Bush went AWOL in the National Guard just because Dan Rather reported it on 60 minutes. No need to comment on this one.
These are the liberals who hate Rumsfeld but don’t even know his title (former title).
These are the liberals that think all Christians are right-wing-zealot extremists. Christians don’t fight their battles with AK47s or suicide bombs.
These are the liberals that protest (and they do a damn good job at it) for the sake of protesting without knowing the issues. I am thinking Berkeley and San Francisco right about now.
These are the liberals who actually think that universal healthcare will actually work here in the US. Look at Canada and take a wild guess where Canadians go when they need major surgery performed because the Canadian healthcare system has waiting lists that are a mile long; and the doctors are way under paid.
These are the liberals that think that all conservatives are racist towards blacks and Mexican Americans. Take a look at the current administration’s cabinet Condi, Alberto Gonzales.
These are the liberals that think all conservatives are white, upper class males.
Listen up people. The real problem is that these uninformed liberals who actually believe what they hear are distributing their rhetoric through blogs, emails and conversations with others; and essentially spreading their ideologies like the Ebola virus.
I plead for these liberals to stop believing everything you hear. Understand that life is based on incentives and there is always a hidden agenda (on both sides of the political spectrum) when you are reading/watching the news; and even talking to a friend or family member. Before you form an opinion, do your research and reason your way into a reasonable point of view.
By the way, the above examples are real and are all based on my personal experience interacting with the left.
Why would anyone want to lean left!

Very eloquently put.

Bravo.

lily of the Valley wrote:

<quoted text>

finis..

My Lord I wish you would just once actually follow through on this promise.

You end every post wioth the promise that we're done with having to read your petulant incessant childish whining, and yet, it never ends.

lily of the Valley wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't think you love mccain that much. In fact if he suddenly dropped dead I truly doubt you'd be shedding one itty-bitty tear.
finis..

As a matter of fact, little girl, I certainly would be upset and disturbed if Mr McCain were to suddenly pass away. Mr McCain represented me for 2 years that I lived in the State of Arizona and I was proud to call him my senator. He is an elder statesman and a proud American that MANY poeple would mourn the passing of. Many people your age as well as mine.

As a matter of politics it would also upset me that the Republicans would then be left to scramble to find another candidate to run against Obama, t would almost create an unfair advantage. Of coarse it would give Bob Barr a fighting chance at becoming our next prez.... but I digress, Sweet innocent arrogant clueless young lilly, you have once again bit off far more than you can chew.

I most certainly WOULD and so would MILLIONS of Americans shed a tear if Mr McCain were to pass away suddenly dear misguided and ignorant child.

lily of the Valley wrote:

<quoted text>
You for one are one of the biggest egotists I’ve seen here so far.
Have a good life. Bye.

Funny the most humongous EGO I've yet seen on this board is YOURS. You dole out judgement and labels yet are unwilling to debate or defend any of your words, you my dear, are the EPITOME of the word HYPOCRITE.

Lost Rights James Bovard wrote:

<quoted text>
As a matter of fact, little girl, I certainly would be upset and disturbed if Mr McCain were to suddenly pass away. Mr McCain represented me for 2 years that I lived in the State of Arizona and I was proud to call him my senator. He is an elder statesman and a proud American that MANY poeple would mourn the passing of. Many people your age as well as mine.
As a matter of politics it would also upset me that the Republicans would then be left to scramble to find another candidate to run against Obama, t would almost create an unfair advantage. Of coarse it would give Bob Barr a fighting chance at becoming our next prez.... but I digress, Sweet innocent arrogant clueless young lilly, you have once again bit off far more than you can chew.
I most certainly WOULD and so would MILLIONS of Americans shed a tear if Mr McCain were to pass away suddenly dear misguided and ignorant child.

I'm really beginning to re-think this 3rd party voting issue. I'm just afraid by rebelling and voting for a 3rd party like my heart says I should, I'm actually GIVING a vote to Obmama and the thought of that just horrifies me. Will we be defeating our purpose by going 3rd party?

Kitcat wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm really beginning to re-think this 3rd party voting issue. I'm just afraid by rebelling and voting for a 3rd party like my heart says I should, I'm actually GIVING a vote to Obmama and the thought of that just horrifies me. Will we be defeating our purpose by going 3rd party?

Kit, a third party vote is always a throw-away vote, even when done for honorable reasons. It will always be a throw away vote in my opinion because we will never see a viable third party, left or right.

Gail wrote:

<quoted text>
Kit, a third party vote is always a throw-away vote, even when done for honorable reasons. It will always be a throw away vote in my opinion because we will never see a viable third party, left or right.

I think we will see a viable 3rd party----but I don't think we'll have enough to be effective for this upcoming election; perhaps the following one. People from both sides are just "fep up" with status qupo politics in this country and the destruction that has ensued because of it. I think enough republicans are jumping ship to make a difference---even some dems.

Gail wrote:

<quoted text>
Kit, a third party vote is always a throw-away vote, even when done for honorable reasons. It will always be a throw away vote in my opinion because we will never see a viable third party, left or right.

Not quite. All one has to do is look at the 1856-1860 elections:

"The Republican Party was itself a "third" party in 1854 when it was founded. In 1856 it was defeated with John C. Fremont. Just four years later, the Republicans defeated the incumbent conservative party, the Whigs, by running a man named Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln, running in a four-way race, won the electoral college and the presidency even though he wasn't on the ballot in nine states and received less that 40% of the popular vote.

"In 1992, Bill Clinton won the presidency with only 43% of the popular vote. In 1992, the Constitution Party (then the U.S. Taxpayers Party) secured ballot access in 21 states.

"In 1996, the party gained ballot access in 39 states, representing 80% of the electoral college votes. In 2000, Constitution Party candidates were on the ballot in 41 states.

"In 2004, the Constitution Party expects to have ballot access on all 50 states.

"Voters Say "YES"!

"The American people are ready to seriously consider voting for a third party candidate. John Zogby International conducted a poll for Reuters and the Boston television station WHDH on September 6-8, 1999. Over one thousand likely voters were surveyed. Contained in the Reuters news article was the revelation that "A third of the voters said they wanted to see a third party candidate in the race and 42 percent said they would consider voting for such a candidate."

"In the 2000 elections, 4 million voters chose minor party candidates, double the number of third party voters from just four years before. In the 2004 election cycle, the Constitution Party is poised for a strong showing. In a presidential race with more than three candidates, one third of the vote can mean victory...."

- Can a New Party Win? History Says "YES"!
http://www.cptexas.org/about.shtml

Lost Rights James Bovard wrote:

<quoted text>
Funny the most humongous EGO I've yet seen on this board is YOURS. You dole out judgement and labels yet are unwilling to debate or defend any of your words, you my dear, are the EPITOME of the word HYPOCRITE.

Hypocrite? Well, as the saying goes "it takes one to know one"

Have a good life, bye.

GunShowOnTheNet wrote:

<quoted text>
Not quite. All one has to do is look at the 1856-1860 elections:
"The Republican Party was itself a "third" party in 1854 when it was founded. In 1856 it was defeated with John C. Fremont. Just four years later, the Republicans defeated the incumbent conservative party, the Whigs, by running a man named Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln, running in a four-way race, won the electoral college and the presidency even though he wasn't on the ballot in nine states and received less that 40% of the popular vote.
"In 1992, Bill Clinton won the presidency with only 43% of the popular vote. In 1992, the Constitution Party (then the U.S. Taxpayers Party) secured ballot access in 21 states.
"In 1996, the party gained ballot access in 39 states, representing 80% of the electoral college votes. In 2000, Constitution Party candidates were on the ballot in 41 states.
"In 2004, the Constitution Party expects to have ballot access on all 50 states.
"Voters Say "YES"!
"The American people are ready to seriously consider voting for a third party candidate. John Zogby International conducted a poll for Reuters and the Boston television station WHDH on September 6-8, 1999. Over one thousand likely voters were surveyed. Contained in the Reuters news article was the revelation that "A third of the voters said they wanted to see a third party candidate in the race and 42 percent said they would consider voting for such a candidate."
"In the 2000 elections, 4 million voters chose minor party candidates, double the number of third party voters from just four years before. In the 2004 election cycle, the Constitution Party is poised for a strong showing. In a presidential race with more than three candidates, one third of the vote can mean victory...."
- Can a New Party Win? History Says "YES"!
http://www.cptexas.org/about.shtml

Woohoo!!! Thanks for the encouragement!!!

I hope this Constitution Party will continue to grow in numbers and influence so the next election (2012) might actually make history!

Kitcat wrote:

<quoted text>
Woohoo!!! Thanks for the encouragement!!!
I hope this Constitution Party will continue to grow in numbers and influence so the next election (2012) might actually make history!

I hope that God moves We The People and it happens in THIS election. For, "With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible." ...

Well, I guess it’s about that time to post Kevin Tillman’s powerful document,(for those who haven’t read it yet)
Especially now since he spoke and still speaks the truth. Boy does he speak the truth. And he says the things I would have liked to have said, only he says far better then I ever could. And it never seems to be out of date since nothing has really changed since he wrote it several years ago. And what better gift then to post what Kevin Tillman had to say.

Kevin Tillman joined the Army with his brother Pat in 2002, and they served together in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pat was killed in Afghanistan on April 22, 2004 (was it friendly fire or was it premeditated murder?).

“Somehow back at home, support for the soldiers meant having a five-year-old kindergartener scribble a picture with crayons and send it overseas, or slapping stickers on cars, or lobbying Congress for an extra pad in a helmet. It’s interesting that a soldier on his third or fourth tour should care about a drawing from a five-year-old; or a faded sticker on a car as his friends die around him; or an extra pad in a helmet, as if it will protect him when an IED throws his vehicle 50 feet into the air as his body comes apart and his skin melts to the seat.
Somehow the more soldiers that die, the more legitimate the illegal invasion becomes.
Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on the ground.
Somehow those afraid to fight an illegal invasion decades ago are allowed to send soldiers to die for an illegal invasion they started.
Somehow faking character, virtue and strength is tolerated.
Somehow profiting from tragedy and horror is tolerated.
Somehow the death of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people is tolerated.
Somehow subversion of the Bill of Rights and The Constitution is tolerated.
Somehow suspension of Habeas Corpus is supposed to keep this country safe.
Somehow torture is tolerated.
Somehow lying is tolerated.
Somehow reason is being discarded for faith, dogma, and nonsense.
Somehow American leadership managed to create a more dangerous world.
Somehow a narrative is more important than reality.
Somehow America has become a country that projects everything that it is not and condemns everything that it is.
Somehow the most reasonable, trusted and respected country in the world has become one of the most irrational, belligerent, feared, and distrusted countries in the world.
Somehow being politically informed, diligent, and skeptical has been replaced by apathy through active ignorance.
Somehow the same incompetent, narcissistic, virtueless, vacuous, malicious criminals are still in charge of this country.
Somehow this is tolerated.
Somehow nobody is accountable for this.
In a democracy, the policy of the leaders is the policy of the people. So don’t be shocked when our grandkids bury much of this generation as traitors to the nation, to the world and to humanity. Most likely, they will come to know that “somehow” was nurtured by fear, insecurity and indifference, leaving the country vulnerable to unchecked, unchallenged parasites. Luckily this country is still a democracy. People still have a voice

Brother and Friend of Pat Tillman,
Kevin Tillman

The important thing is that Pat Tillman is in a far better place now, now that God is his President and he no longer has to look at bush’s face and listen to his stupid voice anymore…

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/200601019...

HAPPY THANKSGIVING AND MERRY CHRISTMAS????

GunShowOnTheNet wrote:

<quoted text>
Not quite. All one has to do is look at the 1856-1860 elections:

True, but this time period was an exception due to the hot issue of slavery. Whigs went away an were replaced by the Republicans. The reason I think we will only have two parties (by any name) is because governing comes down to one philosphy that is what is the role of the federal government. One party will always claim the federal gov't should be more involved in peoples' lives while the other party says the feds should stay out. We will always agrue over this very question in this country. Independents won't work because, well, they are too independent. They are both on the left and the right and do not have a unitifying philosphy to keep them a viable party.

This FORMER LEFT-WING CHRISTIAN "TYPICAL WHITE PERSON" is now LEANING TO THE R-I-G-H-T..........and so are my friends.

Obama is a COMMUNIST/SOCIALIST.

Same old, same old, there is nothing new under the sun. ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Gail wrote:

<quoted text>
True, but this time period was an exception due to the hot issue of slavery. Whigs went away an were replaced by the Republicans. The reason I think we will only have two parties (by any name) is because governing comes down to one philosphy that is what is the role of the federal government. One party will always claim the federal gov't should be more involved in peoples' lives while the other party says the feds should stay out. We will always agrue over this very question in this country. Independents won't work because, well, they are too independent. They are both on the left and the right and do not have a unitifying philosphy to keep them a viable party.

ALL of history is full of change,(except for the basic fundamentals of human nature). One man and twelve of his disciples brought down the mightiest empire the world has ever known. If enough people are hurting bad enough, then they sure as hell WILL change. All of history provides ample proof of that FACT.

GunShowOnTheNet wrote:

<quoted text>
I hope that God moves We The People and it happens in THIS election. For, "With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible." ...

It would be wonderful to think it COULD happen in this election but I'm scared to think my vote for a 3rd party will come up empty and make it easier to Obmam to "take the cake". The thought of that happening makes me ill. I'm so torn about what to do .....