God Damn fuggin libs again


#1

wtf is it with these tards :tard

http://wfts.com/stories/2005/03/050309driving.shtml

cliff notes: dude tries to run a woman and her two children off the road because she has a Bush/Cheney bumper sticker on her car… even got out after he stopped in front of her and tried to attack her :dunno


#2

:wtf

that is freakin gay. some people take politics too seriously. if you arent happy with the way thigns are now, wait til the next election- as they always say, “better luck next time”


#3

hey now I seem to remember a Bush supporter beating the shit out of a Kerry supporter before the election for the sole reason he suppored Kerry, so it’s not all of us, just like I know that guy isn’t all of you. You an’t classify all people by what one of them does wrong.


#4

LOL… Saleen, you never miss a beat do you?


#5

I’m just trying to keep the record straight here. A lot of people are sucked into things really fast without knowing all the facts. Was the guy who did that yesterday a douche…yes, and I hope he gets punished, if in fact he commited a crime, we don’t know the whole story yet, but I’m sure he did it, but I’m trying to show both sides of the stories! :smiley:


#6

lol… Well… as far as the dude NOONE should be that passionate about a president!!! Im sure he did it too, I doubt some lady would lie about something like that.


#7

wee :tard taw :tard ded


#8

While I agree with you 100%, the story you’re talking about wasn’t exactly like the one in this story either. When that guy got beat down, wasn’t it because he went over into the conservative picketers lines and was trying to tear down their signs?

Again, I agree with what you said. But it’s also very well documented that the super liberals in general were getting pretty nasty. Calling people out on the streets and such. Cussing and yelling. It was pretty sad IMO. There were a lot of people who really supported Bush, but were litterally afraid to let anybody know about it for fear of retaliation by the psyco left.

Geez, I’m getting all pissed off again just thinking about it. :lol :lol I’d better go start Friday night early… :booze :banana :rock


#9

In California, the Rebubs are so damn liberal that Dems and Repubs get along just fine. :dunno


#10

While I agree with you 100%, the story you’re talking about wasn’t exactly like the one in this story either. When that guy got beat down, wasn’t it because he went over into the conservative picketers lines and was trying to tear down their signs?

Again, I agree with what you said. But it’s also very well documented that the super liberals in general were getting pretty nasty. Calling people out on the streets and such. Cussing and yelling. It was pretty sad IMO. There were a lot of people who really supported Bush, but were litterally afraid to let anybody know about it for fear of retaliation by the psyco left.

Geez, I’m getting all pissed off again just thinking about it. :lol :lol I’d better go start Friday night early… :booze :banana :rock[/quote]
no actually we are talking about different stories. The one I was talking about took place in North Carolina (I think) and was unprevoked. Both the far left and far right are sad in my opinion I won’t single out any side like you guys do, both extremes are plain stupid, we need to work together for the better good of this great nation.


#11

agreed. i am toward the middle in a lot of issues, but i am toward the right on some moral issues. our country would be more prosperous if the far left and far right extremes would cease and the middle could rule in office. the majority is in the middle, so when the dems put kerry up on the ballot (far left), it is a mistake. if in 08, 2 moderates from each side run, it will be a much much closer battle for office. but then again, what good is the presidency if your party doesnt also control congress?


#12

well I think if 1 party controls the presdiency and 1 controls the congress, it is a system of checks and balances where neither party can fuck up the country real bad. If one party controls both offices, there is no middle ground only one side pushing all of their stuff through. I think when different parties control each office, it forces some bi-partisanship so they can work together and give a little in order to recieve a little. On moral issues I think everyone knows my stance. No one can legally use God as a reason to be for or against something because of the seperation of church and state, and if the federal government gives money to churches, then churches need to start paying federal taxes.


#13

then charities need to start paying federal taxes too…

churches are “non-profit” organizations so they are exempt form taxation. same goes for charities.


#14

[quote=AtlanticBlue99]then charities need to start paying federal taxes too…

churches are “non-profit” organizations so they are exempt form taxation. same goes for charities.[/quote]

That is exactly right. There has been so much enphasis on the seperation of Church and State (enen though it’s well documented the founding fathers didn’t intend it that way) that the Church is actually oppressed by the government in ways. When they wrote the constitution, there was a Bible sitting on the table next to it. It’s woven into the fabric of the nation. It’s in the national anthem, it’s in the pledge of allegance, it’s in the oath’s of office, on the Judicial buildings, etc etc etc… And yet you stand there and make an argument that there is NO / ZERO / NOTHING of a place for religion in government. That’s just not the way the country was founded. And even the people who fight it tooth and nail know this. It’s a matter of history, not some new conservative attack from the right. It’s what this country was founded on.


#15

[quote=IntruderLS1][quote=AtlanticBlue99]then charities need to start paying federal taxes too…

churches are “non-profit” organizations so they are exempt form taxation. same goes for charities.[/quote]

That is exactly right. There has been so much enphasis on the seperation of Church and State (enen though it’s well documented the founding fathers didn’t intend it that way) that the Church is actually oppressed by the government in ways. When they wrote the constitution, there was a Bible sitting on the table next to it. It’s woven into the fabric of the nation. It’s in the national anthem, it’s in the pledge of allegance, it’s in the oath’s of office, on the Judicial buildings, etc etc etc… And yet you stand there and make an argument that there is NO / ZERO / NOTHING of a place for religion in government. That’s just not the way the country was founded. And even the people who fight it tooth and nail know this. It’s a matter of history, not some new conservative attack from the right. It’s what this country was founded on.[/quote]
Yes, but if we always refer to God, then we reduce the freedom of religion for people who believe in nothing, Allah, Buddah etc… I don’t care what religion the U.S. was founded on, the constitution says freedom of religion, and that means the government can’t sponsor one religion over another. BTW…The christian right can suck my fuck stick!!! hahaha calm down people, I;m only being half truthful.


#16

How exactly is their freedom reduced by hearing referance to God? It’s not what they believe, that’s fine. Nobody says they have to. If God’s not real to you, then why get all tied up in a knot when you hear His name? Just let us stupid emotional Americans hold onto our history if nothing else.

On a side note, a people who lose their history are doomed to loose themselves. Are we Americans if we turn our backs on everything that made us so?.. I don’t think so.

The constitution discribes a seperation of church and state. How does that mean one cannot mention the other. What it means, is the church has NO / ZERO / NOTHING to say that will run the government. And that’s always been upheld. The seperation has nothing to do with what you think it does. It has everything to do with the church calling the shots for the country. That’s not going to happen, because it’s in the constitution. THAT is what it was written for. I honestly don’t understand how you guys can get anybody at all to believe what you’re feeding them about what the constitution says and means about the seperation. :dunno


#17

I think it was intended that people have the right to practice whatever religion they want without fear of persicution… not that our government isn’t allowed to say “in God we trust”. I think everyone knows Im not religious but I do beleive America was founded on Christianity and I for one think it should remain that way.


#18

man there is 1000’s of church pray do what ever but don’t use schools for church like they do here they rent part of school for church on sunday…as for dem and rebubs…their all full of shit nothing really changes much no matter whos in there the whole thing now is just about power the hell with doing the right thing…we’re so caught up in helping others that we forget about our own…hell looks at the stupid army ads “an army of one” my ass no 1 person does it all it’s a group thing something a ton of people have forgot… just about the $$ as well most of use fight over the dropping that the rich and our goverment gives us…most need to come to grip the 2% of the people have 90 % of all the money here and if they were to give it all away the laws are writin is that within about 10 years they’s have it all back again… :smiley:


#19

um, yeah - thats what “an army of one” means…that everyone works together, as a group, for one purpose… :dunno


#20

So you rational people don’t feel taken advantage of, and are okay with your freedom being taken away from you when you see “In God we Trust” on the national currancy? … Weird. :dunno