I would just like to understand why liberals are the ones involved in hate speech, violence and vandalism 100:1 over stories about conservatives engaged in the same behavior, but it is always conservatives who are labled hateful...thats the liberal media at work.
Here is some more compassion from ONE site about Fallwell
No loss, it came 20 years too late
Burn in HELL Jerry, burn in HELL
rest in peace you bastard
He caused more hate than any one person should in a single lifetime, he is burning in hell as we type
Hope you brought your sunscreen to the life thereafter, you'll need it
first class asshole...now worm food...all is right with the world
I think I know why liberals are so damn mean and insane. They HATE that someone would have to guts and integrity to say what is right and wrong. To liberals, everyone is allowed to decide what is right and wrong for their personal lives. Of course, all liberals thought and theory destroys descent society, but that is how they think. Why else do you believe liberals are so full of hate?
Now remember, I used actual quotes and facts, unlike liberals who just SAY conservatives hate...
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Liberals show their hate
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
24 comments:
by the way, there are thousands more comments on blogs today...that is just a taste
Game,
I know that, but Jim and Jay are going to spin and demand we not call them liars when they lie to baum their exposed and bruised egos.
Baum? The Wizard of Oz guy?
Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to catch me in a single lie.
Touche, Jay!
way to NOT address the issue AGAIN...touche
Well, I am an anti-Idiotarian. Which means with regard to Falwell's death, I can only say good riddance.
This is not amusing like St. Pancake's death, which, pace the claims of uberpuritans like Jay always on the witchhunt for hypocrisy, was really quite funny. Alas, I must confess Falwell's departure from our world marginally improves the quality of our species. I'll feel the same why when Rev Jesse Jackass kicks the bucket too.
Wasn't pcd's comment was off-topic? Or is there a different definition of on-topic for liberals and conservatives around here?
When I get called out by name, I'd like to respond.
You are exactly right, Game. I checked out the DU to see what they had to say about Falwell. I found several comment threads with over a thiousand comments each, almost all of them celebrating Falwell's death with glee.
This is the Liberals idea of compassion? They make Satan look like a good guy.
Of course he is...to them.
Jason,
Your putting Falwell and Jackson in the same sentence is an illogical grouping. I was not a big follower of Falwell in any way. But I've never heard worse from him than what could be described as "clumsily expressed". That doesn't make him an idiot. If it did, all those moonbat libs would be right about Bush. But they aren't, are they? No, they're not.
Plus, Jerry's not a self-promoter like Jackson. He's a God promoter and that's the source of his bad pub. It's his bringing religion back into the political sphere that has aroused the ire of his antagonists. Of all that has been done in the last forty years, this one area harkens back more clearly to the days of our founding than anything in a long time. Not a theocracy, but a political process guided by the Judeo-Christian principles from which the idea of a self-governed society sprang. Imagine how different the last 40-50 years would be if guided by true men and/or women of God!
Jay, Baum as in salve. You call yourself an English teacher????
Now, your first and foremost lie is that Democrats do not raise taxes, nor is their agenda to raise taxes. Reality proves you wrong daily.
As to the above topic, you want to condemn your bretheren at Democrat Underground for their imtemperate if not slanderous comments toward Mr. Falwell or are you going to say the GOP said nasty things about Wellstone after his death?
Before you get wound up, Jay, are you going to condemn a poster by the name of "Hashfanatic" who posts on "The Radio Equalizer" blog who says that the GOP sabatoge airplanes that Democrats like Wellstone ride on to kill them?
pcd,
Oh, balm. I get it.
your first and foremost lie is that Democrats do not raise taxes, nor is their agenda to raise taxes
Really? I said that? Where?
And I refuse to engage your nutpicking. I am responsible for what I say, not what some psuedonomous idiot somewhere says. I am responsible for what I believe, not what some psuedonomous idiot somewhere believes.
In other words, I put my name--my real, actual, full name--on opinions that I hold. If you want to confront me with them, have at it.
jay
It must be nice to take the "high road". To cherry pick those things that "sound" noble from those you claim to support, and ignore everything else which is destructive and unsupportable (i.e. the bulk of the Democrats platform).
An aside, I wouldn't rely on Wikkipdea so much if I were you. You seem to be knowledgeble on the uses of google, check out the reliability of Wikki and see what you find. A low 80 percentile in accuracy is not what I'd call a "good" source. I prefer Rush who's "found to be accurate 98.6% of the time".
blamin, seriously, you want to hold me responsible for what people I never heard of said on a blog I don't read? That's ridiculous.
What I rejected was not "everything else which is destructive and unsupportable (i.e. the bulk of the Democrats platform)." What I rejected was pcd's suggestion that I believe "the GOP sabatoge airplanes that Democrats like Wellstone ride on to kill them." That's not on the Democrats' platform, nor, in fact, anything rational people believe.
Consider pcd's comments here versus mine or Jim's when it comes to Falwell. Neither Jim nor I accused any of you conservatives of believing any of Falwell's more egregious opinions, or demanding that you publicly distance yourselves from him. (Jason seems to have done so voluntarily.) And yet to prove some point--I think it's that I'm some kind of liar--pcd is trying to associate me with some anonymous guy's stupidity, demanding I reject it.
It would be one thing if pcd were to find something I actually wrote, and challenge me. I would even understand if he asked about, for example, actual bills proposed by politicians I support, or, as you might suggest, actual planks of the Democratic platform. But that's not what's going on here, and I can't believe I actually need to respond to this crap.
Jay,
You are a Democrat hack and union goon. If you don't like being held responsible for Democrat Party and Union trangressions and outrages, don't parrot their talking points and stand so close to them. Oh, and a little criticism of them wouldn't hurt you. You can't even say a criticism of Chuck Chavala.
You can't even say a criticism of Chuck Chavala.
Liar.
you don't like being held responsible for [Democratic] Party and Union trangressions and outrages
Tell me how "Hashfanatic" is a representative of the Democratic Party or of unions.
No jay, I wouldn’t hold you responsible for what others say. Yes jay, I would hold you responsible for supporting people who support destructive ideas.
There’s an old truism I’m sure most have heard many times, but it bears repeating, because it speaks to maturity. ”Those who are not liberal at the age of 19 have no heart, those who are not conservative at 30 have no head”.
There’s a hypothesis among psychologist that suggest most people stop maturing mentally at various ages. Some stop in their teens, we all know someone from our high school or college days who still act like they’re mentally stuck at 19 or 20.
My point? Two types of people populate the liberal/socialist movement. Those who are mentally stuck at 19, and those that want something, whether it be power, or a hand-out.
Some Democrats may think they’re not in one of the two categories mentioned, because they believe they are fighting for justice, or to right wrongs against society (as Conservatives wish to do also), but if they were to take a serious, mature look at the solutions they propose, and the solutions they have implemented they would see the danger and damage. Hence, mentally they’re stuck at 19.
I don’t want 19 year olds and envious, power hungry people running (ruining) my country!
I do admit there’s something wrong with today’s Republican party - it’s not conservative enough!
blamin'--
Whew! For a minute there I thought you were going to go off on an offensive, unsubstantiated, stereotypical rant that both demonstrates an utter misunderstanding of half the American populace and reveals a frighteningly skewed worldview, but you pulled it out in the end! Way to go, brother!
jay
I'm fully aware there are exceptions to the rule but I'm speaking of generalalities my friend. Of course everyone always deny they're part of the group. Maybe, just maybe, you're not part of the group. If that's the case, then here's another truism for ya "99 percent of Democrats make the other 1 percent look bad". You 1 percenters need to get the others into some kind of therapy. (Real therapy, not some of that BS, pseudo-therapy from some gov't program administerd by a life long gov't employee.)
Jason,
The first thing you need to do is to keep in mind that Falwell was speaking from a purely spiritual and Scriptural standpoint. This is an important distinction. There is a ton of immorality rampant in this country that is not even considered so by many of its people. Yet from a Biblical perspective, its helpful to remember that God doesn't change and His Law is absolute. So, though we, or some of us, believe a particular activity is no longer a taboo, you can bet that God doesn't agree (providing it was originally taboo due to Biblical restriction).
So, though I agree with you that no matter what anyone thinks about how the USA may have provoked a grievance against us, the murder of 3000 of our civilians is a heinously inappropriate response, and no, we did not deserve that. But at the same time, our decadent society may indeed be responsible for God lifting His protection. This is a sentiment shared and openly expressed by our first president. He was convinced that our behavior and adherance to God's Will is imperative to our success and preservation. And he was hardly the only one. Falwell was simply stating the same belief. It's the Biblical version of "you reap what you sow", which I think is actually a Biblical reference. I do not dispute this belief, though I don't totally think and live the belief.
To further illustrate the concept, imagine for a moment a man who is by all accounts and witnessing is a moral and upright individual. He's generous with time and money, never has a bad word to say of anyone, totally honest and trustworthy, etc, etc, etc. Everyone knows him to be a perfect saint of a man, yet, when no one's looking, he likes to jerk his gerkin. It's like a hobby. Every opportunity. He knows it's wrong but doesn't care and has no intentions of ever stopping. What he has done is to defy God with that one peccadillo. To the rest of us, he deserves nothing but good. But to God, he's lost his soul.
This is what our country has become. There is good and there is not so good and there has come a list of behaviors from which few attempt to restrain themselves. Evil is called good and good evil. With the list of people Falwell placed responsibility for God's possible decision, it makes perfect sense from a Biblical perspective. And here's the kicker: he said it to promote change in all of us. The repenting kind of change, in order to invite God's Grace upon us.
So it wasn't bigotry in which Jerry was engaging, just preaching the Truth and speculating how it might have played out on 9/11. It's not bigotry to point out what one feels is sinful behavior.
As to the Jewish anti-Christ, I've never heard that. I don't think he means he hates all Jews. Personally, I think the anti-Christ will be Muslim.
"our decadent society may indeed be responsible for God lifting His protection."
This is goofy. With this reasoning, we might as well blame the Jews for the holocaust. Saudi Arabia should be invulnerable to attack given the piety of its inhabitants, while Canada, which is socially identical to the United States, should be receiving similar attacks upon her.
The theory simply isn't adding up.
I'm not going to blame India, or Russia, or Sudan, or Thailand, or Israel, or the United Kingdom, or the United States for the results of blind zealots of one particular religion that can't seem to get along with the others, or even itself lately.
Jason, your misgivings can all be answered from scripture.
Just one example, according to scripture, the Jewish people suffured many times for turning their back on God. I'm not going to go into each example you presented, but suffice to say there is an answer for each and every one, from a biblical standpoint. The Saudi reference, the Canadian reference, ect. You maybe could say it's not for the clay to question the potter.
Now we can get into all kinds of questions like the meaning of life, how we got here, our purpose, Gods purpose, but that's all pure speculation, and I don't think anyone's view will be changed.
But according to Falwells faith, he didn't misspeak. Ya, I'll admit he may not have been the best of speakers at times, but the points made were good points within his faith. And I believe you think he's an idiot for having such beliefs.
This is a common view among athiest or is it agnostic?, no athiest, because an athiest will intellectually belitlle an agnostic also.
Don't get me wrong, been there, done that, not that I'm saying I've figured out the truth. But I know that the athiest will allways discount those opinions coming from believers (they can't be as smart as me if they believe such fables), while the believers will discount the opinions of the athiest (the ego of man has made him fool himself).
I respect your opinion but the bottom line is, I don't believe (correct me if I'm wrong), its the man you have a problem with but his belief. In other words you think he's an "idiot" for his beliefs which foundations are in his faith.
Shit did that make any sense? I try sometimes, but the "devil juice" (just came back from my daughters ball game and then a daughter/father dart tournament) sends me off on a rant occasionally.
Jason,
Also keep in mind, that when the question is asked, "How could this have happened?", there is a spiritual element some times. For example, the widow of a man murdered in a robbery would ask that question and mean, "How could it happen to US?" Falwell is answering that type of question.
One possible explanation to your query about why us and not other nations could be in the fact that we are indeed the best hope for the world. If we can't keep it together in the eyes of God, a harsh wake-up call might be in order. If the whole nation repented of it's wickedness the week before 9/11, would the event still have taken place? How could possibly ever know? That's simply Falwell's belief, not a statement that He knows for sure the mind of God. He doesn't, no one does, for God is not human and doesn't think like a human. To expect Him to do so is folly. But Falwell is a preacher who deals in the realm of the spiritual, so his answers would be based on such. A general would certainly answer from a different point of reference. And they could both be right. We just can't confirm one of them.
Post a Comment