jakee 1,594 #151 September 1, 2010 Quote I think it is miss informed and I do not agree with you Then inform me. How do you know the builders of the mosque are Islamofascists? Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #152 September 1, 2010 QuoteOF Course you dont get it. Politically things changed over the period of your lifetime.... IF YOU WOULD just keep up with what is really happening. You mean like the Dems CONTINUING to treat minorities as second class citizens that couldn't make it without the Dem's help? QuoteThings like the WHITE FLIGHT of the Dixicrats from the Democratic Party after Johnson stabbed them in the back as they saw it with the Civil Rights Act. Which, of course, is why they voted for George Wallace in 68. QuoteThe Republican Party of 1965 is NOT the same party as it exists today. It has swung SO Far to the right in the last 30 years that it is completely unrecognizable and more closely resembles a larger and expanded grouping of ultra conservative DIXCRATS that has morphed into the DIXIE_LICANS I'm sure you think that, being of the whole 'minorities aren't able to make it without our help' mindset of the Dems, yourself.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
okalb 104 #153 September 1, 2010 QuoteQuoteI think a lot of people have trouble respecting misinformed positions. Spoken like a true liberal My point made yet again but by another Thank You Unles you were looking at yourself in the mirror when you posted this Now that's just funny. I know Mark pretty well. Mark is about as far from a liberal as you can get. He probably dislikes Obama more than you do. He is also a reasonable person that is willing to listen to and investigate actual facts rather than blindly agree with the right.Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #154 September 1, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote OF Course you dont get it. Politically things changed over the period of your lifetime.... IF YOU WOULD just keep up with what is really happening. Things like the WHITE FLIGHT of the Dixicrats from the Democratic Party after Johnson stabbed them in the back as they saw it with the Civil Rights Act. The Republican Party of 1965 is NOT the same party as it exists today. It has swung SO Far to the right in the last 30 years that it is completely unrecognizable and more closely resembles a larger and expanded grouping of ultra conservative DIXCRATS that has morphed into the DIXIE_LICANS It is not a question of keep up. It is a question of seeing reality Which you clearly do not How many times have you been fooled now????? Them blinders must be AWFUL to wear No times that I know of by you And that is what counts Ya know.... when you are going hunting way up in the high country and are leading a pack train.. at least you can get a mules attention... by walkin up and smakin him up side the head ..... to pay attention and realize where the fuck he is. I bet you really just stick your nose up his ass Very nice PA.... Sorry dahrlin I leave that to the twisted little fuckers from the flatlands who are clueless The point is though.... its always best to use mules for pack animals... you can get a mules attention. Never use a jack ass they just sit down and refuse to move forward on the trail that they do not like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #155 September 1, 2010 Both of you cut it out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #156 September 1, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteI think a lot of people have trouble respecting misinformed positions. Spoken like a true liberal My point made yet again but by another Thank You Unles you were looking at yourself in the mirror when you posted this Now that's just funny. I know Mark pretty well. Mark is about as far from a liberal as you can get. He probably dislikes Obama more than you do. He is also a reasonable person that is willing to listen to and investigate actual facts rather than blindly agree with the right. Maybe But he is the one that made the comment A reply in kind is too much to expect?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #157 September 1, 2010 QuoteRobert Byrd - Democrat George Wallace - Democrat Bull Connor - Democrat So....what's that about 'history', again? This is at least the third time I've had to make this point in response to that. For example: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3869570#3869570 QuoteQuoteWe should remember the 2:1 Dem:Repub ration of the opponents of the act at the time of its passage, including algore's dad, bird, fullbright, etc. An excellent historical example of the consequences of the traditional monopoly of the two-party system in American government, especially at the Federal level: people were forced to shove their "pegs" (no Bonfire jokes, please) into one of just two "holes": square or round; so if your peg was, say, 3- or 5-sided, you just hammered it in as best as you could. The racist, socially-conservative Southern "Dixiecrats" of the 1950s and 60s to whom you refer bore virtually no resemblance to the non-Southern Democrats of the 1960s. Strom Thurmond tried to break them off into a viable segregationist party in 1948, but that got nowhere. At the grass-roots (i.e., citizen-voter) level, many (eventually most) of them were part of Nixon's "Southern strategy" who defected and voted him into office in 1968; Reagan solidified this type of voter into solid Republicans by 1980. Today, those racist, socially-conservative Southern Democrats of the 1960s are now solidly Republican, whereas the liberal and moderate wings of the party have remained Democratic. Thurmond eventually made the formal switch from the Democratic over to the Republican party to fit his personal ideology (and because they cut him a good power deal), while Byrd chose to remain a Democrat partly because he was an economic moderate, but mainly because he'd already developed a solid power and money base as a Democrat and wasn't about to throw it away. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #158 September 1, 2010 Robert Byrd - Democrat George Wallace - Democrat Bull Connor - Democrat Does not change their history and the Party that included them"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #160 September 1, 2010 Quote Quote Robert Byrd - Democrat George Wallace - Democrat Bull Connor - Democrat Does not change their history and the Party that included them ....up until this year. Yep, you are correct, the dems are hypocrites and are crazy"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #161 September 1, 2010 QuoteThe racist, socially-conservative Southern "Dixiecrats" of the 1950s and 60s to whom you refer bore virtually no resemblance to the non-Southern Democrats of the 1960s. Strom Thurmond tried to break them off into a viable segregationist party in 1948, but that got nowhere. At the grass-roots (i.e., citizen-voter) level, many (eventually most) of them were part of Nixon's "Southern strategy" who defected and voted him into office in 1968; Reagan solidified this type of voter into solid Republicans by 1980. Today, those racist, socially-conservative Southern Democrats of the 1960s are now solidly Republican, whereas the liberal and moderate wings of the party have remained Democratic. Thurmond eventually made the formal switch from the Democratic over to the Republican party to fit his personal ideology (and because they cut him a good power deal), while Byrd chose to remain a Democrat partly because he was an economic moderate, but mainly because he'd already developed a solid power and money base as a Democrat and wasn't about to throw it away. QuoteRobert Byrd - Democrat George Wallace - Democrat Bull Connor - Democrat Does not change their history and the Party that included them Attaboy there, Marc. Who needs a deeper analysis? - just keep it simple. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #162 September 1, 2010 QuoteTHWACK Aw yes The sound of truth hitting you in the face I hope you are ok"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #163 September 1, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe racist, socially-conservative Southern "Dixiecrats" of the 1950s and 60s to whom you refer bore virtually no resemblance to the non-Southern Democrats of the 1960s. Strom Thurmond tried to break them off into a viable segregationist party in 1948, but that got nowhere. At the grass-roots (i.e., citizen-voter) level, many (eventually most) of them were part of Nixon's "Southern strategy" who defected and voted him into office in 1968; Reagan solidified this type of voter into solid Republicans by 1980. Today, those racist, socially-conservative Southern Democrats of the 1960s are now solidly Republican, whereas the liberal and moderate wings of the party have remained Democratic. Thurmond eventually made the formal switch from the Democratic over to the Republican party to fit his personal ideology (and because they cut him a good power deal), while Byrd chose to remain a Democrat partly because he was an economic moderate, but mainly because he'd already developed a solid power and money base as a Democrat and wasn't about to throw it away. QuoteRobert Byrd - Democrat George Wallace - Democrat Bull Connor - Democrat Does not change their history and the Party that included them Attaboy there, Marc. Who needs a deeper analysis? - just keep it simple. I know I know It is all you can handle"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #164 September 1, 2010 QuoteQuoteRobert Byrd - Democrat George Wallace - Democrat Bull Connor - Democrat So....what's that about 'history', again? This is at least the third time I've had to make this point in response to that. Good for you - this is at least the third time I've had to make that point in response to some idiotic 'broad brush' smear. The fact that the KKK identifies with extremist right ideology is no more telling on the Republican party as a whole than the American Communist party identifying with extremist left ideology is telling on the Democratic party as a whole.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #166 September 1, 2010 QuoteTHWACK Aw man You OK?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 893 #167 September 1, 2010 Thanks Oren...I just checked my voter registration card. Still Republican! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #168 September 1, 2010 QuoteQuote I think it is miss informed and I do not agree with you Then inform me. How do you know the builders of the mosque are Islamofascists? Hello hello hello... Anything? Rush, I'm giving you the opportunity to educate me, why won't you tell me what you know?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
okalb 104 #169 September 1, 2010 Quote Thanks Oren...I just checked my voter registration card. Still Republican! A republican who has no problem with the mosque being built and who is opposed to the death penalty. You mean you can be a republican and not blindly support all of their policies? You mean you can think for yourself about things and reach your own conclusion based on facts and evidence? That should land you in the republican dog house for quite some time Edited to add that the exact same thing can be said about the Dems too.Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #170 September 1, 2010 >How do you know the builders of the mosque are Islamofascists? Same way republicans know that the KKK is a liberal group. Same way they know that Obama was born in Kenya. That he's a Muslim and a Christian with a radical preacher. That we have to invade Iraq to stop Saddam's WMD programs. That global warming isn't happening, and that it's happening but there's a natural reason for it. That cutting the government's income will reduce the deficit. That the mosque is really at Ground Zero. That most people in Manhattan oppose the mosque. That there's no evidence for evolution. That relativity doesn't work. In other words, facts don't matter one bit. They FEEL that something must be true, and once they have that feeling, will cling to it despite any evidence to the contrary. Stephen Colbert did a good satirical piece on this. He called it "truthiness" - a "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively, from the gut, without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts. A description of this during his roast of GWB: ========= We both get it. Guys like us, we're not some brainiacs on the nerd patrol. We're not members of the factinista. We go straight from the gut. Right, sir? That's where the truth lies, right down here in the gut. Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. Now, I know some of you are going to say, "I did look it up, and that's not true." That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut. I did. My gut tells me that's how our nervous system works. ========= It's an awesome tool. You can say anything you want, and if you believe hard enough, and can get FOX News to repeat it (which isn't hard at all) it becomes a real conservative fact. In this case, they're just repeating the words "Islamofascist" and "Ground Zero Mosque" over and over, and eventually, it becomes a conservative truthy fact that it's right on top of Ground Zero and will be full of the people who flew the planes into the Twin Towers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #171 September 1, 2010 Quote Thanks Oren...I just checked my voter registration card. Still Republican! Yeah.. but by posting some of the things you have.. DUDE... you need to be thrown under the bus for being just not conservative enough for those Fair and Balanced types. In the GOP of today.. that is tantamount to being a liberal... for not having absorbed enough of the conservturd mantra coming from Lush Rimjob and Sean Insanity, And the Glenn "The Crying Dude" Beck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 893 #172 September 1, 2010 Just leave my guns and money alone! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyPiggie 0 #173 September 1, 2010 Pardon me for getting back on topic. ;-) Now this in the news: "A new controversy has surfaced for Imam Faisal Rauf, the spiritual leader of the proposed mosque and community center near ground zero. According to IPT, the Investigative Project on Terrorism, questions have emerged about how a Muslim group led by Rauf obtained tax exempt status. The group, the American Sufi Muslim Association, ASMA says it “hosted and conducted prayer and meditation sessions…” on its tax exempt application filed in 1998. ASMA listed its established place of worship as 201 West 85th Street, a New York City apartment house. The group claimed average attendance at worship services was between “450 and 500.” The problem according to the Investigative Project on Terrorism is that the building lacks the necessary public space to house that many congregants... " http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/09/01/new-questions-for-imam-rauf/ So, was he committing tax fraud, by claiming it was a church, when it really wasn't? And this questionable status is to be piled on top of all of the developer's other bad past history. This story just gets curiouser and curiouser, and an inquiring Skypiggie wants to know. I now return you to your normal bickering. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 893 #174 September 1, 2010 Sounds like he simply listed the wrong address as it has been an established place of worship for years...just not at that address. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #175 September 2, 2010 QuoteQuoteBuilding on this site for them is not about religion. It is about a conquest You see, the thing there is that A) you are assuming that it is about conquest. You have absolutely no evidence that the motive is to commemorate a conquest. And B) even if it was about conquest it would still be religious. At the end of the day, it is a mosque: fact. It is being built by Islamic people: fact. It will be used for religious worship: fact... It is commemorating conquest: conjecture. I am not making it about religion to fit my position - it is about religion. You are making the entirely unfounded assumption that it is about conquest in order to fit your position. End of story. Hypothetical: Lets say that they build the mosque. At the grand opening or whatever ceremony for the opening, they openly admit that everyone that opposed the mosque was right and it is a great victory to build a mosque so close to where the terrorist attack on the trade center buildings happened, hence confirming the conquest. Would you still whole heartedly support the mosque, it's imam and his followers?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
