Comments
23,381 - 23,400 of 30,478 Comments Last updated 57 min ago
mutt

Chillicothe, OH

#25726 Feb 18, 2014
Canton wrote:
I bet you'd like me to quit pointing out the obvious and striking similarity in Christian Conservative's beliefs, when compared to child murdering terrorist, Timothy McVeigh
Yes, we know how much you liberals care about the children.

I did some reading about McVey on Wikipedia. He was agnostic, and claimed that science was his religion. He voted libertarian in 1996. He was definitely angry at the govt, but it was because of what was done at Waco and Ruby Ridge.

He wrote an essay in 1998 that sounds more like Obama's old buddy, Bill Ayers, than it does a conservative.....

"The administration has said that Iraq has no right to stockpile chemical or biological weapons ("weapons of mass destruction")— mainly because they have used them in the past.

Well, if that's the standard by which these matters are decided, then the U.S. is the nation that set the precedent. The U.S. has stockpiled these same weapons (and more) for over 40 years. The U.S. claims this was done for deterrent purposes during its "Cold War" with the Soviet Union. Why, then, it is invalid for Iraq to claim the same reason (deterrence) with respect to Iraq's (real) war with, and the continued threat of, its neighbor Iran?

The administration claims that Iraq has used these weapons in the past. We've all seen the pictures that show a Kurdish woman and child frozen in death from the use of chemical weapons. But, have you ever seen those pictures juxtaposed next to pictures from Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

I suggest that one study the histories of World War I, World War II and other "regional conflicts" that the U.S. has been involved in to familiarize themselves with the use of "weapons of mass destruction."

Remember Dresden? How about Hanoi? Tripoli? Baghdad? What about the big ones — Hiroshima and Nagasaki?(At these two locations, the U.S. killed at least 150,000 non-combatants — mostly women and children — in the blink of an eye. Thousands more took hours, days, weeks or months to die).

If Saddam is such a demon, and people are calling for war crimes charges and trials against him and his nation, why do we not hear the same cry for blood directed at those responsible for even greater amounts of "mass destruction" — like those responsible and involved in dropping bombs on the cities mentioned above?

The truth is, the U.S. has set the standard when it comes to the stockpiling and use of weapons of mass destruction."
Canton

Canton, OH

#25728 Feb 18, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh for crying out loud with your leftist lies. When did GW ever say that Iraq was responsible for 911?
Haliburton has been involved in every US reconstruction project since the Vietnam war. WTF else was as capable as Haliburton or their subsidiaries to rebuild Iraq? What company built Iraq's oil infrastructure in the first place?
Yellowcake in Iraq:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25546334#.UwQNpyjij...
Cheney and Haliburton:
http://stanfordreview.org/old_archives/Archiv...
You are correct. It was Halliburton's Cheney who tied 9/11 to Iraq. How completely off the mark I was to suggest it was Bush. Obviously you uncovered my great conspiracy to blame the Bush administration for it. Considering Halliburton has always been there to make money off of needless GOP wars, there is nothing shady about Cheney selling an unfounded war before Halliburton made billions in no bid government contracts off of it. I'm sure if Obama did that, you wouldn't bat an eye. Now in Viet Nam and Iraq both, the threat to American soil was what? The outcome of our American soldiers dying accomplished...? I mean besides Halliburton making billions of dollars. Oh, that's right. It's all about the GOP's well known love of spreading freedom and democracy to Muslims and socialists and nothing to do with defense spending or military contracts.

Here's Cheney and McCain claiming the Iraqi government met with Al Qaeda before 9/11. I'm sure it's just some Liberal media trick with camera work and green screens.

Canton

Canton, OH

#25729 Feb 18, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama Administration Outsourced Jobs with Stimulus Funding
July 10, 2012
- See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-adminis...
Stimulus funds boost number of federal jobs
Posted 9/23/2009
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washingto...
I'm sorry but a right wing propaganda site doesn't hack it. We have been over this before. Remember. You are the guy who bases his opinions off of proven liar, Rush Limbaugh. I'm the guy who doesn't watch MSNBC because it is leftist propaganda.

The USA story was interesting though. You skipped over the part where it created energy industry jobs though. You can thank Obama later.
mutt

Chillicothe, OH

#25730 Feb 18, 2014
Canton wrote:
Obama's stimulus package was designed to stop America from sliding into a major economic depression created by "God's President" GW Bush. Unfortunately, the greedy CEOs gave themselves fat bonuses instead.
How did that happen, with Biden overseeing everything?(LOL)

Harsh words from Senate Minority Whip, John Cornyn (D, TX) on the 5th anniversary of the stimulus pkg:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/17/john...

Obama issued Executive Order #13502 concerning Project Labor Agreements. It strongly recommends that states hire only union workers for construction jobs. That means the union bosses get their pockets lines, and the democrat party gets more funding.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25731 Feb 18, 2014
Here's what a political fact checking website thinks of cnsnews...

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/cnsne...
Canton

Canton, OH

#25732 Feb 18, 2014
Here's a web site dedicated to exposing cnsnews for being liars. Sure, it's probably run by leftists, but where there's smoke...

http://cnsnewswatch.org/
mutt

Chillicothe, OH

#25733 Feb 18, 2014
Canton wrote:
A mother crocodile will defend it's young with its life.
And a wolf spider will eat hers.
Squirrels aren't randomly murdering each other on my front lawn because they are unable to read the 10 Commandments.
"Random" implies that there's no motivation in choosing certain victims. Based on what I've read, mass murderers may not have known the victims, but they had an objective in mind, and spent a lot of time planning the attack. And a serial killer usually targets the same type of person every time.

The black-tailed prairie dog:
"A seven-year natural experiment by John Hoogland...revealed that infanticide is widespread in this species, including infanticide from invading males and immigrant females, as well as occasional cannibalism of an individual's own offspring. The surprising finding of the study was that by far the most common type of infanticide involved the killing of close kin's offspring. This seems illogical, as kin selection favors behaviors that promote the well-being of closely related individuals....Marauding behavior is evidently adaptive, as infanticidal females had more and healthier young than others, and were heavier themselves as well. This behavior appears to reduce competition with other females for food, and future competition among offspring."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide_%28z...

Kinda puts those cute little prairie dogs in a different light, doesn't it?
Canton

Canton, OH

#25734 Feb 18, 2014
mutt wrote:
<quoted text>
How did that happen, with Biden overseeing everything?(LOL)
Harsh words from Senate Minority Whip, John Cornyn (D, TX) on the 5th anniversary of the stimulus pkg:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/17/john...
Obama issued Executive Order #13502 concerning Project Labor Agreements. It strongly recommends that states hire only union workers for construction jobs. That means the union bosses get their pockets lines, and the democrat party gets more funding.
Yah, that Biden and his kookie magic underwear that repels evil spirits. Oh wait. That was Romney I'm thinking of. That's strange. Above, you claimed John Cornyn was a Democrat. Instead your shocking revelation is that a Republican from Texas doesn't like Obama. Strange since you copied and pasted the title, that it got changed. Nothing conniving going on there.

I'll have to look it up and see which part of the Executive order mentions union bosses getting their pockets lined. Either way, I'm sure you'll agree, since you are in no way the top wealthiest 1%, that it's about time they quit favoring these bloated tax dodgers and take care of the American 99% labor working class folks like you and me. Anything short of that would be directly against our own interests and as dumb as the day is long. I'll step back and make room so you can thank Obama for looking out for yours and us other 99% working man's best interests.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25735 Feb 18, 2014
mutt wrote:
<quoted text>
And a wolf spider will eat hers.
<quoted text>
"Random" implies that there's no motivation in choosing certain victims. Based on what I've read, mass murderers may not have known the victims, but they had an objective in mind, and spent a lot of time planning the attack. And a serial killer usually targets the same type of person every time.
The black-tailed prairie dog:
"A seven-year natural experiment by John Hoogland...revealed that infanticide is widespread in this species, including infanticide from invading males and immigrant females, as well as occasional cannibalism of an individual's own offspring. The surprising finding of the study was that by far the most common type of infanticide involved the killing of close kin's offspring. This seems illogical, as kin selection favors behaviors that promote the well-being of closely related individuals....Marauding behavior is evidently adaptive, as infanticidal females had more and healthier young than others, and were heavier themselves as well. This behavior appears to reduce competition with other females for food, and future competition among offspring."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide_%28z...
Kinda puts those cute little prairie dogs in a different light, doesn't it?
Oh those animals and the kookie traits evolution has passed down in them to continue their species. Saw a bird, a rabbit and a squirrel all sitting next to each other the other day. I could tell they had read the Bible, because the weren't murdering each other. Just like herds of deer. A murderous lot. Always watching over their back for some other deer to come along and murder them. Lions...same thing. Your point about serial killers makes sense though, because, as you pointed out, we would all be selecting our next victims to murder and cannibalize right now if it weren't for those fables in the Bible being passed down. This is evident by how the Buddhists are always chopping each other up and eating each other.

Here's a story about a Christian woman who murdered her own children because "God" told her to. Kinda puts those cute little Christians in a different light, doesn't it?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/03/29/children.sl...

Here's another...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Yates

Here's another example of the moral high ground...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-23257...
Canton

Canton, OH

#25736 Feb 18, 2014
mutt wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, we know how much you liberals care about the children.
I did some reading about McVey on Wikipedia. He was agnostic, and claimed that science was his religion. He voted libertarian in 1996. He was definitely angry at the govt, but it was because of what was done at Waco and Ruby Ridge.
He wrote an essay in 1998 that sounds more like Obama's old buddy, Bill Ayers, than it does a conservative.....
"The administration has said that Iraq has no right to stockpile chemical or biological weapons ("weapons of mass destruction")— mainly because they have used them in the past.
Well, if that's the standard by which these matters are decided, then the U.S. is the nation that set the precedent. The U.S. has stockpiled these same weapons (and more) for over 40 years. The U.S. claims this was done for deterrent purposes during its "Cold War" with the Soviet Union. Why, then, it is invalid for Iraq to claim the same reason (deterrence) with respect to Iraq's (real) war with, and the continued threat of, its neighbor Iran?
The administration claims that Iraq has used these weapons in the past. We've all seen the pictures that show a Kurdish woman and child frozen in death from the use of chemical weapons. But, have you ever seen those pictures juxtaposed next to pictures from Hiroshima or Nagasaki?
I suggest that one study the histories of World War I, World War II and other "regional conflicts" that the U.S. has been involved in to familiarize themselves with the use of "weapons of mass destruction."
Remember Dresden? How about Hanoi? Tripoli? Baghdad? What about the big ones — Hiroshima and Nagasaki?(At these two locations, the U.S. killed at least 150,000 non-combatants — mostly women and children — in the blink of an eye. Thousands more took hours, days, weeks or months to die).
If Saddam is such a demon, and people are calling for war crimes charges and trials against him and his nation, why do we not hear the same cry for blood directed at those responsible for even greater amounts of "mass destruction" — like those responsible and involved in dropping bombs on the cities mentioned above?
The truth is, the U.S. has set the standard when it comes to the stockpiling and use of weapons of mass destruction."
So now you are claiming that Liberals don't care for their children? Wow. Well, if that's how it's going to be, then the only reason Christian Conservatives are anti-abortion is because they want all those lumps of cells to grow into toddlers so they can molest them and then slap a Southern Baptist owned cigarette in their mouths... or what they like to call "targeted life long customers". Can I get a praise Jesus! I'm glad you read up on Timmy McTeaBaggers though. That way you can't deny the fact that most of his views read like a Tea Party manifesto, without breaking one of the 10 Commandments.
mutt

Chillicothe, OH

#25737 Feb 18, 2014
Canton wrote:
Here's a story about a Christian woman who murdered her own children because "God" told her to. Kinda puts those cute little Christians in a different light, doesn't it?
Is that different than a liberal woman killing her children because the democrat party tells her she can? You can keep citing instances of so-called Christians or republicans doing things that go against what the bible or the republican platform says, but all you're showing is that those people didn't adhere to what the group supports. The democrat platform, on the other hand, supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose. The right to murder is in your party's platform.
Class

United States

#25738 Feb 18, 2014
I am "Happy to see everyone" is starting to see who is who on this site...they are too ashamed to use their names because they want run out of this this town...by 95% of everyone. You are trying to get a point to two Logo Atheist.!!!
...
Class

United States

#25740 Feb 18, 2014
How many names can 2 people make up? Please, you are not fooling anyone !! Be Real !!
mutt

Chillicothe, OH

#25741 Feb 18, 2014
Canton wrote:
I'm glad you read up on Timmy McTeaBaggers though. That way you can't deny the fact that most of his views read like a Tea Party manifesto, without breaking one of the 10 Commandments.
Right. That's why he thought a number of presidents -- democrat and republican alike, from WWI on -- were war criminals. He was very similar to Bill Ayers, who was militant, anti-govt, and anti-war, and felt certain presidents should be charged with war crimes.

Another failed attempt by you to slander an entire group because of the actions of one. You're a joke.
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#25742 Feb 18, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes they did, because they were in the majority. But if you care to check, you'll find out that there was a higher percentage of Republicans that passed the bill than Democrats:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013...
You continue to try to confuse people ignorant of our history with some outdated political labels.
That's a good article. I think this is the passage you were referring to:

"80% of Republicans in the House and Senate voted for the bill. Less than 70% of Democrats did. Indeed, Minority Leader Republican Everett Dirksen led the fight to end the filibuster. Meanwhile, Democrats such as Richard Russell of Georgia and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina tried as hard as they could to sustain a filibuster. "

Richard Russell of Georgia and Strom Thurmond of South Carolina were both well known segregationists. They were the conservative forces of their day. They opposed civil rights legislation, and supported state's rights. When the Democratic Party passed civil rights legislation in the 1960s, the "Southern Democrats" suddenly became Republicans and voted for Richard Nixon.

"In 2005, the political scientists Nicholas Valentino and David Sears demonstrated that a Southern man holding conservative positions on issues other than race is no more likely than a conservative Northerner to vote for a Democrat. But when the relevant identifier is anti-black answers to survey questions—like whether one agrees “If blacks would only try harder they could be just as well off as whites”—white Southerners were twice as likely than white Northerners to refuse to vote Democratic. As another political scientist, Thomas Schaller, wrote in his 2006 book Whistling Past Dixie (which naturally quotes the infamous Atwater lines),“Despite the best efforts of Republican spinmeisters...the partisan impact of racial attitudes in the South is stronger today than in the past.”

http://www.thenation.com/article/170841/exclu...
Old Guy

Cincinnati, OH

#25743 Feb 18, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes they did, because they were in the majority. But if you care to check, you'll find out that there was a higher percentage of Republicans that passed the bill than Democrats:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013...
You continue to try to confuse people ignorant of our history with some outdated political labels.
Thanks again, for posting this article. Did you read it, or just pull out that one nugget? It does an excellent job of explaining the transformation of the conservative Southern Democrats into Republicans:

"Nearly 100% of Union state Democrats supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act compared to 85% of Republicans. None of the southern Republicans voted for the bill, while a small percentage of southern Democrats did.

The same pattern holds true when looking at ideology instead of party affiliation. The folks over at Voteview.com , who created DW-nominate scores to measure the ideology of congressmen and senators, found that the more liberal a congressman or senator was the more likely he would vote for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, once one controlled for a factor closely linked to geography.

That's why Strom Thurmond left the Democratic party soon after the Civil Right Act passed. He recognized that of the two parties, it was the Republican party that was more hospitable to his message. The Republican candidate for president in 1964, Barry Goldwater, was one of the few non-Confederate state senators to vote against the bill. He carried his home state of Arizona and swept the deep southern states – a first for a Republican ever.

Now, it wasn't that the Civil Rights Act was what turned the South against the Democrats or minorities against Republicans. Those patterns, as Trende showed, had been developing for a while. It was, however, a manifestation of these growing coalitions. The South gradually became home to the conservative party, while the north became home to the liberal party.

Today, the transformation is nearly complete. President Obama carried only 18% of former Confederate states, while taking 62% of non-Confederate states in 2012. Only 27% of southern senators are Democrats, while 62% of Union state senators are Democrats. And 29% of southern members in the House are Democrats compared to 54% in states or territories that were part of the Union."

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#25744 Feb 19, 2014
Old Guy,

LBJ's own Liberal Democrats were the against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and it was the Republicans that got it passed and there is no way Southern Democrats changed their affiliation to Republican.

October 15, 2012

The Democratic Party's Long History of Racism

Ethel C. Fenig

A few examples:

It was Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Democrat, who founded the Ku Klux Klan.

Woodrow Wilson segregated Federal Buildings and jobs after 50 years of integration under largely Republican administrations.

It was the Democrat Party in the South that instituted Jim Crow Laws.

It was the Democrat Party in the South that instituted "separate but equal".

It was the Democrat Party in the South that supported the Ku Klux Klan.

It was George Wallace and the Democrat Party in the South that said "Segregation Forever".

It was Orval Faubus and the Democrat Party that wanted the Arkansas National Guard to enforce segregation, and Dwight Eisenhower, a Republican President, that sent the 101st Airborne to integrate the schools.

It was Bull Connor, a member of the Democrat National Committee, who turned the hoses on the marchers in Birmingham, and it was the Republicans who made up the majority that passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, over the filibuster of such Democrat paragons as William Fulbright and Al Gore Sr.- and Grand Kleagle Byrd.

(And no, the Dixiecrats didn't join the Republican Party - most of them remained Democrats.)

It was the Democrats who kept Grand Kleagle Byrd in the party.

It was Democrats who called General Colin Powell a "house N-word".

It was Democrats who called Condi Rice - who grew up with and knew the little girls in Birmingham who were blown up, by Democrats - an "Aunt Jemima" and ran cartoons of her with fat lips doing Hattie McDaniel riffs.

It was Democrats, or at least Obama supporters, who called Stacy Dash a hundred different racist names for daring to leave the Democrat plantaion.(sic) It's the Democrats who hold annual dinners honoring Andrew Jackson, who owned slaves and who orchestrated the Removal, the Trail of Tears, the near genocide of several of the Indian Nations.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/10/t...

Lyndon Johnson, The N Word, and the Concept of the Democrat Plantation

“These N?groes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”—LBJ

http://commonsenseconspiracy.com/2012/10/lynd...
Canton

Canton, OH

#25745 Feb 19, 2014
mutt wrote:
<quoted text>
Is that different than a liberal woman killing her children because the democrat party tells her she can? You can keep citing instances of so-called Christians or republicans doing things that go against what the bible or the republican platform says, but all you're showing is that those people didn't adhere to what the group supports. The democrat platform, on the other hand, supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose. The right to murder is in your party's platform.
I bet there have never been a Christian Republican that got an abortion...except for my cousin. Also, with that whole right to murder thing, you might want to take that up with the Supreme Court. Good thing when "God's President" Bush was in office, and the GOP had the majority in the Supreme Court, they did away with the abortion that is never mentioned in the Bible...right? Read a neat article where they found the skeletons of hundreds of fetuses in the sewers of Jerusalem from the time Jesus supposedly was around. Wonder why he made no mention of hookers tossing their babies in the sewers as being wrong? Just like how he witnessed hundreds if not thousands of crucifixions in his life and had to walk down a road lined with people crucified for stirring up things in the city...followed by him entering the city and immediately stirring things up. Suicide by cop, I think the term is called these days. You can save your whole "not a real Christian" gig you guys always run to when one of you gets caught. There is no magic switch on people who dedicated their lives to being Christian, that suddenly makes them "not Christian" when they are exposed as being monstrosities. I think my examples of Christians doing vile and murderous acts in the face of your evil prairie dog story about sums it up. VOID.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25746 Feb 19, 2014
Class wrote:
I am "Happy to see everyone" is starting to see who is who on this site...they are too ashamed to use their names because they want run out of this this town...by 95% of everyone. You are trying to get a point to two Logo Atheist.!!!
...
You are a nutball and nobody is trying to hide some great atheist conspiracy. Take me for example. I, like the founders of this nation, am a Deist.(Also see no sign of Jesus anywhere in sight) Christians hi-jacked this nation and are trying to twist the intentions of our nation's founders to match their Dominionist agenda. Luckily, their corporate oil sponsors throwing money hand over fist against Obama, wasn't enough to stifle the true will of the American people.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25747 Feb 19, 2014
mutt wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. That's why he thought a number of presidents -- democrat and republican alike, from WWI on -- were war criminals. He was very similar to Bill Ayers, who was militant, anti-govt, and anti-war, and felt certain presidents should be charged with war crimes.
Another failed attempt by you to slander an entire group because of the actions of one. You're a joke.
Oh lil' poochie. You must have missed these obvious quotes from your Conservative hero. You know, the ones you hear Tea Party members spewing all the time...

"The government is afraid of the guns people have because they have to have control of the people at all times. Once you take away the guns, you can do anything to the people. You give them an inch and they take a mile. I believe we are slowly turning into a socialist government. The government is continually growing bigger and more powerful and the people need to prepare to defend themselves against government control" -Timothy McVeigh

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

North-Georgetown Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Doggie Delight (Dec '13) 13 hr TeresaB988 2
Ashlin Faulkerson (Nov '11) Wed chandra hakes 7
OH Who do you support for Treasurer in Ohio in 2010? (Oct '10) Aug 20 Marvin Levels 188
Joey (Joseph) Cramton (Jan '12) Aug 16 asdl 14
OH Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Ohio in 2... (Oct '10) Aug 2 gary 2,230
josh newman Aug 1 curious4 1
centerville Jul '14 Zappa 2
•••
•••
•••

North-Georgetown Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

North-Georgetown People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

North-Georgetown News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in North-Georgetown
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••