Ted Nugent: 'If Obama Becomes President, I'll Either Be Dead or in Jail'

[George- H- Scherff- Jr]

Ted Nugent violent anti-Obama message brings out all the Gun dangerous Conservatives like him hinting to kill Obama if he should win

[Mr Bully WoodZ Esquire]

VinceP wrote:

<quoted text> is that your pet names for your homies ? G, dre, cunta kinta ,cheetah ,buttons,treyvon? Curious george ? You mutts elected that mutt,so why don`t you just do us all a favor move back to africa,I hear there is a famine on and the lions eat the slow ones,so you stand no chance field hand..lmmfao!!!!!!!!!

Yo' pissface, those are pet names for all of yo' daddies ya' stupid monkey mutt. LOFL!!!!!

[Mr Bully WoodZ Esquire]

George- H- Scherff- Jr wrote:

Ted Nugent violent anti-Obama message brings out all the Gun dangerous Conservatives like him hinting to kill Obama if he should win

I hope those klan monkeys including Nugent would try it. That way the Secret Service can rid the world of a bunch of those racist bozos. LOFL!!!

[George- H- Scherff- Jr]

Mr Bully WoodZ Esquire wrote:

<quoted text>I hope those klan monkeys including Nugent would try it. That way the Secret Service can rid the world of a bunch of those racist bozos. LOFL!!!

They are powerful ebough to buy the SS, at least they did Nov 22 1963! THE 7M MANDATE//////////C-street house---------The fellowship foundation/////the council for national policy//////JBS/The CNP///// CNP/Rev Moon////// Pastor Worley ==========Pat Robertson===== Billy Graham----------Jerry Fallwell 9glad he has fallen)---------Rev Moon----------Tim LaHaye----------Dr. James Wickstrom-----C Peter Wagner----------R J Rushdoony ----------The Christian Right, Dominionism, and Theocracy”,------- Ed Kalnins=== Sarah Palin’s long-time church in Wasilla is one such congregation. The most clear-cut example of NAR dominionism is the so-called “Seven Mountains Mandate”, which holds that dominionist Christians should control the whole world by infiltrating and dominating the “Seven Mountains” of culture:(1) Business; (2) Government; (3) Media; (4) Arts and Entertainment; (5) Education; (6) Family; and (7) Religion.

Dominionism is not a left-wing fantasy

A number of authors made charges similar to or derived from Joe Carter, web editor of First Things, who wrote:“The term ["dominionism"] was coined in the 1980s by [sociologist Sara] Diamond and is never used outside liberal blogs and websites. No reputable scholars use the term for it is a meaningless neologism that Diamond concocted for her dissertation.”

However, at the same time Diamond was working on her dissertation – published as the book Spiritual Warfare in 1989 – evangelical writer/researcher Albert James Dager was taking similarly critical aim, though from a different direction. In 1986 and ’87, he published a multi-issue essay “Kingdom Theology” in the publication Media Spotlight. In that text he also used the terms “Kingdom Now” or “Dominion” Theology. In 1990, Dager, too, published a book, Vengeance Is Ours: The Church in Dominion.

[Aquarius-WY]

George- H- Scherff- Jr wrote:

<quoted text>They are powerful ebough to buy the SS, at least they did Nov 22 1963! THE 7M MANDATE//////////C-street house---------The fellowship foundation/////the council for national policy//////JBS/The CNP///// CNP/Rev Moon////// Pastor Worley ==========Pat Robertson===== Billy Graham----------Jerry Fallwell 9glad he has fallen)---------Rev Moon----------Tim LaHaye----------Dr. James Wickstrom-----C Peter Wagner----------R J Rushdoony ----------The Christian Right, Dominionism, and Theocracy”,------- Ed Kalnins=== Sarah Palin’s long-time church in Wasilla is one such congregation. The most clear-cut example of NAR dominionism is the so-called “Seven Mountains Mandate”, which holds that dominionist Christians should control the whole world by infiltrating and dominating the “Seven Mountains” of culture:(1) Business; (2) Government; (3) Media; (4) Arts and Entertainment; (5) Education; (6) Family; and (7) Religion.
Dominionism is not a left-wing fantasy
A number of authors made charges similar to or derived from Joe Carter, web editor of First Things, who wrote:“The term ["dominionism"] was coined in the 1980s by [sociologist Sara] Diamond and is never used outside liberal blogs and websites. No reputable scholars use the term for it is a meaningless neologism that Diamond concocted for her dissertation.”
However, at the same time Diamond was working on her dissertation – published as the book Spiritual Warfare in 1989 – evangelical writer/researcher Albert James Dager was taking similarly critical aim, though from a different direction. In 1986 and ’87, he published a multi-issue essay “Kingdom Theology” in the publication Media Spotlight. In that text he also used the terms “Kingdom Now” or “Dominion” Theology. In 1990, Dager, too, published a book, Vengeance Is Ours: The Church in Dominion.

So?

[theotherredneck]

dogmatic wrote:

<quoted text> rightwingers don't believe in "our" country as in a country of people. For them the country is run, ruled and FOR the money. At least the crooks on the left care more about people.

President Obama is rich. Not just a little rich either, we're talking full-on, filthy, dirty, stinking RICH. Super-duper MEGA EFFING rich. OIL-SHEIK rich.

All the leading Democratic Senators are filthy stinking rich. As is every single Democratic Representative.

Same with the left-wing Supreme Court justices and every single Progressive Czar and Cabinet member in the Obama administration.

What in God's name makes you think they care about anything other than poor peoples' VOTE and the power(money) that comes with it!?

Just like the rightwingers(sic).

For Christ's sake--grow the hell up!

dogmatic wrote:

<quoted text>Things are always better for the poor and middle class when democrats are in office.

If by "better" you mean "able to get slightly more free stuff in exchange for their vote", then yeah--things are "better" for the poor when the D's are in. If you mean things change so that poor people are able to raise themselves up and earn a comfortable living or even--God forbid-- become "rich", then not so much.

And as far as things being "better" for the middle class--I'd love to hear how you've arrived at that!

dogmatic wrote:

<quoted text>And better for the richest when the republicans are in office.

Then why have some of the richest individuals and organizations done so much to put the Democrats in power? And why are so many extremely wealthy people spending so much to make sure they STAY in power? I won't waste any effort compiling a list.(Unless of course you ask for one--then I'd be happy to.) PLEASE ask.

In the 2012 election, the Obama campaign spent $381,000,000.00 on adds alone. Where do you think that money came from? The POOR? Don't think so. The MIDDLE CLASS? Guess again. Keep working on it--if you're honest with yourself, you'll figure it out eventually. When you do figure out who paid for Obama's re-election(hint: the answer rhymes with ditch truckers), ask yourself what they expect in return.

dogmatic wrote:

<quoted text>The britches-shitting horndog nUGENT doesn't give a shit about anyone. Only about money and himself. Which is his godd given right.

What about YOU my friend?

Every other sentence out of your mouth refers to money in one way or another.

[Asscendo Tuum]

dogmatic wrote:

Dear estranged uncle ted,
Shut up and play your guitar!
Thank you

On second thought.... Uncle Ted.... just shut the fcuk up and lose the guitar (you couldn't play it anyways). AND STAY THE FCUK OUT OF CANADA. We don't need you or your types tell US how to manage OUR wild life.

[theotherredneck]

Son of SickNTired wrote:

<quoted text>
Because the wage that the elitist rich are willing to pay so they don't have to do it themselves isn't enough to live on.

The "elitist rich" are trying to pay the least possible amount, that's true. But they don't get to decide what that amount is--the employee decides that. The least possible amount is equal to the minimum amount the EMPLOYEE is willing to do work for.

I owned a small business a few years ago. I had four employees. Three were unpaid family members and one was a paid hourly worker. I put $1120 dollars in a payroll account every two weeks. After the Federal, State and local governments took their cut, my employee got to take $403 dollars home to his family.

Now I felt like Stephen was worth a lot more than $403 dollars a week. In fact, I would like to have been able to pay him $1100 a week. And if not for the government I could have.

I paid myself an average of $250 a week after taxes, so my employee actually made more than me.

So two questions:

One: Because I once paid an employee to do something "so I didn't have to do it myself", am I considered a member of your "elitist rich"?

And Two: As far as my employee being ripped off--who's more the bad guy here, me or the government?

[whooaa]

This title has been wrongly stated. It was supposed to be "If Nugent isn't wearing his diapers when he craps his pants again, he brown eye will either become more brown, or his hemorroids could die".

[kev]

Is uncle Ted still on suicide watch?

[Mr Big Bad John Roberts]

I was betting Nugent would be dead. LOFL!!!

[American Indian]

Mr Big Bad John Roberts wrote:

I was betting Nugent would be dead. LOFL!!!

:
My friend, crusty old man with long hair die after first record.

[Mr Big Bad John Roberts]

American Indian wrote:

<quoted text>
:
My friend, crusty old man with long hair die after first record.

Looks like like that crusty old man was half right about where his dumb butt would be when Mr. Obama gets re-elected.