WASHINGTON, DC - Conservative Christian leaders are releasing a declaration and warning today on what they're calling "moral issues of great concern." Chuck Colson, founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries, helped draft the Manhattan Declaration, which affirms the sanctity of human life, marriage as the union of one man and one woman, religious liberty, and freedom of conscience. Where those values are threatened, the document endorses civil disobedience under some circumstances.
Organizers of today's official release say the Manhattan Declaration sends "a clear and strong call to Christians" and "a warning to civil authorities."
They say it's been signed by more than 125 evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox Christian leaders. We conservative Americans have been standing on the sideline way to long. We need to organize and protest and right letters like the liberals did. We need to keep the peace but speak with boldness and without fear. You on the left better get ready because the Christians are coming.
I think its time to start killing christians. I hope they do have riots so we can put them all in prison and torture them. christians are the enemy and they need to be treated like the terrorists. I'd like to piss on those people so they pray for their god. Don't you agree JoeC and BruceF?
ReplyDeleteNo, I don't agree we should kill anyone.
ReplyDeleteI am certainly not going to advocate the death of anyone. Nice try though. Wonder which conservative was behind that one?
ReplyDeletemy only problem with them is they seem to want to restrict freedoms, which goes against what i feel the country is about. Why do they hate america? What type of people want to add restrictions of freedoms to the constitution instead of gurantees?
Anon if that is your real name, are one sick puppy. Joe what freedoms have the Christians taken away from you? I know we want to take away you right to kill someone,the right to take a persons property as your own,the right to marry same sex(never was a right to begin with),the right to socialize everything in govt,the right to NAMBLA young kids,the right to walk around naked,the right that there should be two sets of laws one for conservatives and one for liberals?
ReplyDeleteAnon said,
ReplyDelete"christians are the enemy and they need to be treated like the terrorists"
JoeC said,
"my only problem with them is they seem to want to restrict freedoms, which goes against what i feel the country is about. Why do they hate america?"
Once again,liberals misplace labels? Take the two quotes and you are defining muslims - NOT CHRISTIANS.
You are right Christopher.
ReplyDeleteChris, i was being sarcastic with that comment. I think the attempt to define marriage constitutionally is a restriction of freedom, but thats me. Just because years of discrimination and homophobia has been accepted and part of our countries dogma doesn't mean they shouldn't have had those rights.
ReplyDeleteWhile marriage is to many christians something invovling the christian religion, its forms exist in many different cultures, invovling many religions and non-religous people alike, and needs to be seen as such.
Don't get me wrong, i don't automatically oppose christians, as i am very interested in the liberation theology of South America. I'm not sure if your familiar with it. One of the past leaders, Dom Helder once defined it so simply, "when i fed the poor they called me a saint. When i asked why there are poor they called me a communist."
I guess in God We Trust according to LIBS is a Threat to the Country. OUR poor Misinformed Fore Fathers putting the Word GOD in the Constitution and other Documents on Numerous Occassions,What were they THINKING? Our Buildings in Washington D C including the Supreme Court have the 10 Commandments on them!
ReplyDeleteSeems to me and its just this OLD mans Opinion but this Nation under GOD started a downward trend when Supreme Court took GOD out of the Schools. God was replaced by LIBERALISM and hows that working out?
If I remember my History classes(do they still teach History in Schools) We fought the British in that little ole Revoluionary War to Get Freedom of Religion and From Exsessive TAXES. Sounds pretty close to NOW!
Chris - Did you see the angry mob of liberal protesters? It's UCLA, so it has to be assumed that they are liberal. One person refers to college as "public education", I suppose that a college education will be the next "Right" to be bankrolled by taxpayers, after health care and housing and food. The video that I found was taken down, but here is a link to an article. I hope those liberal nutbags don't hurt anyone, they can seriously become unhinged and dangerous.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9C2OPP80&show_article=1
More SEIU shenanigans. http://www.breitbart.tv/bury-them-fresno-homecare-workers-describe-seiu-threats/
ReplyDeleteChris - Conservative Teacher nails it again:
ReplyDeletehttp://aconservativeteacher.blogspot.com/2009/11/business-is-personal.html
Business is Personal
On an episode of the NBC show The Office, the intern Ryan betrays the boss Micheal, and in his defense, he says "It was just business, it wasn't personal." Micheal replies back "Business is personal."
Business is personal. In the United States, it means that I can make a personal decision to buy a good, and a seller can make a personal decision to sell a good. We both mutually and freely arrive at this point. We both gain something they want, and what each side wants is a personal decision that they are making. No one forces anyone to make this exchange, it is done purely based on personal reasons. It doesn't matter if you are selling paper or buying a hamburger, the exchange is a personal one. Under a capitalistic system, business thrives, and business is personal, thus personal relationship thrive.
Ryan didn't understand that, and that's why he never made any sales. He thought business was some sort of system, full of buzzwords and gimmicks, and that business could be managed and planned into success. He is antisocial and does not like people and does not like to be personal with people, and that's why he doesn't understand business and does not make any sales.
Today on the radio I heard that Stefanie Spielman, wife of NFL and Ohio State star Chris Spielman, has died after a lengthy battle with breast cancer. She was only 42.
The government wants to encourage women to delay getting breast exams until the age of 50. The reason for this is that it costs money to run these exams, and the government wants to save some money on the 'system'. To the government, business is not personal, and the government does not care if women like Stefanie Spielman live or die. She was first diagnosed with cancer at the age of 30- that is 20 years before the government 'recommends' screening. After beating cancer the first time, she had several more kids and did great things for another dozen years before finally losing the long battle.
But if the government had its way, it would not have paid for all of those costly operations, paid for all of those costs tests, not have paid for all of those costs drugs, and given up on her after her third or fourth recurrence of breast cancer. She was a 'cost on the system', and not a person. She was just a number or a statistic, like the Jews were to Hitler, and not really a person.
Business, including health insurance and medical coverage, is personal. It is a personal decision between two consenting adults who decide on a mutually agreeable price point at which to buy insurance and at which to sell insurance. Once the government gets involved, it is no longer a personal decision, but rather an impersonal decision, and will lead to personal tragedies. We must fight to keep our decisions about goods and services we buy in our hands, and not in the hands of impersonal big government.
All business is, and always should remain, personal.
Make sure you visit the link, for links to the various stories:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2009/11/a_bad_week_for.html
A Bad Week for the Cult
Posted by Gregory of Yardale at November 21, 2009 8:33 AM
The last few days have not been good for the People's Temple of Hope and Change, nor for its charismatic leader, whom many members regard as a god incarnate.
Chairman Zero returned from Asia having accomplished nothing except looking like a jackass for bowing to the Emperor of Japan
Chairman Zero's budget deficit just for the month of October, at $127 billion, was larger than the deficit for the entire 2007 Fiscal Year (the last budget authored by a Republican president and Congress.)
Chairman Zero's Attorney General was revealed to be an idiot when he couldn't name a single case where an enemy combatant captured on a battlefield had been given a trial in a civilian court.
Chairman Zero promised the world that Khalid Sheik Mohammed would receive a fair trial, while promising Americans there could be no other outcome to that trial but conviction and execution. (Ponder the Stalinist quality of that statement for a moment.)
The "hockey stick" chart was revealed to be a fake when emails between Global Warming scienticians revealed they were deliberately manipulating the data to "prove" global warming; one scientician instructing another to fudge the data in order to "hide the decline" in global temperatures.(Thanks TGC for the better link)
A probably-soon-to-be-fired Inspector General revealed that Chairman Zero's Tax Cheat Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner used TARP money as a private slush fund to bail out his old buddies at AIG, Wachovia, and Goldman Sachs.
It was also revealed that $6.4 Billion in Stimulus money was sent to congressional districts that don't exist.
By the end of the week, Chairman Zero's silly little cult was so desperate for a distraction they were hyping a fake story about Sarah Palin getting booed at a book signing.
Hope and Change, or Dope and Chains?
Obama tripled the national deficit his first year in office and he’s off to a record-setting start in fiscal year 2010.
ReplyDeleteDespite the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Hurricane Katrina, the Clinton Recession he inherited, and the 9-11 attacks, President Bush brought down the national budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007.
On July 11, 2006, the Bush Administration announced they were revising midyear budget estimates. They changed their projections after they discovered that greater than expected tax revenues would drop the deficit below 300 billion dollars. Budget Director Rob Portman drove home the message later that day telling reporters that this latest revision was proof that the administration’s tax cuts were working.
This wasn’t a one time event. During the Bush years, despite the 2000 Recession, the attacks on 9-11, the stock market scandals, Hurricane Katrina, and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration was able to reduce the budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007, a sixty percent drop. In 2004 the federal budget deficit was 412 billion dollars. In 2005 it dropped to 318 billion dollars. In 2006 the deficit dipped to 248 billion dollars. And, in 2007 it fell below 200 billion to 162 billion dollars. During the Bush years the average unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, the economy saw the strongest productivity growth in four decades and there was robust GDP growth.
Then again Bush cut taxes while Obama has decided to spend his way out of this recession.
Al, you know this nation had plenty of down times prior to the loss of prayer in school. But just for your knowledge the Supreme Court features stone sculptures of 18 lawgivers, from Hammurabi to John Marshall, are meant to signify the law's foundation in a stable society. Included is Moses with the Ten Commandments and the phrophet Muhammad.
ReplyDeleteSo i guess the supreme court wasn't trying to place the Ten Commandments in that high of a position.
John, I am beginning to see that you think of government the same way i think of big business, like perhaps insurance companies. I love how you used this sentence.
ReplyDelete"Once the government gets involved, it is no longer a personal decision, but rather an impersonal decision, and will lead to personal tragedies"
because that is simply what has been happening with insurance companies for years now. There are hundreds of thousands of cases were insurance companies made impersonal decisions that lead to personal tragedies.
So i'll be the pot you be the kettle and it'll all be fine.
Joey - First of all, that was an article as I referenced, so I don't understand how you can say "I love how you used this sentence". However that is merely semantics.
ReplyDeleteThere is a BIG difference between the government and business. The government FORCES me to take part, at the point of a gun! If I do not like a business or service, I can take my hard-earned money somewhere else. The government wants to force me to buy insurance, rather than perhaps saving my money in a low (or no) tax HSA!
Furthermore, insurance companies perform a service for a price. I do not blame insurance companies for the high cost of health care, as I am fully aware that they are a business. 3% profit is way down in industries, and if the insurance companies had as many rejections as the government's MEDICARE (the largest source of rejections) then they would probably be out of business. If these companies were so terrible, how would they even exist?!!
Did you ever read the article that I asked you to, way back in the day? http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care/ check it out, you will be enlightened.
And try to refrain from assuming or implying that I am in ANY way like you. You might be ON pot if you think the government is the answer. I do like though how you say "oh, let's keep it civil" and then you always have to add your little shot at the end, such as your pot and kettle statement. Do you want to keep it civil, or do you want to start taking shots again? Because I'm ready whenever you are little man.
John, Its not a shot if i suggest that both sides are hypocritical in some aspects. Thats all i did. I thought things were going fine and all of a sudden your en fuego. Relax. Thats the problem with partisan politics. You get all upset because we might have something in common. Shit we have more in common that not.
ReplyDeleteDude, get to know me you might like me. Just because my politics are different doesn't mean we are naturally enemies.
JoeC said,"Just because years of discrimination and homophobia has been accepted and part of our countries dogma doesn't mean they shouldn't have had those rights." What discrimination are yoiu talking about? I can't turn on a TV program without seeing it. Marriage is for the purpose of procreation and furthering our society.
ReplyDeleteJohn where are all those liberals that were crying when Bush ran up the deficit? No wonder why 62% of Americans can't stand self proclaimed liberals.
ReplyDeleteJoe said,"There are hundreds of thousands of cases were insurance companies made impersonal decisions that lead to personal tragedies." And if a decision the insurance companies made was wrong you can sue them. You will find it very hard to sue the govt. Come on Joe you know what reality is when it comes to what an insurance company can and can't do. I have HAP/HMO and with all my medical issues I haven't had one problem. One time they did turn me down for a procedure so I just asked for a letter from HAP telling me why they turned me down and to say that I didn't need the procedure the doctor said I needed. Guess what they did instead of writing the letter? You got it I had the procedure done and it worked. Everyone knows that Medicare and Medicaid are the two biggest insurances that turn down people.
ReplyDeleteInsurance Companys did and do TURN down Procedures BUT I beleive this Health Care Revamp could have been done in a MORE orderly way without INFRINGING on the 85% of people who are OK with their Insurance NOW!
ReplyDeleteThere was NO need to make this as EXTREME as it is and with Government in Control of Health Care, and eventually they will be, where is your CHOICE? Weather you want Insurance or not if you DO NOT get Government Coverage you CAN be FINED and PUT in JAIL!
Does anyone know WHY the Taxes on this Obama Care will start when the Bill is Passed yet the Bill itself does NOT take effect until 2013. Where is that tax money going and WHO will Control it POLITICANS and it will DISAPPEAR prior to 2013.I beleive they are using this 4 years of collecting Taxes to BRING down the ACTUAL Defecit this huge Program will make, Just Smoke and MIRRORS!
The University of Wisconsin-Whitewater has fallen under criticism for an e-mail announcing a prayer vigil.
ReplyDeleteSchool officials allowed the notice of a prayer vigil for Amy Krueger, a former student who was killed earlier this month in the Fort Hood massacre. A notice about the event was posted on the school's website, which caused confusion over who sponsored the occasion. Julaine Appling, president of Wisconsin Family Action, suspects the root of the problem is nothing more than an opposing organization's efforts to cause trouble.
"What you have is Freedom From Religion Foundation using its normal bullying and intimidating tactics," she explains. "The U.W.-Whitewater has done nothing wrong in letting students know about an event that is student-led to honor and to pray for the family of a victim from the Fort Hood shooting. Freedom from Religion is once again looking for a fight."
The nontheistic Foundation has a history of mailing threatening letters to government bodies nationwide over such things as prayer before meetings, although court rulings say that prayer is allowed to take place. In this case, it claims that the university violated its own rules as a public university by inviting students to pray, and that it further should have changed the "prayer vigil" to a "memorial service."
However, considering past court rulings, Appling says, "I would trust that school officials will not be intimated by the neighborhood bully."
The Wisconsin Family Action president believes it is time for officials and organizations, along with levels of government and schools, to stand up to the Freedom From Religion Foundation.
Piss on all of you christians,bruce and joe. bruce and joe are dickfaces for not backing me on my last post. Herb was right about you joe you are a dipshit pervert.
ReplyDeleteAnon,you sound confused? 'piss on all Christians' and put liberals Bruce and Joe in there? Make-up your mind already!
ReplyDeleteBruce and Joe are CINO's (Christian In Name O nly).
If you wish to disparage liberals,go for it,but don't include them as Christians-they are far,far from it.
Conversly,if you wish to disparage Christians,go ahead,but do not include us as liberals as once again,far from it.
Joey - I told you once, and you can't seem to grasp it, so I guess I have to say it again: Don't ever ever insinuate that we have anything in common.
ReplyDeleteWhere is your proof that I am a hypocrite Joey? I know you and yours are hypocrites, I prove it all the time. How am I hypocritical Joey?
Thanks for the compliment that I am hot, but you can quit hitting on me. I'm pretty sure I don't like you, even if we DID agree on everything. I saw your behavior long ago on the OP, and I see how you treat others on there and on these other blogs. You fit right in with the liberals (that's not a compliment).
So my point is Joey, you need to stick with the topics at hand, stop making your little comments, and don't ever think I'm going to want to have a beer with you. I'm sure you have plenty of friends already, and I know I do. 'Kay?
Who cares if joe wants to bury his face in your ass john? It sounds to me like joes feelings are a little displaced.
ReplyDeleteChris, please don't label me a christian. I wouldn't want you to include me in your band of Pharicees.
ReplyDeleteJohn, lol...trust me i won't hit on you. You could let the hate go brother. I've seen and experienced how nasty you are, so its not like i am looking to be your friend.
As for how you are a hypocrite, your a conservative right? There's proof enough brother. Have a nice day.
But Joe you have no problem with your band of Sodamites. Once again Joe you are putting Christians below yourself. You must really think highly of yourself. I know you were talking to Christopher but I had to chime in. And Once again Joe calls a conservative a name without backing it with proof of that claim.
ReplyDeleteExactly Chris. "You are because I say you are", that is the liberal way. No proof, just emotion and lies. Nice "proof" Joey. Well I guess with that level of proof that you accept Joey, I can call you a racist, a homosexual, a bigot, a greedy, hypocritical pedophile. You're a liberal, after all, so there's proof enough. You have yourself a terrible day Joey. I'm not two-faced, you see, I say what I mean and I mean what I say. And I don't "hate" Joey, that's a strong word in my book. I don't like you, or what you stand for, but I don't "hate" anyone. But again, you liberals enjoy trying to project YOUR emotions and hatred on others. Bunch of nutbags.
ReplyDeleteThe association of the ancient city of Sodom with sexual depravity is of biblical origin. In the Book of Genesis (chapters 18-20), the Lord perceives Sodom and Gomorrah as places of grave sinfulness and seeks to discover whether this perception is really true before He destroys the inhabitants. Two angels (who have the appearance of humans) are sent to find out the reality of life in Sodom. After arriving in the city in the evening, the angels are invited - then urged strongly - by Lot (an upright man) to take refuge with his family for the night.
ReplyDelete4 But before they [the angels] lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: 5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them. 6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, 7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. 8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. 9 And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. 10 But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. 11 And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.
(Genesis 19:4-11, KJV)
To summarise the above account:
The men of the city of Sodom desired that Lot give them the two men so that they may "know them," which has been interpreted either to mean "interrogate" or "to engage in sexual intercourse." Lot refuses to hand them over, and (going outside) offers his two virgin daughters instead. This offer is refused, and after the men press upon Lot and come near to break down the door, the two angels draw Lot back into the house and shut the door. They cause blindness to come upon the men of the city, thus bringing safety to those within the house. Even in their blinded state, the men outside still try to gain entry to the house and continue until they become wearied. We see here the extent of either their depravity or lack of hospitality, depending upon how one interprets the verses.
Sodom is subsequently destroyed by a rain of sulfur and fire. From this biblical narrative, the word 'Sodomy' is derived. It has come to be synonymous with anal intercourse (particularly between two males) and sometimes also to describe human-animal sexual intercourse (also known as bestiality or zoophilia);[1] this is the primary meaning of the cognate German language word Sodomie.
Is Medicare the Real Target of ‘Health Care Reform?’
ReplyDeleteby Dr. Jane Orient
Nobody outside the inner halls of Congress really knows what’s going on in the negotiations on health care “reform. Every now and then, someone emerges from the formerly smoke-filled rooms and throws another 2,000 or so page “bill” out into the public and then disappears to continue talks to carve up one-sixth of the nation’s economy.
But we do know some of the unforgiving numbers. And we have reason to suspect that radical changes to Medicare Part E (as in Medicare for Everybody) is the real endgame, whatever the interim steps are called: public option, cooperatives, or mandated Insurance Exchanges.
We have the unmentionable truth that Medicare is insolvent. And the common dogma that Medicare is efficient, popular, and impregnable. Is it a Hegelian thesis and antithesis? With the synthesis being to throw the whole rest of the system, which is also allegedly bankrupting the country, into Medicare? Are our leaders stark, raving mad? Or diabolically clever?
The on-the-books public debt is around $12 trillion, and Congress needs to pass still another law to increase the debt limit. The annual deficit is close to, or even exceeds, 40% of expenditures, the point that some call the tipping point for hyperinflation.We’re not going to grow our way out of this, not with GDP already down 25%, compared to 2000, if calculated in euros.
Then there are the unfunded liabilities of Medicare and Social Security, about which former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker has been sounding the alarm for years. Estimates are as high as $100 trillion or more—orders of magnitude greater than any conceivable ability to pay.
So here we have a legal obligation to pay back the $12 trillion we have loaned out, much of it to overseas investors. And the moral obligation, backed by politicians’ full faith and credit, to soon-to-be-retiring Baby Boomers.
The Chinese and the Saudis have the industry and the oil we absolutely need to live. Not to mention the Chinese army, nuclear weapons, and missiles. American seniors have—the vote.
It is incontrovertibly true that seniors, especially of the Baby Boomer generation, have been taxed all their working lives to pay for their medical needs in retirement. Their money has gone—into the “lock box”? Wherever it is, it is in the form of IOUs. Whose IOUs will get paid first?
Americans have been robbed by the Medicare system, just like Bernie Madoff’s investors were, only in vastly greater amounts. And they are just as likely to get their full benefits from Medicare as investors are to get their money back from Madoff’s prison cell.
No politician, however, wants to default openly, not on his own watch. There’s the danger to his career, from a voter revolt. And when voting doesn’t work, and peaceful demonstrations don’t work, people could become very surly indeed—and worse possibilities loom.
So here’s the con: We put everybody into the comprehensively reformed system. We suck in huge amounts of new revenues, not called “taxes” but rather “premiums,” “penalties,” “fees,” “surcharges,” or “shared responsibility payments.” Since the thresholds aren’t indexed for inflation, the “responsibility” to “share” the load for other people’s needs migrates down the social scale as the dollar deteriorates. Remember, also, that current health care proposals envision the government collecting new revenue for several years before full benefits–i.e. costs–kick in. Its health care on a layaway plan. A neat trick to plug some budget holes without admitting it.
ReplyDeleteNow comes the allocation part. We make everybody dependent on the system: patients for their care, doctors for their livelihood, so everybody is in a cooperative mood. An inspiration from a consummate politician named Bismarck, also implemented by Lenin and Stalin. Is there any other way than promising “universal care” that politicians could get away with cutting hundreds of billions from expected Medicare expenditures?
We let politicians off the hook by delegating the key decisions to an appointed Federal Reserve-like agency.
We set up a “fair,” “evidence-based” system, with the apparently laudable goal of improving the overall health of society. No discrimination of course—“disparities” are to be eliminated.
Remember, however, that age discrimination is not “invidious.” Every 60-year-old was once 20. The “complete lives system” (a.k.a. “Reaper Curve”) favored by Ezekiel Emanuel is by this logic completely fair.
Here is what it means: people over age 65 would get 3.4 times less care than a 50-year-old. At present, however, spending on people over age 65 is about 3.1 times higher than for 50-year-olds (Uwe Reinhardt, Health Affairs November/December 2003). Under the Emanuel system, older people would get only about one-tenth as much care as they do now [1/(3.4 x 3.1)].
The elderly would not all be cut off at once. They would simply be placed in an overloaded boat with everybody else, with lower-priority people pitched overboard—one at a time.
No death panel is needed. The system simply ratchets down doctors’ pay to the minimum they will tolerate, then punishes those on the top end of the spending curve. It will know who they are because of intense electronic monitoring of everything. Rational rationing—“equitable redistribution”—will occur.
Key words include “universal” and “consensus.” With “everybody in, nobody out,” social hydraulics will occur. Pull one lever at the top, and everybody beneath it is complicit in the “hard” decisions.
Default? No, no. Just a change.
Great article Dr.Jane. We need as much info as we can get and your blog has it. It is really nice to have someone of your caliber posting on this blog.
ReplyDeleteAn new university study showed that liberals 794% more likely to stick things in their ass. That is just shy of 8 times more likely then conservatives. 86% of pediphiles are Democrats. This explains why liberals think everyone is sick like they are. Did anyone hear about some Obama supportes beating a retarded man for saying "Obama sucks" out loud? And in NV they threw shit on some protesters of the healthcare bill. The New Black Panther Party has grown by over 1 million members since Obama took office. Didn't they say the KK would be the group that got bigger. It hasn't happened to a major degree yet. And what is with these libtardes saying the world is ending on 12/21/2012? The libtardes are going to Pagan beliefs and saying we need to sacrifice human life to save Mother Earth(their god). What is wrong with these progressives? I visited here from Dr.Janes blog. This blog is all the rave. By the way Bruce Fealk is a has been in politics. No one wants anything to do with that man. He is a time bomb to the Democratic Party. Thank God he isn't one of ours.
ReplyDeleteNo I didn't hear about that stuff Ralph. I did however see the movie 2012 and it was awesome.
ReplyDeleteI thought 2012 sucked, but the SNL spoof was awesome.
ReplyDeleteRalph, 794% that is a lot of percent. Could you source that please? I wouldn't know what to type in on the google search page.
86 percent of pedos are democrats except for the rightwing ones huh???? The priests and pastors, the congressmen, the mayors, and all the rest of the right huh?
ReplyDeleteI'm sure Jim West and Mark Foley were democrats.
I do appreciate the homophobic percentages. you guys don't fear gays, you just keep track of who likes anal sex. strange thing to post if ya are okay with it. Besides i bet the Ma election has you up in arms now huh?
http://www.gaypolitics.com/2009/11/23/gop-candidate-for-mass-gov-picks-gay-running-mate/
And who can forget this ultraconservative journalist, ex-marine and gay escort Jeff Gannon/Jame Guckert
http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Uploads/Graphics/001-0915074056-JeffGannon.jpg
Joe I thought you said, "I do appreciate the homophobic percentages. you guys don't fear gays, you just keep track of who likes anal sex. strange thing to post if ya are okay with it. Besides i bet the Ma election has you up in arms now huh?" And then you post a web site that is "gaypolitics.com" and some other gay web sites. You didn't even know you were that strange guy that knew all the homoeratic web sites.BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ReplyDeleteBoy Joey, there you go disparaging the homosexuals again. What do you have against the gays Joey? I thought, as a liberal, you loved all the homos. Didn't you know that just because they are gay doesn't mean they are pedophiles. I bet the gays are really impressed with you insinuating that because they are gay they are pedophiles. More projecting Joey?
ReplyDeleteYou really seem to take those statistics personally. I don't see where you have any statistics that say anything different either. Just saying. Maybe the statistics are wrong, but so are your examples. Are you saying that priests, congressmen (and women) aren't Democrats? Having a tough time following your logic there Joey.
Chris, John, One day i am homophobic the next me and my child are gay. Could you and John make up your mind? And i found the link off of google.
ReplyDeleteNo i am not taking them personally, i am thinking they are the typicals lies that make the rightwing talking points. Thanks for your ass-umption there.
And no i am saying that their have been alot of Republicans who decided they liked little boys, like Spokane Mayor Jim West (R) and Congressman Mark Foley (R).
By the way neither of you let me know how you feel that a republican canidate for Govenor picked a openly gay running mate.