So your anti war?

[satellite66]

If your anti the war on terror here are some of your peers in action. I'm sure this will make you swell with pride.





Click to veiw this WARNING foul language in pic

[swabjocky]

Bummer, the pictures didn't come through and the link doesn't work. Ah well.

[satellite66]

They got removed. There were two pics and a link to a third that was off color in language. Don't know what happened. I think the site where I saw them removed them.

[Marlin]

I can't even pull up the basic Site, Sat. Either they are having problems or the Site itself is down.

[satellite66]

I can't either. The pics will make your blood boil. I can't even imagine Americans doing what they were doing. This country is in deep trouble with folks like this around.

[Pat Hurley]

Courageous liberals. They burn our flag, a soldier in effigy, and curse God... all while wearing masks to hide their identity.

I can distill my conclusions about a lifetime of witnessing liberal insanity, in just this way...

- liberals don't work as much or as hard as conservatives do. How often do you see conservatives protesting in large groups? In the middle of the day? In the middle of a work week?
- liberals are foul mouthed
- liberals are godless, but not without religion. Abortion, gay rights, and environmentalism are their religions
- liberals are cowards
- liberals are full of rage
- liberals are frequently ignorant of history
- liberals really hate democracy
- liberals embrace deviancy, call it normal, and jealously guard it
- liberals believe that evil is good and good is evil
- liberals love government because it's the only way to foist their beliefs on others with people having the least ability possible to resist
- liberals hate guns and gun owners because they want a defenseless populus with no ability to resist
- liberals hate free speech. Free speech is what exposes their lunacy best.
- liberals are filled with guilt
- liberals are the biggest bigots of them all
- liberals see color and ethnicity everywhere. They are the antithesis of MLK's call for a colorblind society where each person is judged only on the content of their character.
- liberals are pessimists
- liberals are joyless
- liberals are liars
- liberals hate free market capitalism
- liberals love extreme environmentalism because it has the capacity to stifle and slow free market capitalism, and give government more power over people
- liberals are guided by emotion and reject reason
- liberals want to be judged on their intentions, not their results
- liberals are married to their ideology and are deaf and blind to the misery that ensues from their beliefs being made public policy
- liberals are consistenly ranked among the worst Presidents of all time
- liberals HATE America and are embarrassed to be an American

I could go on and on; but you get the drift. They MUST be stopped my friends. It starts with you and me.

[Adam686]

Wow! That is bad. That looks more like something you see from the terrrorists overseas. Those are not liberals. Those are over the top crazy people. With every group you have your extremists, like your abortion clinic bombers/shooters. Most liberals I know are only liberal about a few things but conservative on a lot of other things. If I ever met someone with all the traits Pat spoke of I think I would want to put that person out of their misery.

[satellite66]

Those are the people the cut and run dems cater to and curry favor with. Those twisted SOBs are the modern dem party base. Sad to say.

[catfish83861]

To adam686, I must admit that I am probably a heck of a lot older than you. Maybe not nearly as smart as you. But I will assure you that in my opinion,now this is just my opinion mind you.that Pat is a he** of a lot more right than you may realize. I and I don't think Pat (although Pat can and does speak for himself) is stating that every person that believes in abortion,or every person that doesn't believe exactly as Pat does is considered a liberal zealot. In my opinion liberals are very much just exactly as Pat describes them.Those included but restricted to are the Hanoi Janes,Ted Kennedy,Chuck Schumer,Harry Reid,Hillary Clinton, those are the type that believe we do not need to think for ourselves.I would go so far as to say they honestly believe that we the people elected them to think for us,when in fact they are supposed to be elected to do OUR BIDDING.Not what the hell they want to do.I don't remember the person who stated that if you don't learn from the mistakes of history, you will repeat them was. I am sure though they were right.If the liberals continue their assault on almost every belief this country was founded on we are in for some hard time.I am not here to insult your liberal friends nor their ideas or morals. I merely say, They are more wrong than right in almost every case. Now isn't America great! What other country can you see individuals burning the national emblem and one of Americas finest in effigy. Who do you think gave them that opportunity? That's right , the men and women (sometimes just kids themselves) that fought and often died. Just so some ideas even if they are exceptionally distasteful to what I call an American. They still have the right to do so.Just so you know, this old man is really a jerk if I see someone exercising his right to burn our flag.Shucks I haven't ever been locked up in Jail. Wanna see how fast I might get that way. BURN MY FLAG! Last statement not meant at you 686. This is just this old coots rant. Forum not responsible for my ranting.
catfish83861

[Adam686]

Thanks for being so kind to me Catfish. I was expecting to be gutted for my comment (There is still time) or any comment I make here that does not reply "Go Republicans!!". I was in 4th grade when Clinton got elected so my personal experience with US presidents is limited to two people Clinton and Bush. My family has to this day voted republican but I had to break away from that due to my own experiences(however limited they may be). This is where perspective is all the difference in the world. From my perspective when polls tell a president unequivocally that America does not agree what he is doing and he continues doing it that fits perfectly with what you described as elected officials not doing our bidding. But that is just my perspective, obviously you and others have a different one and I respect that.

[catfish83861]

Adam686, The more time you spend on this forum and the more you watch people you may want even more Republicans in office. Do I agree with President Bush all the time.Absolutely not, not even close.Would I pack my bag and go back to military service,why of course I would.Would I volunteer for duty in Iraq. Well I haven't gotten any smarter than I was in 1966 when I signed a waiver to go to Viet Nam. I am a soul surviving son so other wise I would have stayed stateside my entire enlistment. Would I have liked Kerry or Gore as president.HELL NO!!!!! Sometimes its not who you vote for but who you vote against. If you don't mind big government telling you what to do and when to do it then a Socialist Government is for you. I sure as he** will not be standing beside you though.Get as much education as you can,I don't care if its a College or a trade school. You can't go wrong with getting a better education. Just watch out for those very liberal college professors. For a dumb country guy with no education I have done pretty well by voting mostly Republican but sometimes Democrat. Those Democrat votes were for local officials that I actually knew the individual-not just what they said on the campaign trail . catfish

[satellite66]

If you really want to open your eyes to what we are headed for in this country read Somebodys got to say it by Neal Boortz. He really nails it.

[Pat Hurley]

Originally Posted by Pat Hurley

Courageous liberals. They burn our flag, a soldier in effigy, and curse God... all while wearing masks to hide their identity.

I can distill my conclusions about a lifetime of witnessing liberal insanity, in just this way...

- liberals don't work as much or as hard as conservatives do. How often do you see conservatives protesting in large groups? In the middle of the day? In the middle of a work week?
- liberals are foul mouthed
- liberals are godless, but not without religion. Abortion, gay rights, and environmentalism are their religions
- liberals are cowards
- liberals are full of rage
- liberals are frequently ignorant of history
- liberals really hate democracy
- liberals embrace deviancy, call it normal, and jealously guard it
- liberals believe that evil is good and good is evil
- liberals love government because it's the only way to foist their beliefs on others with people having the least ability possible to resist
- liberals hate guns and gun owners because they want a defenseless populus with no ability to resist
- liberals hate free speech. Free speech is what exposes their lunacy best.
- liberals are filled with guilt
- liberals are the biggest bigots of them all
- liberals see color and ethnicity everywhere. They are the antithesis of MLK's call for a colorblind society where each person is judged only on the content of their character.
- liberals are pessimists
- liberals are joyless
- liberals are liars
- liberals hate free market capitalism
- liberals love extreme environmentalism because it has the capacity to stifle and slow free market capitalism, and give government more power over people
- liberals are guided by emotion and reject reason
- liberals want to be judged on their intentions, not their results
- liberals are married to their ideology and are deaf and blind to the misery that ensues from their beliefs being made public policy
- liberals are consistenly ranked among the worst Presidents of all time
- liberals HATE America and are embarrassed to be an American

I could go on and on; but you get the drift. They MUST be stopped my friends. It starts with you and me.

For ADAM686...

Rosie O'Donnell, Jane Fonda, Jimmy Carter, Barbra Streisand, Ramsay Clark, Jesse Jackson, Barney Frank, Teddy Kennedy, Noam Chomsky, Hillary Clinton, Keith Olberman, et al., are Democrat LIBERALS as described above.

Joe Lieberman, Sam Nunn, Evan Bayh, John F. Kennedy, Henry "Scoop" Jackson, Harry Truman, FDR, and others, are/were Democrat moderates or conservatives. They would not be described above.

The only reason you have not encountered liberals as described above yet, is only because of your age. Give it some time. If you want to accellerate the process, stop by your local college and hang out in the faculty lounge (THERE ARE A FEW EXCEPTIONS... PISTOL, for instance) for a half hour. Be ready for shock and horror. Don't want to go there? Try City Hall. Or look up a local union and go talk to their leaders. Better yet, stop by a local Starbuck's and hoist a latte with one of their erudite employees. Wait, here's the best idea yet.. stop by Planned Parenthood and ask for a chat with the Director. I guarantee you will be exposed to the liberals I described, although I'd recommend a hot shower (using anti-bacterial soap)and a de-lousing when you're done.

I'm a fairly young buck (41), but there are some very wise and learned ladies and gents here, older and more wise than I am, who will testify that I have not exaggerated hard core liberals to you. Be warned; they're a viscious, nasty, illogical, hateful, and emotional bunch.

Good luck, and please report to us your own findings.

[catfish83861]

Originally Posted by Pat Hurley

For ADAM686...

I'm a fairly young buck (41), but there are some very wise and learned ladies and gents here, older and more wise than I am, who will testify that I have not exaggerated hard core liberals to you. Be warned; they're a viscious, nasty, illogical, hateful, and emotional bunch.

Good luck, and please report to us your own findings.

Pat, although you and I may and probably do agree on many items,I am not sure this young man is a hard core liberal. Maybe leaning that way, but haven't you and I changed our minds on more than one item we felt extremely important to us at one time or the other? I know I have!
Adam686, by your screen name I would guess that you either own a pistol or desire to own one. (Heck maybe you used that screen name to make us think you don't mind gun ownership, I just don't know) I do know this. I would respectfully request that you change your screen name (or use this one) and go up on one of the liberal sites here on the web. Say something good (even if you hate to do so) about President Bush,also ask why they (the liberal media) is so distraught about private gun ownership.Ask how they think things will turn out in Iraq if we just pull out right now? Be direct with your questions,remember direct,not disrespectful. Let me know how you fare. You can email me using the email contact form here on the forum.Or if you prefer just post your findings on the forum,after all even though you are young.Remember that a guy or girl your age has at the very least provided you this opportunity to say what you think.SOME GAVE ALL!! God Bless our Uniformed Men and Women.By their sacrifice,we remain free! Oh Yea I'm 60 years old. Bob Sisson

[Bruce FLinch]

Originally Posted by Adam686

Wow! That is bad. That looks more like something you see from the terrrorists overseas. Those are not liberals. Those are over the top crazy people. With every group you have your extremists, like your abortion clinic bombers/shooters. Most liberals I know are only liberal about a few things but conservative on a lot of other things. If I ever met someone with all the traits Pat spoke of I think I would want to put that person out of their misery.

Those are LIBERAL EXTREMISTS. Good thing I wasn't in the crowd to witness that. I think I would have escalated the action, for all the smiling
Libs, who stood around & watched

Adam686, I think you are a little wiser than Catfish may have given you credit for. People w/ the traits Pat mentioned , do deserve to be put out of their misery. Maybe I'm an Extremist, too!

So where was this protest at, Mike?

[catfish83861]

Bruce, I hope that anything I stated about adam686 could not be construed to imply that I believe he is not intelligent,far beyond that. I feel he is probably extremely intelligent,even stated that he is probably a lot smarter than I am. Which may not take a long reach .I merely wanted to point out that conservatives are generally more likely to listen to an opposing point of view than liberals.. Feel free to correct me if I am incorrect. Thanks catfish

[JohnK3]

Like most generalizations, it covers a broad spectrum of people and does not exactly describe any but a few extremists.

HOWEVER, it does sum up the general view of the average moveon.org, etc moonbat. It accurately describes those mentioned previously (Ted Kennedy, et al) as well as "great" liberal "thinkers" like Noam Chomsky.

Here's something to consider: Often, a liberal will point to mistakes that America has made as evidence of its "evil." Beware of those examples, as they usually don't put the action in context, nor do they consider how others have behaved or a multitude of other attributes of America. An example of this is when a liberal starts bemoaning how horribly we've treated American Indians in the past.

Yes, the U.S. has behaved reprehensibly towards the indigenous population of this continent. No argument there. However, when looked at in the context of the times, coupled with the behavior of every other society/nation towards indigenous peoples standing in the way of colonization, you'll see that the U.S. is no more guilty than any other society, *including several of the indigenous populations it displaced/destroyed.*

Most "conservatives" would simply have us stop engaging in the negative behavior and punish the individuals responsible for the actions. Most "liberals" would have us engage in a wide variety of "reparation" type behavior and self-punishment in order to somehow achieve "atonement" for our "sins." Sins, by the way, which few currently alive are guilty of. In addition, the "sins" are supposed to be atoned for in perpetuity. We can never put it completely behind us and move on, because we're always revisiting the mistakes of the past. *That's* why I have a problem with most liberal "thinking." It's anti-progressive. It's actively regressive. Yet, most liberals will happily plant the "progressive" label on themselves, as they seem to think that the label is all that matters, not the action.

The same thing happened with the 'liberal' label. Liberal used to be all about individual freedom, reduced government, shake the yokes of the masters off and be your own master. Now, it appears to mean "sexually-liberal" (libertine) and government-as-nanny.

[Pat Hurley]

Originally Posted by JohnK3

Like most generalizations, it covers a broad spectrum of people and does not exactly describe any but a few extremists.

HOWEVER, it does sum up the general view of the average moveon.org, etc moonbat. It accurately describes those mentioned previously (Ted Kennedy, et al) as well as "great" liberal "thinkers" like Noam Chomsky.

Here's something to consider: Often, a liberal will point to mistakes that America has made as evidence of its "evil." Beware of those examples, as they usually don't put the action in context, nor do they consider how others have behaved or a multitude of other attributes of America. An example of this is when a liberal starts bemoaning how horribly we've treated American Indians in the past.

Yes, the U.S. has behaved reprehensibly towards the indigenous population of this continent. No argument there. However, when looked at in the context of the times, coupled with the behavior of every other society/nation towards indigenous peoples standing in the way of colonization, you'll see that the U.S. is no more guilty than any other society, *including several of the indigenous populations it displaced/destroyed.*

Most "conservatives" would simply have us stop engaging in the negative behavior and punish the individuals responsible for the actions. Most "liberals" would have us engage in a wide variety of "reparation" type behavior and self-punishment in order to somehow achieve "atonement" for our "sins." Sins, by the way, which few currently alive are guilty of. In addition, the "sins" are supposed to be atoned for in perpetuity. We can never put it completely behind us and move on, because we're always revisiting the mistakes of the past. *That's* why I have a problem with most liberal "thinking." It's anti-progressive. It's actively regressive. Yet, most liberals will happily plant the "progressive" label on themselves, as they seem to think that the label is all that matters, not the action.

The same thing happened with the 'liberal' label. Liberal used to be all about individual freedom, reduced government, shake the yokes of the masters off and be your own master. Now, it appears to mean "sexually-liberal" (libertine) and government-as-nanny.

Beautifully written; succinct; and full of wisdom. Well done, John.

[Pat Hurley]

Originally Posted by catfish83861

Pat, although you and I may and probably do agree on many items,I am not sure this young man is a hard core liberal.

Dear Cat:

I think you have misread me badly. I don't think Adam is a liberal and never said so; I think he's young. I was trying to share with Adam some examples of hard core, hard left liberals, so that he clearly knew who and what I was talking about. And also to give concrete definition of what a real fire breathing, Woodstock loving, flag burning, America hating, tofu eating, maggot infested liberal is. I didn't want to be accused of using an overly broad brush in painting the liberal picture.

I guess that I didn't succeed. Sorry.

[catfish83861]

Hell Pat,didn't you remember that I'm from Oklahoma and retired Navy,maybe you just typed to fast. Type slower man,I read slow . catfish

[Pistolenschutze]

Originally Posted by JohnK3

Most "conservatives" would simply have us stop engaging in the negative behavior and punish the individuals responsible for the actions. Most "liberals" would have us engage in a wide variety of "reparation" type behavior and self-punishment in order to somehow achieve "atonement" for our "sins." Sins, by the way, which few currently alive are guilty of. In addition, the "sins" are supposed to be atoned for in perpetuity. We can never put it completely behind us and move on, because we're always revisiting the mistakes of the past. *That's* why I have a problem with most liberal "thinking." It's anti-progressive. It's actively regressive. Yet, most liberals will happily plant the "progressive" label on themselves, as they seem to think that the label is all that matters, not the action.

The same thing happened with the 'liberal' label. Liberal used to be all about individual freedom, reduced government, shake the yokes of the masters off and be your own master. Now, it appears to mean "sexually-liberal" (libertine) and government-as-nanny.

Nicely done, John, and I entirely agree. Before terms like "conservative" and "liberal" may be reasonably used, however, the terms themselves must be defined for what their referant is NOW. Indeed, during the 19th century, especially in Britain, the terms held almost precisely the opposite meanings we now assign to them. It is worthwhile to point out as well, I think, that Teddy Roosevelt. of "walk softly but carry a big stick" and Great White Fleet fame, not to mention San Juan Hill, was both a Republican and a Progressive. The official name of the so-called "Bull Moose Party" of 1912 was actually the "United States Progressive Party."

Another point, I think, is how we introduce the concept of "progressive" into the conservative/liberal mix. Is it not possible and reasonable for a modern-day conservative to have allegedly progressive opinions, at least about certain things? For example, it was considered "progressive" and "liberal" by many in the 1960s to believe that the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution actually meant what they said, which is essentially that the color of one's skin or ethnicity has no bearing on American citizenship and the right to vote. As a conservative/libertarian myself, I have no problem at all with that position, nor, I think, would anyone who believes in what this great country was founded to be.

Another example of what I'm getting at here; let's take the issue of sexual conduct by consenting adults. How might that issue be viewed within the context of conservative, liberal, and progressive? Some would say (myself included) that what happens privately, between consenting adults, and does no harm to anyone, is solely the business of the persons involved and no one else, not government, not the self-proclaimed progressives, and most assuredly not the religious right! Now, is that a "liberal" position? Some would so classify it. Yet, is it not more correctly a position that steadfastly proclaims the right of individual freedom of choice, unencumbered by arbitrary regulation, a position which is generally considered to fall on the conservative side of the equation, at least today? Is it not also a "progressive" position? It certainly is if we compare it to our own past--a rather recent past, I might add--in which such outrageously "progressive" and "liberal" ideas as birth control were outlawed, and laws which made sexual contact using anything other than the missionary position a crime in this country, at least in certain jurisdictions. Don't believe me? Google the Comstock Act and see what you get, just for a starter, then try doing the same thing with the phrase "blue laws." The result will amaze anyone who believes in individual freedom.

My real point here, after all is said and done, is simple: labeling is deceptive and often deceitful; it is, in fact, the very antithesis of rationality. In my view one does not accept someone else's definition of what is "right," merely to identify with some arbitrary group. An intelligent man or woman thinks for himself or herself and chooses a position accordingly.

OK, off the soapbox.

[Marlin]

Nicely put, Pistol.

[Border411]

Just wanted to bring up some info. One of my buddies, who does do his fair share of protesting (the peaceful kind) told me that a protesting group called SDS *Students for a Democratic Society*, has been protesting like this to get themselves beat up and arrested! He stated that they are extremely radical in their thoughts and actions. They want to get video and photos of people beating up these "Peaceful Protestors" as they pass themselves off to be so that the police, who I am a member of, will look bad. I will make sure to take off my uniform before I engage them-I can tell you that!

[Pat Hurley]

Originally Posted by Border411

Just wanted to bring up some info. One of my buddies, who does do his fair share of protesting (the peaceful kind) told me that a protesting group called SDS *Students for a Democratic Society*, has been protesting like this to get themselves beat up and arrested! He stated that they are extremely radical in their thoughts and actions. They want to get video and photos of people beating up these "Peaceful Protestors" as they pass themselves off to be so that the police, who I am a member of, will look bad. I will make sure to take off my uniform before I engage them-I can tell you that!

Deputy,

If you'll call me collect when these young commies will be protesting in your town next, I'll be happy to travel there and beat the hell out of them for you.

[Bruce FLinch]

SDS was one of the original Radical groups, going back to VietNam era.