Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:

[Mediocrates]

Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:

Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy.

Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's cocaine conviction is none of our business.

Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness, and you need our prayers for your recovery.

You support states' rights, which means Attorney General John Ashcroft can tell states what local voter initiatives they have the right to adopt.

What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80s is irrelevant.

Friends don't let friends vote Republican

[KSO]

FOX News -BREAKING NEWS!!! CHRIST KILLERS JEWS< ONCE AGAIN REJECT A DIvINE LEADER!!!!!!

Originally Posted by KSO

FOX News -BREAKING NEWS!!! CHRIST KILLERS JEWS< ONCE AGAIN REJECT A DIvINE LEADER!!!!!!

LOL
I'd vote Democrat, too.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

Obviously your not familiar with the concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" The Iran/Iraq war was a win/win situation for the US, why wouldn't we support it?

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

Hmm, could it have to do with Cuba's LONG history of terrorism?? Also it's foreign policy 101 that you don't treat every country the same. Say Iraq/Iran/N. Korea with regards to WMD's.

http://cuban-exile.com/menu1/%21terror.html

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

Way to distort the issues. Perhaps he values the life of a unborn child over a woman's selfish desire to not use birth control or put the child up for adoption.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

Jesus loves you, and shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.

Woot, unsubstationated rhetoric that really isn't worth commenting on.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

If you for a minute think combat pay is unsubstantial or vet bene's are underfunded you must never have served or know anyone that has.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

Wow, is that a quote? Or maybe just taking an issue and then putting a false reason for the issues conception.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy.

You realize this "health care" we are providing isn't even remotely as good as even the crappiest HMO's in the US?

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

When did he say this? And I guess cradle to grave entitlements and income redistribution isn't socialism now?

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

Does he believe private sector with actual competion is more accountable then a government monopoly, yes, and so do I.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creations should be taught in schools.

Nice distortion, he stated Global warming needs more studying, which it does if you've ever read any scientific journals. And I love how you forget to mention he wanted creations taught in CONJUNCTION with evolution. What a crime.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

Linkage on the first part. Linkage where he was lying and not misinformed. Even the 9/11 commission never said he lied, he was given bad intelligence and accessments.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

So you think child porn should be legal and freely distributed? The only reason the gay marriage amendment is even being considered is the renegade and overturned like mad 9th circuit.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's cocaine conviction is none of our business.

Linkage of George Bush pushing for inquires into Hilary's business dealings.

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

You support states' rights, which means Attorney General John Ashcroft can tell states what local voter initiatives they have the right to adopt.

That's called the AG's job description. Enforcing laws, is he not suppose to do that now?

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80s is irrelevant.

Any linkage, or more baseless ???

Originally Posted by Mediocrates

Friends don't let friends vote Republican

Friends don't let other friends spew forth garbage masquerading as fact.

[Mediocrates]

Like I said, these are the things you have to believe. I didn't say you have no right to believe them. No one's stopping you for example.

Originally Posted by Gabriel

Obviously your not familiar with the concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" The Iran/Iraq war was a win/win situation for the US, why wouldn't we support it?.

Because Millions of people died in a pointless war? It was the bloodiest war in Middle eastern history.

Originally Posted by Gabriel

Hmm, could it have to do with Cuba's LONG history of terrorism?? Also it's foreign policy 101 that you don't treat every country the same. Say Iraq/Iran/N. Korea with regards to WMD's.

How many countries has the US bombed rightly or wrongly since 1945? For what ends? Not always noble ones thats for sure;

China 1945-46
Korea 1950-53
China 1950-53
Guatemala 1954
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-60
Guatemala 1960
Belgian Congo 1964
Guatemala 1964
Dominican Republic 1965-66
Peru 1965
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1961-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Guatemala 1967-69
Lebanon 1982-84
Grenada 1983-84
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1981-92
Nicaragua 1981-90
Libya 1986
Iran 1987-88
Libya 1989
Panama 1989-90
Iraq 1991-2002
Kuwait 1991
Somalia 1992-94
Croatia 1994 (of Serbs at Krajina)
Bosnia 1995
Iran 1998 (airliner)
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999
Afghanistan 2001-02
Iraq 2003-2004


I don't enough about the other US domestic issues contained here to really comment in an eductaed way. however i will say this. Banning gay marriage and the practice of abortion is an infringement on civil liberty. Neither issue affects anyone else other than those involved. What a person does in private is their choice. If people want Creationism taught in school, they should send their kids to an outright Christian insitution, RC or Protestant.

Originally Posted by Isiah 2:4

Because Millions of people died in a pointless war? It was the bloodiest war in Middle eastern history.

Didn't you read what I said. Millions of our enemies dying and wasting resources killing each other, how was this not a win-win for the US?

Originally Posted by Isiah 2:4

How many countries has the US bombed rightly or wrongly since 1945? For what ends? Not always noble ones that’s for sure;

China 1945-46
Korea 1950-53
China 1950-53
Guatemala 1954
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-60
Guatemala 1960
Belgian Congo 1964
Guatemala 1964
Dominican Republic 1965-66
Peru 1965
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1961-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Guatemala 1967-69
Lebanon 1982-84
Grenada 1983-84
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1981-92
Nicaragua 1981-90
Libya 1986
Iran 1987-88
Libya 1989
Panama 1989-90
Iraq 1991-2002
Kuwait 1991
Somalia 1992-94
Croatia 1994 (of Serbs at Krajina)
Bosnia 1995
Iran 1998 (airliner)
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999
Afghanistan 2001-02
Iraq 2003-2004


I don't enough about the other US domestic issues contained here to really comment in an educated way.

What's the point of bringing these up? You think since there are several over the last century some might be unjustified? Unless your going to argue specific cases I"m not commenting on this laundry list of US bombing.

Originally Posted by Isiah 2:4

however I will say this. Banning gay marriage and the practice of abortion is an infringement on civil liberty. Neither issue affects anyone else other than those involved. What a person does in private is their choice.

In your opinion it's a civil liberty. And what say you about the baby's civil liberty and his inalienable right to LIFE Liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Originally Posted by Isiah 2:4

If people want Creationism taught in school, they should send their kids to an outright Christian institution, RC or Protestant.

Once again in your opinion. I think it's kinda weird schools are not even to mention a concept around 90% of the countries citizens religious beliefs expound.

[KettleWhistle]

I usually vote Republican because IMO they are the lesser evil, and because their aren't anti-Israel like the Democrats. What Mediocrates posted is, of course, simplistic propaganda that shows only one side of the issues. More importantly, it stereotypes Republicans, ingnoring the fact that there are many who do not want to regulate social issues like the Christian reconstructionists, and who do want to have a small, efficient, and accountable government. For my part I make sure to vote in primaries in order to support the latter type of the Republican politician.

Originally Posted by Gabriel

In your opinion it's a civil liberty. And what say you about the baby's civil liberty and his inalienable right to LIFE Liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

A fetus is not a baby, and abortion is just a method of birth control. It is not the preffered method only because it is more expensive and painful. And it's really simple to deal with it too: if you don't like it, don't do it. (And leave the others to make their own decisions.)

Originally Posted by Gabriel

Once again in your opinion. I think it's kinda weird schools are not even to mention a concept around 90% of the countries citizens religious beliefs expound.

So according to you, if the majority of people believes that 2+2=5, schools should teach that also, right? If you don't mind, what are your ideas regarding this whole round-Earth theory?

Originally Posted by Isiah 2:4

Because Millions of people died in a pointless war? It was the bloodiest war in Middle eastern history.




How many countries has the US bombed rightly or wrongly since 1945? For what ends? Not always noble ones thats for sure;

China 1945-46
Korea 1950-53
China 1950-53
Guatemala 1954
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-60
Guatemala 1960
Belgian Congo 1964
Guatemala 1964
Dominican Republic 1965-66
Peru 1965
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1961-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Guatemala 1967-69
Lebanon 1982-84
Grenada 1983-84
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1981-92
Nicaragua 1981-90
Libya 1986
Iran 1987-88
Libya 1989
Panama 1989-90
Iraq 1991-2002
Kuwait 1991
Somalia 1992-94
Croatia 1994 (of Serbs at Krajina)
Bosnia 1995
Iran 1998 (airliner)
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999
Afghanistan 2001-02
Iraq 2003-2004


I don't enough about the other US domestic issues contained here to really comment in an eductaed way. however i will say this. Banning gay marriage and the practice of abortion is an infringement on civil liberty. Neither issue affects anyone else other than those involved. What a person does in private is their choice. If people want Creationism taught in school, they should send their kids to an outright Christian insitution, RC or Protestant.

Ishiah's list of some 35 nations we have bombed since 1945 is nothing to snort at. To think that we are somehow justified in bombing whomever we want to, whenever we want to, regardless of the provocation, means that we are becoming more psychopathic all the time.

Gabriel, you gotta get a grip!! People like you are RUNNING the country right now. We don't need anymore Peanut Gallery exhortations to egg 'em on !

[KettleWhistle]

Originally Posted by philingraham

Ishiah's list of some 35 nations we have bombed since 1945 is nothing to snort at. To think that we are somehow justified in bombing whomever we want to, whenever we want to, regardless of the provocation, means that we are becoming more psychopathic all the time.

Gabriel, you gotta get a grip!! People like you are RUNNING the country right now. We don't need anymore Peanut Gallery exhortations to egg 'em on !

We are certainly NOT justified in bombing anyone we want, but we were in a number of cases listed by Isaiah.

Originally Posted by philingraham

Ishiah's list of some 35 nations we have bombed since 1945 is nothing to snort at. To think that we are somehow justified in bombing whomever we want to, whenever we want to, regardless of the provocation, means that we are becoming more psychopathic all the time.

Gabriel, you gotta get a grip!! People like you are RUNNING the country right now. We don't need anymore Peanut Gallery exhortations to egg 'em on !

Yeah...yet another person who comments on all the bombing not the individual merits and pro/cons of that situation. Stop trying to lump things together that have NOTHING to do with eachother.

Trust me if people like me were running the country things would be a lot different, so I have a feeling they are not....

Originally Posted by AJL

A fetus is not a baby, and abortion is just a method of birth control. It is not the preffered method only because it is more expensive and painful. And it's really simple to deal with it too: if you don't like it, don't do it. (And leave the others to make their own decisions.)

Okay this is a completely seperate debate and if you care to countinue I think it should have it's own seperate thread. (not trying to cop out )

Originally Posted by AJL

So according to you, if the majority of people believes that 2+2=5, schools should teach that also, right? If you don't mind, what are your ideas regarding this whole round-Earth theory?

Okay your using the same logic Med was using, I am saying MANY opinions should be taught, I'm not seeing what the problem here is? Look at history and your see how science is not always right and is all based on THEORIES (like uniformatariansm). If you never want contrary opinions you might as well live in Arabic Theocracies where teaching anything contrary to the Koran is a crime.

[KettleWhistle]

Originally Posted by Gabriel

Okay this is a completely seperate debate and if you care to countinue I think it should have it's own seperate thread. (not trying to cop out )

We can if you want to; I was just replying to your post.

Originally Posted by Gabriel

Okay your using the same logic Med was using, I am saying MANY opinions should be taught, I'm not seeing what the problem here is? Look at history and your see how science is not always right and is all based on THEORIES (like uniformatariansm). If you never want contrary opinions you might as well live in Arabic Theocracies where teaching anything contrary to the Koran is a crime.

Theories are not opinions. They are based on observation, evidence, and tests. Your comparison to Muslim theocracies really doen't fit here, since theories are constantly tested and questioned. And if we are to teach opinions, whos opinions should we teach? Would a representative of the Flat Earth Society (yes, it does exist ) do?

Originally Posted by AJL

Theories are not opinions. They are based on observation, evidence, and tests. Your comparison to Muslim theocracies really doen't fit here, since theories are constantly tested and questioned. And if we are to teach opinions, whos opinions should we teach? Would a representative of the Flat Earth Society (yes, it does exist ) do?

I see where you are going with this, it could easily turn into a slippery slope situation. I was mearly saying more then one Theory being taught I think will be useful, as differences cause debate and discussion, and in school heaven forbid....THOUGHT. So current science should be taught, but despite all it's testing the very foundation of it is based on Therories that are unprovable, you have to take them as a given or pretty much must all scientific knowledge and formulas go out the window. So things should be taught in that context.

I think I've received this one four or five times in various e-mails. There is a similar one, I do believe perhaps crafted in response to this one, with the shoe on the other foot.

I think they are both pretty funny, myself, but I'm something of a Marxist, so I might be a little more testy should somebody try to come up with one for that. Might be difficult, though, considering the faultless logic and forceful presentation of Marx's own arguments. He was without peer, and his concise, but wickedly eloquent statement on the subject ring as true today as those many years ago.

So in the words of the great one, himself, "I wouldn't belong to any club that would have me as a member".