~~~“Sometimes, like in the case of Black rights, the government must - through the actions of the people - take charge and finally say, enough is enough. We are a nation where ALL people are supposed to be equal under the law.”---AJ~~~
Agreed, to a point. Again, however, gays already have the same rights as anyone else.
~~~“Such is the political reality RW; in fact, your own right wing, christians, neocons, and so on - use the exact same tactics as others do. As I call it, the concept of "Mine or I will whine," is not just a liberal modus operandi, it's a people one. Ex: Conservative doesn't like an atheist conducting a business deal and expressing themselves? (i.e. putting up a billboard that claims there is not god, or whatever) They whine and complain, and claim that their rights are infringed. They use the system we have to take it down.
Uh, what gives?
Likewise, liberals have done it as well. Both sides do.
People don't think of others, they think of themselves, period. That is largely why I identify as a liberal (albeit, perhaps an old fashioned one), because at its core - it is about living and let live, respecting each others to live life, however we want to. Christians, athiests, homosexuals, and straight people included.”---AJ~~~
As to “living and let live”, that sounds great; in fact, it’s a very conservative notion.
However, how often, really, do you hear of conservatives actually going to court, and firing the first volley, in such cases? Usually, it’s the intolerant Left, which initially opens the court dockets for some petty nonsense, such as a Nativity within 1500 miles of a school, and the Right which must, in turn, defend itself.
~~“It does seem funny that some of his core beliefs (communist as you say), Americans also agreed with. Hmm, go figure.”---AJ~~~
There were also Americans who agreed with Nixon, too; twice. And Reagan, twice. And Bush 43 “The Reviled”, twice. And those guys didn't have the media blatantly on their side, salivating over their very existence. Hmmm, go figure.
Of course, as the sheen wears off, and the hype is shown to be just that, Obama seems to be losing that edge, too. All style and no substance works great for winning elections. Actually governing is another kettle of fish. You'll notice also, that the radical Muslims seem to be getting more and more emboldened, now, too.
He got the Nobel Prize simply for not being Bush; the terrorists realize he's not Bush, too.
1. "Our"? I'm sure you mean your own personal beliefs, because frankly, you don't have any right to intervene in what anyone else celebrates, even if it is - as you say - undermining to "our" beliefs and tradition. You sure as hell do not speak for me.”---AJ~~~
Nor would I attempt to speak for you. However, my personal beliefs were, for many, many years, the statistical and cultural norm. Polls indicate that they actually still are, despite what the ACLU may say. See, I really couldn’t care less if you and/or your friends celebrate Christmas or not. That’s your loss, if you don’t.
The radical Left, however, seems to try it’s damnedest to make it more and more difficult for me and mine to do so.
You and your comrades take issue, stamp your feet, and cry and complain, about what I and my fellows do as a matter of course; I resent what you’re side is doing simply because they don’t like it, and to be contrary, and in grudging defiance, of what I do.
Just leave us alone; quit being so ridiculously thin-skinned. You’re supposed to be the tolerant, open-minded, free-thinkers. We’re the closed-minded, short-sighted, Neanderthal “haters“, remember?
But every time your side files a lawsuit against some small, one-horse town which had the audacity to place a cross or a depiction of the Ten Commandments on public property or too close to a courthouse, you show the absolute reverse to be true.
Look at that cross in the Mojave desert; placed there---in the middle nowhere---in 1931 by WWI vets to honor their dead. The ACLU wants it taken down because it’s on public land. It’s been there almost 80 years. They’ve had to cover it in a plywood box since the suit was first opened, in 2001. Does the following sound tolerant to you?
~~~“Such is our nation, god love it; people can do, say, and believe damn near anything they want.”---AJ~~~
Thanks to left-wing, alphabet soup organizations like the ACLU PETA, ACORN, GLSEN and GLAAD and many others with many and varying agendas, that’s becoming a tough statement to choke out. The most active intolerance, the most petty oppression and repression, comes from the overly-litigious, lawsuit-happy Left, not the Right. You really can’t see it, can you? I’m not surprised. They do this, because they know that their views are not really in the majority, no matter how they propagandize, and the only way they can get people to see thinsg their way is to impose it upon them, through the courts and activist judges legislating from the bench.
I repeat, from above:
‘As to “living and let live”, that sounds great; in fact, it’s a very conservative notion.
However, how often, really, do you hear of conservatives actually going to court, and firing the first volley, in such cases? Usually, it’s the intolerant Left, which initially opens the court dockets for some petty nonsense, such as a Nativity within 1500 miles of a school, and the Right which must, in turn, defend itself.’
“2. This is entirely your opinion, but thankfully, it doesn't make it fact, or law. Yeah, you may not agree with it, and it may conjure up nightmares of some manchurian candidate in your mind, but you know...oh well. You have no real proof other than your bias.”---AJ~~~
Sure I do; I have open eyes and a curious mind, which is more than you and your comrade have exhibited. I’ll use the birth certificate issue to illustrate that point; would you be so accepting if it had been a Republican who won? I doubt it; you’d be up in arms, hysterical; screeching. Even moreso than us “tea baggers” are, demanding that it be addressed. Yet, you all simply accept it, because he's your guy.
Your side calls us ideologues, but would you hold that mirror up to yourselves?
~~~“I think this whole ornament deal is overblown honestly.”---AJ~~~
Perhaps; but I still think it’s a minor symptom of a larger, more dangerous, and insidious, problem.
~~~“I mean come on, it was brought to light be one of the more biased, anti-obama, we-hate-progressives/liberals-and-will-do-anything-to-destroy-them "news" sites (biggovernment). Really? You're willing to buy their pulitzer prize winning journalism?
If so, then you deserve what you get - vitrol, hate, venom, lies, etc. NOT - critical, investigative, unbiased (as possible), fact based news.”----AJ~~~
Does that make it any less accurate? Even the sleazy tabloids get hold of a good story once in a great while; it just depends how they run with it. Reminds me…..
Years ago, I posted on here, a story about Iran providing guns for insurgents in Iraq. It was taken from ABCNEWS.com; someone (a leftie poster) posted that they were surprised, having expected it to be from Rush Limbaugh’s site or something, but felt they could believe it, knowing where it came from. It was completely true and accurate, but if Limbaugh had said it, they wouldn’t have believed it. Why? Because we all have our biases.
When I hear the MSM news, I automatically assume they’re omitting something, or spinning it somehow, which, of course, both sides do. But at least the conservative media has the balls to admit, even flaunt, their bias, and not hide behind false “objectivity”.
~~~“Why not try pbs, eh?”---AJ~~~
PBS is one of the worst of a bad lot. NPR is up there, too.
~~~“Yet you and others consistantly do so. I can't remember even one event where you have praised him, or hell - given him 1 out of five stars. I don't remmember if it was you or another person, but someone once told me that while I may think that my country is great, that my words and constant critcism (albeit intended as a means to hold it accountable in a good way) show, contrary to my intentions.”---AJ~~~
Criticism is one thing, simple bitching is another. There’s nothing wrong with open criticism, as long as it‘s constructive. For most of the last eight years, the Left bitched unceasingly about Bush; turns out, shockingly, a lot of what Bush did was okay, even correct. Obama, in fact, has continued on some of the same paths, extending some of the Bush policies he and his liberal cohorts, for years, criticized.
~~~“Unless you can show me - cumulative effect or not - evidence that suggests that Obama knew about it, I have to call bullshit. It isn't because of my beliefs or bias, but because it just is to big of a leap, damn near conspiracy theoryesque - to consider that he is involved in some communist plot to overthrough our country.”----AJ~~~
If we’ve “shown” you, why do you fight us on it? Does that mean you see what we mean, and now agree?
He’s stacked his cabinet and staff with far-leftist ideologues and radicals of all stripes, at least one of which, White House Communications Director Anita Dunn, publicly expressed a personal admiration for Mao. Richard Holbrooke is an anti-gun zealot, strongly pro-abortion, and favors drug legalization. Kevin Jennings is a radical gay, who favors sexualizing children and (ahem) inserting pro-gay, anti-hetero propaganda into curriculum. Just go here:
At any rate, he’s certainly gone a good distance toward stocking the pond with the right kinds of people to undermine and take down the system they work under, and the country along with it.
~~~“Btw, Iran-Contra and Reagan. Normally, yes, the president is always advised and expected to be aware of all that goes on, but like anyone - even the archangel Reagan - they are human and sometimes they trust people with tasks or positions, and those people abuse them.”---AJ~~~
Good point. Very true; but if that’s the case, then virtually every single one of the ideologues Obama trusted is abusing his faith in them. I think that’s highly unlikely, myself. I mean, if that's the case, what does that say about his judgement of people and character? He can't even trust the people who decorated his freakin' Christmas tree?
Kudos, AJ….you are one of the only of your kind I’ve ever encountered, who is willing to say Reagan wasn’t at fault for Iran-Contra.
~~~“Yeah well sometimes the majority sucks - badly. I find it interesting though, that all this comes down to is intention, albeit "good" intentions. (Ironic? Perhaps. Hilarious? Indeed)
And that says it all....Christmas is not political, yet folks like yourself insist on either turning it into a political statement or worse yet looking the other way. Quite self serving.
Neither is religion, yet it is made such by those pushing their beliefs onto those who don't agree with them. The religious right is just as responsible for politicizing christmas (and other subjects) as the left is, perhaps even more since they're so passionate.”---AJ~~~
“(F)olks like yourself”….when was the last time I sued someone for having a position contrary to my own, in an attempt to coerce them into seeing things my way? Never….and very seldom does that happen from the general direction in which my politics reside. From the other side, however…..well, happens all the time.
Christmas gets politicized because leftist political pressure and advocacy groups make it political. I’d be overjoyed to just let Joseph, Mary, Baby Jesus and Santa have the whole season to themselves. Your side just can’t let that happen.
“Chains shall He break, for the slave is our brother;
And in His name, all oppression shall cease.”---“O Holy Night”
Oppression isn’t in His name; it’s in names like Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Guevara, Chavez and, increasingly…..Obama.
Btw, I'm sure you and I (RW) can agree about one thing - that there are way too many people (left, right, centrist, or purple...) concerned about what others do. It's ironic really, given that it is - in some cases - an overstep of what could be termed as compassion. (Ex: Religionists concerned about others souls, thusly pushing so that everyone does the "proper" things...and vice versa.)
It reminds me of a political cartoon that was in my Mass Media and Society course textbook, in the television section. It shows a couple watching tv and they're turned towards the front of the cartoon and are saying, "It isn't our morals we're concerned about, it's theirs." (Not verbatum)
Yes, there are; but again, my side seldom uses the courts to impose its will on those others. Neither does it have the advantage of having virtually the whole of the media, in all its myraid facets, at its disposal. Your side does, and uses it.
Once again, it's not about a single ornament, it's about the pattern of behavior from Obama. It's a fact he has surrounded himself with marxists and communists nearly his whole life? Unfortunately, we have a media that has no desire at all to call out the truth. If anybody does, they are labeled as a racist. This is the real Obama.