Jesus H. Christ...Sweet Home Alabama...

[wesfau2]

Ok - that was good.  

Where's your two? You can't have a one without a two when counting.

I reserve the right to stop counting at any number of my choosing.  Otherwise we'd be here for a very long time.

I will repeat my question - who is/was Adam?

He had a few names over the years, but I'll be damned if I can remember any right now.  Stanley Applebaum maybe?

[GH2001]

but I'd like to think that people are getting pissed because of people attacking peoples chartacter rather than attacking the issue.

You said what I was trying to say - in much fewer words.

[Snaggletiger]

Just my opinion...for the record...there is no way on God's green earth that Kaos left this board because of a disagreement over this or any other issue.  Right or wrong, the man lives to take a position and debate it to the death (So to speak).  If he did leave because of that, something's gone wrong with that boy's medulla oblongata.

[Jumbo]

Just my opinion...for the record...there is no way on God's green earth that Kaos left this board because of a disagreement over this or any other issue.  Right or wrong, the man lives to take a position and debate it to the death (So to speak).  If he did leave because of that, something's gone wrong with that boy's medulla oblongata.

Dem' Gators have all dem' teeth with no tooth brush.

[CCTAU]

I agree with Tim James. ALL illegals should be deported.....

Or shot.

Tim James for gubner.


And the rest of you that do not agree with me, kiss my redneck grits.


Did I mention illegals should be shot?

[AUChizad]

I agree with Tim James. ALL illegals should be deported.....

Or shot.

Tim James for gubner.


And the rest of you that do not agree with me, kiss my redneck grits.


Did I mention illegals should be shot?

I rest my case, your honor.

[GH2001]

Just my opinion...for the record...there is no way on God's green earth that Kaos left this board because of a disagreement over this or any other issue.  Right or wrong, the man lives to take a position and debate it to the death (So to speak).  If he did leave because of that, something's gone wrong with that boy's medulla oblongata.

He was seriously sick last week. No joke. Ive had illnesses do crazier things to my logic. Who knows.

[GarMan]

We've rehashed this a thousand times. There's a difference. Auburn fans have no problems calling Alabama fans rednecks, and vice-versa. It's only a shockingly offensive term when someone you disagree with uses it.

That sounds like bullscat to me.  Personally, I don't find either term "shockingly offensive", but if it sounds like hypocrisy...

You are completely delusional and deranged. I think maybe that's your main problem in these forums. You can't read what's in front of you, so you come up with something completely random out of left field and argue with that as if it were my position.

I think it's more the way you come into these threads to defend your gurlz.  The obvious assumption is that you completely support their position when you defend and continue along the same lines of their argument.

Find the word "Christian" in my post one time. Just once. Or anything that would slightly suggest anything about religion. You've lost it.

There's a Search function in the top bar.  You've stepped into a lot of threads where challenging Christian, Conservative, heterosexual, Baptist, white male and several other values were discussed.  One of many examples...

I never held a post in the party, but I was driven away from the Republican Party because they sold their fiscal conservative values to the religious right for votes. 

Bingo. 

And, there are a lot more.

And let's get one thing straight. GarMan's characterization of how these arguments go is nowhere near reality. After the hundredth or so racist/homophobic/blatantly false rant, occasionally a very small few of us will step up and disagree with the herd. Any time Taylor or I offer an opinion, it is berated with "Beta Male" this, or "left wing extremist" that, or "dope smoking hippie" this, or "young with no experience in the real world" that. It's beyond ridiculous to say that a few of us are the ones bullying people off the board with our opinions.
I could say the exact thing for everyone else here on this board.

Sorry Queen...  That's ridiculous.  I truly enjoy learning about alternative opinions along with the rationale behind them, but when they solely involve disparaging the others position with name-calling or accusing the other of being Neanderthal, how else would you expect us to respond?

[GarMan]

This is laughable.

What I'm hearing here is that two or three people who dare to question the Republican/Social Conservative circle jerk that is the X's political forum are the sole reason some people decided to take their ball and go home.  Really?

That is the weakest of weaksauce.

You guys would rather have a group backslapping and mutual admiration meeting than engage in lively debate?

Taylor and Chad are no more to blame for sandy vaginas than Pillowpants. 

Seriously, I think it's just the tactics that keep people out of here and chase people away.  As I just said in another post, I enjoy learning about alternative opinions, but I don't expect to be called a homophobe, Neanderthal or right-wing Christian devil for sharing mine. 

[CCTAU]

I rest my case, your honor.

You never had a case. Just your enlightened reasoning that says we should sacrifice OUR country before we actually try and stand up for it. Typical legalese.

Everything is good. We are all fine. I can't see it from my house. Let Arizona worry about it. Those supreme lawgivers will slap them damn redneck racist bastards down.


We have a problem with illegal immigration and all folks like you want to do what we have been doing, and expect a different outcome. Guess what that is the definition of?

Arizona is doing what they need to do. Are we as a nation?

[GarMan]

I agree.

And I think you'd find that if the mud slinging didn't originate from Kaos & GarMan, you wouldn't see it in return.

Originate from me?  Really?  What was this you just posted???

Taylor presented the commercial, and said (accurately) that all Tim James was doing was making a desperate appeal to the redneck constituency who see that and kneejerk react "Hayl Yah! Em damn Mexicans just wanna try to stop us from speakin American!". Kaos did pretty much just that in this thread. And said he would vote for him "now," indicating that his vote was won by this commercial. He took Tim James' bait hook, line, and sinker. And I said congratulations, you're one of the rednecks whose vote he was trying to win by making a commercial like that.  

I must have read that wrong...  It's all my fault.  

[AUChizad]

There's a Search function in the top bar.  You've stepped into a lot of threads where challenging Christian, Conservative, heterosexual, Baptist, white male and several other values were discussed.  One of many examples...

I never held a post in the party, but I was driven away from the Republican Party because they sold their fiscal conservative values to the religious right for votes. 

Bingo. 

And, there are a lot more.

Really? That's the best you've got. I'm sure there are "a lot more", but all you could produce was me saying "Bingo" in response to someone else's post. How radical of me to agree with something someone else said.

And for the record, I think it's a bit dramatic to refer to even Wes's comment in your example as "challenging Christian, Conservative, heterosexual, Baptist, white male and several other values". I think you'll find many Republicans (not of Tim James/Sarah Palin variety) who would agree with that assessment wholeheartedly.

And P.S., I unintentionally edited your post GarMan, in an effort to triple quote you quoting me quoting wes.

I formatted the post and clicked post thinking I was responding, and it messed up your post. I restored the part I was responding to. Feel free to go back and edit the rest of it.

My bad.

[GarMan]

This is true if you are leaving because someone disagrees with your opinion, but I'd like to think that people are getting pissed because of people attacking peoples chartacter rather than attacking the issue.

BINGO!!!

[AUChizad]

You never had a case. Just your enlightened reasoning that says we should sacrifice OUR country before we actually try and stand up for it. Typical legalese.

Everything is good. We are all fine. I can't see it from my house. Let Arizona worry about it. Those supreme lawgivers will slap them damn redneck racist bastards down.


We have a problem with illegal immigration and all folks like you want to do what we have been doing, and expect a different outcome. Guess what that is the definition of?

Arizona is doing what they need to do. Are we as a nation?

Here's why you're an idiot.

The Tim James thing doesn't have diddly shit to do with immigration reform. Still, it appeals to morons that make that connection. Because after all, there's only two languages, right? Mexican & American!

Originate from me?  Really?  What was this you just posted???

I must have read that wrong...  It's all my fault.  

You still don't get it, which is what's laughable. I'm not calling someone an idiot redneck for disagreeing with me. I specifically listed WHY the Tim James commercial was pandering TO idiot rednecks. Kaos proudly admitted he was one of them. By the way, I have a buddy who is big in Alabama Republican politics. He's running the Bradley Byrne campaign, and couldn't say enough about how completely and utterly idiotic this whole commercial and the idea behind it is. Like I said, it's not a political disagreement. It really is, you either understand what this is, or you're an idiot. It really is that simple in this case.

[GarMan]

Bingo. 

And, there are a lot more.

Really? That's the best you've got. I'm sure there are "a lot more", but all you could produce was me saying "Bingo" in response to someone else's post. How radical of me to agree with something someone else said.

And for the record, I think it's a bit dramatic to refer to even Wes's comment in your example as "challenging Christian, Conservative, heterosexual, Baptist, white male and several other values". I think you'll find many Republicans (not of Tim James/Sarah Palin variety) who would agree with that assessment wholeheartedly.

It's all me.  You guys are never the first ones to stereotype and disparage any particular group that you disagree with.  I must be mistaken.  It's all me...

And P.S., I unintentionally edited your post GarMan, in an effort to triple quote you quoting me quoting wes.

I formatted the post and clicked post thinking I was responding, and it messed up your post. I restored the part I was responding to. Feel free to go back and edit the rest of it.

My bad. 

Yeah...  You also deleted more than half of my response...  NICE...
 

[AUChizad]

By the way, I hit the back button enough that I was able to restore the post.

[AUChizad]

Sorry Queen...  That's ridiculous.  I truly enjoy learning about alternative opinions along with the rationale behind them, but when they solely involve disparaging the others position with name-calling or accusing the other of being Neanderthal, how else would you expect us to respond?

I must have read that wrong...  It's all my fault. 

[GH2001]

 I think you'll find many Republicans (not of Tim James/Sarah Palin variety) who would agree with that assessment wholeheartedly.

Mr. Conservative, Barry Goldwater -  was one of them. Just saying. The Reagan/Goldwater/Ron Paul model is the one I most subscribe to - not Tim James, not Sarah Palin, not Pat Robertson, not John McCain.


"There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.' " (1909-1998) Goldwater, US Senator (R-Arizona) Source: Congressional Record, September 16, 1981

"Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass." - Goldwater

"If they succeed in establishing religion as a basic Republican Party tenet," he told U.S. News & World Report in 1994, "they could do us in."  In an interview with The Post that same year, Goldwater observed, "When you say 'radical right' today, I think of these moneymaking ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the Republican Party and make a religious organization out of it.  If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye."

"Well, I've spent quite a number of years carrying the flag of the 'Old Conservatism.'  And I can say with conviction that the religious issues of these groups have little or nothing to do with conservative or liberal politics.  The uncompromising position of these groups is a divisive element that could tear apart the very spirit of our representative system, if they gain sufficient strength." Insisted Goldwater, "Being a conservative in America traditionally has meant that one holds a deep, abiding respect for the Constitution.  We conservatives believe sincerely in the integrity of the Constitution.  We treasure the freedoms that document protects. . .  "By maintaining the separation of church and state," he explained, "the United States has avoided the intolerance which has so divided the rest of the world with religious wars . . .  Can any of us refute the wisdom of Madison and the other framers?  Can anyone look at the carnage in Iran, the bloodshed in Northem Ireland, or the bombs bursting in Lebanon and yet question the dangers of injecting religious issues into the affairs of state?"
        Goldwater concluded with a waming to the American people.  "The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others," { he said,} "unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy.  They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives. . .  We have succeeded for 205 years in keeping the affairs of state separate from the uncompromising idealism of religious groups and we mustn't stop now" { he insisted}.  "To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism and the values upon which the framers built this democratic republic."

[wesfau2]

Originate from me?  Really?  What was this you just posted???

I must have read that wrong...  It's all my fault.  

There are plenty of threads begun with sentiments along the lines of "Here's another thing that those beta-male, liberals would like to see!".

So, when the few non-herd members here jump in, of course they're on the defensive.  They've had their manhood challenged from the jump.

[AUChizad]

Mr. Conservative, Barry Goldwater -  was one of them. Just saying. The Reagan/Goldwater/Ron Paul model is the one I most subscribe to - not Tim James, not Sarah Palin, not Pat Robertson, not John McCain.


"There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in 'A,' 'B,' 'C,' and 'D.' Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of 'conservatism.' " (1909-1998) Goldwater, US Senator (R-Arizona) Source: Congressional Record, September 16, 1981

"Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass." - Goldwater

"If they succeed in establishing religion as a basic Republican Party tenet," he told U.S. News & World Report in 1994, "they could do us in."  In an interview with The Post that same year, Goldwater observed, "When you say 'radical right' today, I think of these moneymaking ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the Republican Party and make a religious organization out of it.  If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye."

"Well, I've spent quite a number of years carrying the flag of the 'Old Conservatism.'  And I can say with conviction that the religious issues of these groups have little or nothing to do with conservative or liberal politics.  The uncompromising position of these groups is a divisive element that could tear apart the very spirit of our representative system, if they gain sufficient strength." Insisted Goldwater, "Being a conservative in America traditionally has meant that one holds a deep, abiding respect for the Constitution.  We conservatives believe sincerely in the integrity of the Constitution.  We treasure the freedoms that document protects. . .  "By maintaining the separation of church and state," he explained, "the United States has avoided the intolerance which has so divided the rest of the world with religious wars . . .  Can any of us refute the wisdom of Madison and the other framers?  Can anyone look at the carnage in Iran, the bloodshed in Northem Ireland, or the bombs bursting in Lebanon and yet question the dangers of injecting religious issues into the affairs of state?"
        Goldwater concluded with a waming to the American people.  "The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others," { he said,} "unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy.  They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives. . .  We have succeeded for 205 years in keeping the affairs of state separate from the uncompromising idealism of religious groups and we mustn't stop now" { he insisted}.  "To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism and the values upon which the framers built this democratic republic."

A-fuckin'-men, brother.