NationStates Jolt Archive

This would be funny if it weren't so sad. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0976726904/qid=1124746343/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-9677285-7681629?v=glance&s=books)

That someone would actually read this to/with their children is just plain old scary.

It'll probably sell like crazy.

It'll sell just as well to commie pinko leftist students who'll buy it just to howl with laughter after taking their third bong hit of the evening... or they'll just shoplift it instead.

It'll sell just as well to commie pinko leftist students who'll buy it just to howl with laughter after taking their third bong hit of the evening... or they'll just shoplift it instead.

The latter is always preferable for literature meant to be read while baked.

The latter is always preferable for literature meant to be read while baked.

I wonder if the pages would make acceptable rolling papers? I know the Bible and the book of Mormon work well. :D

(laughing hysterically)
That's funny as hell!
The sad thing about it is its proof that the right has finally sunk to the level that the left has been on for years. Brainwashing kids when they're too young to know any better. Up until now, I had been under the impression that the right was the one side that was above this. Well, I guess this means that in a decade or two, right wingers below the age of 20 won't be so few and far between.

I wonder if the pages would make acceptable rolling papers? I know the Bible and the book of Mormon work well. :D

I've never owned a copy of either of them, so I wouldn't know. Although, I was given a New Testament by a gideon once. I hope it recycled better than it did as a paperweight.

This would be funny if it weren't so sad. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0976726904/qid=1124746343/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-9677285-7681629?v=glance&s=books)

That someone would actually read this to/with their children is just plain old scary.
Even if this were satire, that's friggin dangerous. Children won't understand it. I remember missing my English mothertongue class on my first day of school (well, real school) because my dad made a joke about me having to go to English "daddytongue" class, because it's my mom that's German and my dad that's American...

That's just stupid. Damn the publisher that was willing to publish something so stupid.

(laughing hysterically)
That's funny as hell!
The sad thing about it is its proof that the right has finally sunk to the level that the left has been on for years. Brainwashing kids when they're too young to know any better. Up until now, I had been under the impression that the right was the one side that was above this. Well, I guess this means that in a decade or two, right wingers below the age of 20 won't be so few and far between.

Those damned liberals! Brainwashing kids with such destructive values as respect, tolerance and equality. Because everyone knows how the right can't stand for those sissy values. :rolleyes:

Ooh, ooh, lets all write children's books that teach our children to fundamentally hate other groups of people at a young age!

"Mommy, there are black people in my closet."
"The Mexican in the Janitor's closet"
"The Jew and the Pauper"

Just when I thought politics in this country couldn't get any stupider, these people had to go and prove me wrong.

I rather like the first two "Customer Reviews" on the Amazon page, though. :p

Damn ass pinko-liberals. Let's stop 'em while their young! :sniper: Quick gunshot to head will keep democracy rolling right laong the captialism train.

I am so buying that book! :D :D :D :D

Ooh, ooh, lets all write children's books that teach our children to fundamentally hate other groups of people at a young age!

"Mommy, there are black people in my closet."
"The Mexican in the Janitor's closet"
"The Jew and the Pauper"
PS. You know what would happen if you made any of thsoe books? You would be sued by so many different groups you would be begging on the street by the time it was over. It is called hate speech, and that is what the Liberal v Conservative" bullshit is turning into: hate speech, especially on the crazy conservative side (Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, any other conservative given any sort of airtime).

I can't wait till the poor kid who reads this rebels when he is a teenager and ties himself to trees.

(laughing hysterically)
That's funny as hell!
The sad thing about it is its proof that the right has finally sunk to the level that the left has been on for years. Brainwashing kids when they're too young to know any better. Up until now, I had been under the impression that the right was the one side that was above this. Well, I guess this means that in a decade or two, right wingers below the age of 20 won't be so few and far between.
Damn right, left-wingers are supposed to have a monopoly on brain washing the youth. Fuck them and their capatalist methods of getting around choking government brainwashing.

Has anyone bitching here actually, y'know, read the damn thing? Or are we just launching in with the preemptive whine and gripe session? perhaps you should all go out and start burining all the copies you can get ahold of now? That satanic, vile, evil Harry Potter teaching our children sorcery is now joined by scheming satirists who might DARE suggest that maybe an all encompassing beurocratic government is anything less than a gift from Gawd Hisself.

I can't wait till the poor kid who reads this rebels when he is a teenager and ties himself to trees.
Whilst chanting verse from "Dude: Where's my country?"

PS. You know what would happen if you made any of thsoe books? You would be sued by so many different groups you would be begging on the street by the time it was over. It is called hate speech, and that is what the Liberal v Conservative" bullshit is turning into: hate speech, especially on the crazy conservative side (Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, any other conservative given any sort of airtime).

There is a difference between attacking people for their views and attacking them for who they are.

Damn right, left-wingers are supposed to have a monopoly on brain washing the youth. Fuck them and their capatalist methods of getting around choking government brainwashing.

Has anyone bitching here actually, y'know, read the damn thing? Or are we just launching in with the preemptive whine and gripe session? perhaps you should all go out and start burining all the copies you can get ahold of now? That satanic, vile, evil Harry Potter teaching our children sorcery is now joined by scheming satirists who might DARE suggest that maybe an all encompassing beurocratic government is anything less than a gift from Gawd Hisself.
Breath. Remember that unless you calm the fuck down right now you are going to have two dozen liberals rip you a new one in the next twenty seconds. Think about it...

Those damned liberals! Brainwashing kids with such destructive values as respect, tolerance and equality. Because everyone knows how the right can't stand for those sissy values. :rolleyes:
You mean like respect and tolerance for someone else's religious beliefs, even if they happen to be Christian? ;)

You mean like respect and tolerance for someone else's religious beliefs, even if they happen to be Christian? ;)

Actually, yes.

PS. You know what would happen if you made any of thsoe books? You would be sued by so many different groups you would be begging on the street by the time it was over. It is called hate speech, and that is what the Liberal v Conservative" bullshit is turning into: hate speech, especially on the crazy conservative side (Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, any other conservative given any sort of airtime).
If you want to hear real venomous hate speech, listen to Al Franken. That guy is so pissed off all the time he probably has ulcers that have ulcers.

You know what's real sad... This is how the Nazis ensnared the young and got 12 year olds to shoot Panzerfäuste at tanks when the Russians came to Berlin :(

Actually, yes.
Yeah, right. :rolleyes: Too bad that respect and tolerance is almost never on display. It sure as hell isn't the right that is constantly attacking Christianity. It seems like all I ever hear from the left are messages of hate. I hate Bush. I hate Rush. I hate Hannity. I hate Christians. I hate this that and the other thing. For people who pratically invented the term "hate-speech", they sure do spew an awful lot of hate-speech.

Breath. Remember that unless you calm the fuck down right now you are going to have two dozen liberals rip you a new one in the next twenty seconds. Think about it...
The first bit was sarcasm, and so it had to be outrages. However, the second part is half-hyperbole, half-genuine annoyance, half-sarcasm, and 110% bad at maths.
The only thing I had to myself when I thought of most leftists in the world is "at least they respect free speech, they'd never dance around fires and burn books." Now thats gone, and my average opinion of fellow humans has dropped another notch. At this rate I really will have to embark upon my plain to exterminate humanity in a few years (and, yes, I really do have a plan committed to paper; the only problem is that it would take half a century or so and a couple trillion dollars to implement).

You know what's real sad... This is how the Nazis ensnared the young and got 12 year olds to shoot Panzerfäuste at tanks when the Russians came to Berlin :(
Yeah, they should have just put their hands in the air, and let the Russian tanks roll in and take their city.

Yeah, right. :rolleyes: Too bad that respect and tolerance is almost never on display. It sure as hell isn't the right that is constantly attacking Christianity. It seems like all I ever hear from the left are messages of hate. I hate Bush. I hate Rush. I hate Hannity. I hate Christians. I hate this that and the other thing. For people who pratically invented the term "hate-speech", they sure do spew an awful lot of hate-speech.
Thats not hate, thats just a very special kind of love. Only an ignorant hate filled rightist would interperet it as hatred.

The first bit was sarcasm, and so it had to be outrages. However, the second part is half-hyperbole, half-genuine annoyance, half-sarcasm, and 110% bad at maths.
The only thing I had to myself when I thought of most leftists in the world is "at least they respect free speech, they'd never dance around fires and burn books." Now thats gone, and my average opinion of fellow humans has dropped another notch. At this rate I really will have to embark upon my plain to exterminate humanity in a few years (and, yes, I really do have a plan committed to paper; the only problem is that it would take half a century or so and a couple trillion dollars to implement).
I think the book is just crap. If it were "Help! Mom! There are republicans under my bed!" It would still be crap. The idea is crap. Comparing this to a book like, "Heather has two mommies" is nonsense. Because somewhere there is a girl with two mommies. And that book is for her. What kid goes to school and comes home and says, "Mom. Billy's a liberal and he's teasing me for my political beliefs."
I know you didn't compare the book to the one I suggested... just saying.

Yeah, they should have just put their hands in the air, and let the Russian tanks roll in and take their city.Russians had the habit of only raping women and weren't likely to shoot people that weren't armed...
In fact, yes, the should have let the Russian tanks roll in and take Berlin. It would have saved so many lives and so much destruction that was needlessly wrought because some people thought someone had a couple tricks up his sleeve and was only luring the Russian into a false sense of security.

Thats not hate, thats just a very special kind of love. Only an ignorant hate filled rightist would interperet it as hatred.
(laughing)
:fluffle: Feel the love.

Russians had the habit of only raping women and weren't likely to shoot people that weren't armed...
In fact, yes, the should have let the Russian tanks roll in and take Berlin. It would have saved so many lives and so much destruction that was needlessly wrought because some people thought someone had a couple tricks up his sleeve and was only luring the Russian into a false sense of security.

A. Geez, try staying awake in history next time.
B. When can we get the "Conservative" version? I'm tired of both sides sounding like 60's KKK members.

Russians had the habit of only raping women and weren't likely to shoot people that weren't armed...
In fact, yes, the should have let the Russian tanks roll in and take Berlin. It would have saved so many lives and so much destruction that was needlessly wrought because some people thought someone had a couple tricks up his sleeve and was only luring the Russian into a false sense of security.
Yeah, that's a great idea. If a foreign nation decides to conquer your nation, you should just let them. Why defend your country from invaders? Everyone knows its much better to be oppressed by a warmongering regime. Just ask France.

I think the book is just crap. If it were "Help! Mom! There are republicans under my bed!" It would still be crap. The idea is crap. Comparing this to a book like, "Heather has two mommies" is nonsense. Because somewhere there is a girl with two mommies. And that book is for her. What kid goes to school and comes home and says, "Mom. Billy's a liberal and he's teasing me for my political beliefs."
I know you didn't compare the book to the one I suggested... just saying.
No, the point isn't American Liberals teasing, its about a corrupt money-grubbing government crushing the life out of small business.
And, yes, there were kids who had this problem (some kids lemonade stand was busted on zoning regulations, or licensing, or something of the like, so there, nyeh!).
As far as I can tell, nothing here is about hate. It is anti-Facist (Facists like government regulation, that is where you get government power), and, thus, not pro-Nazi. As a result, this reaction is even stupider than the reaction to Harry Potter that the right was lambasted for.

A. Geez, try staying awake in history next time.
B. When can we get the "Conservative" version? I'm tired of both sides sounding like 60's KKK members.You can visit some of the Nazi regions for a "conservative" view on the battle in my home city, if you'd like...

No, the point isn't American Liberals teasing, its about a corrupt money-grubbing government crushing the life out of small business.
And, yes, there were kids who had this problem (some kids lemonade stand was busted on zoning regulations, or licensing, or something of the like, so there, nyeh!).
As far as I can tell, nothing here is about hate. It is anti-Facist (Facists like government regulation, that is where you get government power), and, thus, not pro-Nazi. As a result, this reaction is even stupider than the reaction to Harry Potter that the right was lambasted for.
Some liberals took away a kids lemonade stand?
Are you talking about this?
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/08/04/lemonade.stand.ap/
That happened only days ago. And it was resolved. How does this have anything to do with children dealing with politics?

Yeah, that's a great idea. If a foreign nation decides to conquer your nation, you should just let them. Why defend your country from invaders? Everyone knows its much better to be oppressed by a warmongering regime. Just ask France.The Nazis were the warmongers, mind you. By the time the Russians were near Berlin, the war was less than three weeks away from being over. Sure nice to waste a bit more blood for those three weeks. At least Albert Speer didn't follow Hitler's orders for destroying everything technological...

Some liberals took away a kids lemonade stand?
It was a guy running a nearby hot dog stand who wanted to cut-throat the competition. Afterward, he was regretful and apologetic, but it was too late. At least that's the way I heard it on the news...

The Nazis were the warmongers, mind you. By the time the Russians were near Berlin, the war was less than three weeks away from being over. Sure nice to waste a bit more blood for those three weeks. At least Albert Speer didn't follow Hitler's orders for destroying everything technological...
The Nazis weren't the only warmongers. You can't look at the history of the USSR and tell me honestly that they weren't warmongering and oppressive.

Some liberals took away a kids lemonade stand?
No, but they were forced to "cease and desist" because some sausage guy complained about their unlicensed business, in Massachusets I believe, but you can Google away if you must. Overregulation of business due to big government.
Alternately, I could just go vague and say that small businesses have to battle hard against goverment overregulation and taxation, and that this book satirises it. Which I hate whole heartedly, how dare they put satire in children's literature. Only horrible hacks do that, and they are never remembered by sensible people . . .
Or are they?:eek:

That happened only days ago. And it was resolved. How does this have anything to do with children dealing with politics?
That government would get involved in a lemonade stand is ridiculous. Which is what the story is about (Government regulation gone mad). There are no liberals under the bed, that is a play on words with the monsters under the bed.

Maybe the liberals should write a book about a Republican mayor. I'm saying the idea is a bad one but such a book could be easily done.

"A father builds a Treehouse for his four children and 25 other neighborhood kids after receiving permission from the zoning administrator. Over 5 years later, Mayor Rosemary Aultman of Clinton Mississippi, fearing a scourge of front yard accessory buildings, orders the Treehouse torn down. The father and mother appeal the decision to the planning and zoning board who cannot find any ordinance that was broken; but the board amazingly and illegally renders no recommendation under the poor guidance of the city attorney Ken Dreher. A public hearing vote by a standing room only crowd is unanimous to keep the treehouse. Not one person opposes the treehouse.
Of course, a second appeal to the mayor and her board is denied. The city compares their duty to remove this treehouse to Worldcom and Watergate."
TREEHOUSE IS SAVED BY THE LOWER COURT
CITY APPEALS TO THE SUPREME COURT
Amazingly, the Mayor and Board vote to appeal the ruling to the state Supreme Court. Even before the Judge made her ruling, the Mayor Rosemary Aultman said that she would appeal leaving no doubt that she wanted this treehouse gone.
The city's costs are enormous. WJTV reports that the city has already spent well over $10,000 and estimates the city will spend over $30,000 to remove this treehouse in the high courts.
The John P McGovern Group of Washington, D.C. declares the Mayor's abuse against the Treehouse as one of the worst examples of Government abuse in the nation to show the staggering degree to which government regulation can harm average Americans." http://www.saveourtreehouse.com/SaveOurTreehouse/frequently_asked_questions_1.htm
To show that she is Republican: "Mayor Rosemary Aultman will face Clint Brantley in the Republican primary." http://www.clintonnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050310/NEWS/503100353/1001

No, but they were forced to "cease and desist" because some sausage guy complained about their unlicensed business, in Massachusets I believe, but you can Google away if you must. Overregulation of business due to big government.
Alternately, I could just go vague and say that small businesses have to battle hard against goverment overregulation and taxation, and that this book satirises it. Which I hate whole heartedly, how dare they put satire in children's literature. Only horrible hacks do that, and they are never remembered by sensible people . . .
Or are they?:eek:
You didn't read the link, did you?

The Nazis weren't the only warmongers. You can't look at the history of the USSR and tell me honestly that they weren't warmongering and oppressive.Not where Nazi Germany was involved. Far as I can remember, Stalin was waiting for an invasion by the Allies and actually stuck to the HS Pact.
"I couldn't help myself. If the I was to make peace with the Russians, I would break it a moment later. I can't help myself." -Adolf Hitler
Who's the friggin' warmonger?
Please don't tell me you know more about my country's history. It gets offensive when you gloss over that particular chapter.

You didn't read the link, did you?
You edited the link in after I replied (which is completely unfair). However, my point (though unnessecarily vague now) still stands, nanny regulations and overtaxation are asinine and there is nothing wrong with parents being offered the chance to reveal this to their kids.

You edited the link in after I replied (which is completely unfair). However, my point (though unnessecarily vague now) still stands, nanny regulations and overtaxation are asinine and there is nothing wrong with parents being offered the chance to reveal this to their kids.Yes there is. The magic of childhood shouldn't be destroyed by how ugly politics have become. Right or Left.

Not where Nazi Germany was involved. Far as I can remember, Stalin was waiting for an invasion by the Allies and actually stuck to the HS Pact.
"I couldn't help myself. If the I was to make peace with the Russians, I would break it a moment later. I can't help myself." -Adolf Hitler
Who's the friggin' warmonger?
Please don't tell me you know more about my country's history. It gets offensive when you gloss over that particular chapter.
Don't get offended. I'm looking at the overall history of the USSR, not just WWII. I do understand your point. We just have a difference of opinion. The real problem here is that this angle of the coversation is getting WAY off topic.

Don't get offended. I'm looking at the overall history of the USSR, not just WWII. I do understand your point. We just have a difference of opinion. The real problem here is that this angle of the coversation is getting WAY off topic.True, but I really hate ignorance on the topic of WWII when concerning the wonderful last sacrifices of 12 year olds against Soviet tanks. It's sick to say "They shouldn't have let the tanks roll through." My grandpa would agree, and he was 9 at the time (though not in Berlin, thank goodness).
Let's drop it here. ;)

Gah, partisanship sucks. Can we just kill off 90% of the voting population and start over?

Yes there is. The magic of childhood shouldn't be destroyed by how ugly politics have become. Right or Left.
Alright then, no more Raul Dahl. Political atire exists there, and that may corrupt children.
Rocky and Bullwinkle is gone, hidden messages there may be intercepted.
Similarly, Alice in Wonderland, The Magic Tollbooth, and similar works contain elements of satire and should be disposed of.
After all, By Gawd, we must keep our chilluns from those 'orrible people. If you let them get exposed to reality, they might just develop intelligence, and then they might not swallow the manure that public schools and organized religion desire to shovel down their throats, and then we might actually have Free Thinking Individuals who don't need a Father Knows Best Government lurking over their shoulder to protect them from their own idiocy.

OK, I quit. My level 31 Steamband character needs my attentions, and no one here seems to want to do anything than whine about the use of the word, "Liberal". Quick thought here people, read something other than the title next time, and then maybe someone can take you seriously when you want to talk about a story's merits.

Alright then, no more Raul Dahl. Political atire exists there, and that may corrupt children.
Rocky and Bullwinkle is gone, hidden messages there may be intercepted.
Similarly, Alice in Wonderland, The Magic Tollbooth, and similar works contain elements of satire and should be disposed of.


So this book is on par with those books and cartoons?

Pandering is not always good satire.

OK, I quit. My level 31 Steamband character needs my attentions, and no one here seems to want to do anything than whine about the use of the word, "Liberal". Quick thought here people, read something other than the title next time, and then maybe someone can take you seriously when you want to talk about a story's merits.

Have you read it? Defending it without reading it is the same.....

You edited the link in after I replied (which is completely unfair). However, my point (though unnessecarily vague now) still stands, nanny regulations and overtaxation are asinine and there is nothing wrong with parents being offered the chance to reveal this to their kids.
That was unintentional. I thought I edited it in quickly enough. Sorry.

Showing children satire is one thing. Deliberately trying to illustrate how our country is divided and then showing exactly which side that child should be on is another. People like Dahl did throw social commentary into their books but based more on basic moral systems than to promote a political agenda.

Showing children satire is one thing. Deliberately trying to illustrate how our country is divided and then showing exactly which side that child should be on is another. People like Dahl did throw social commentary into their books but based more on basic moral systems than to promote a political agenda.Children don't understand satire. It's just like that, it's a skill you aquire with age...

Children don't understand satire. It's just like that, it's a skill you aquire with age...
I don't know if that is necessarily true but if done too subtly it will go over their heads.

I don't know if that is necessarily true but if done too subtly it will go over their heads.I didn't understand satire when I was six and I've seen it in children I've worked with. The target group of that book is too young to understand.

I didn't understand satire when I was six and I've seen it in children I've worked with. The target group of that book is too young to understand.
You sound like you have loads more experience with children than I do.

You sound like you have loads more experience with children than I do.Why? How much experience have you had? :D

(laughing hysterically)
That's funny as hell!
The sad thing about it is its proof that the right has finally sunk to the level that the left has been on for years. Brainwashing kids when they're too young to know any better. Up until now, I had been under the impression that the right was the one side that was above this. Well, I guess this means that in a decade or two, right wingers below the age of 20 won't be so few and far between.

Um-hmm, and what left-wing hate books for children can you name?

I always thought Sesame Street and Curious George were radical leftists.

Um-hmm, and what left-wing hate books for children can you name?

I always thought Sesame Street and Curious George were radical leftists.Exactly. What kind of world would we live in if MONKEYS could be functioning members of society?!? What's next, acceptance of evolution? :D

Exactly. What kind of world would we live in if MONKEYS could be functioning members of society?!? What's next, acceptance of evolution? :D

It would be a world where a lot of puzzle pieces go missing.

pretty sure this a joke, remember when someone published a "childrens" book along the lines or where is waldo but it was about finding WMDs and you could find any in the whole book. thinking the intended audience in adult just thought a children's media, much like southpark

Exactly. What kind of world would we live in if MONKEYS could be functioning members of society?!? What's next, acceptance of evolution? :D

And Sesame Street is clearly radical leftist propaganda. I mean, it promotes tolerance towards monsters, whom, we can tell from their name, are clearly evil. Also, the Count is obviously endorsing violent "alternative" lifestyles, Kermit the Frog is undoubtedly present as a nod to the French, and everyone knows "Big Bird" is really a code word for radical feminism. Not to mention that Elmo is clearly a sissy pansy-boy, seeing as he likes things like drawing pretty pictures and dancing, and his best friend is female. Given all this, it's practically certain that soon Bert and Ernie will be adopting a baby together and teaching it to be a Satan-worshipping communist!

;)

Yeah, that's a great idea. If a foreign nation decides to conquer your nation, you should just let them. Why defend your country from invaders? Everyone knows its much better to be oppressed by a warmongering regime. Just ask France.

Well, now we know why the Iraqis are throwing bombs at our boys "over there."

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0976726904/ref=cm_cr_dp_pt/002-7780571-4872007?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=283155&s=books
Read the reviews.

It was a guy running a nearby hot dog stand who wanted to cut-throat the competition. Afterward, he was regretful and apologetic, but it was too late. At least that's the way I heard it on the news...
Capitalizm at work. Destroy the competition by any means necessary.
Don't believe everything you hear on Fox News...

And Sesame Street is clearly radical leftist propaganda. I mean, it promotes tolerance towards monsters, whom, we can tell from their name, are clearly evil. Also, the Count is obviously endorsing violent "alternative" lifestyles, Kermit the Frog is undoubtedly present as a nod to the French, and everyone knows "Big Bird" is really a code word for radical feminism. Not to mention that Elmo is clearly a sissy pansy-boy, seeing as he likes things like drawing pretty pictures and dancing, and his best friend is female. Given all this, it's practically certain that soon Bert and Ernie will be adopting a baby together and teaching it to be a Satan-worshipping communist!

;)Ah, but are you sure that the Count isn't a Republican? I mean he has the cape...
Anyway, Bert and Ernie? There's actually a couple of puppets on a very perverted news parody that's on on Fridays, RTL Freitag Nacht News (http://www.rtl.de/comedy/fnn/freitagnachtnews.php) that used to be called Bernie and Ert (now known as Unkown #1 and 2 and wearing SM leather outfits) that was rather clearly... unrepublican to say the least :D

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0976726904/ref=cm_cr_dp_pt/002-7780571-4872007?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=283155&s=books
Read the reviews.
Oh, I wish someone would have told me earlier!Actually, the first volume in this series was titled, "Help, Mom! I Have to Work in the Coal Mine 16 Hours a Day!", written in 1894. Unfortunately, since the evil liberals initiated child labor laws, demand has fallen, and the book is no longer in print.

The only thing I had to myself when I thought of most leftists in the world is "at least they respect free speech, they'd never dance around fires and burn books." Now thats gone, and my average opinion of fellow humans has dropped another notch.
Okay, once more with feeling-

Calling something stupid, or critisizing it, etc. is not infringing on free speech. In fact, it could be argued that free speech is actually the freedom to call something stupid and critisize it.

Just so we're all clear.

No, the point isn't American Liberals teasing, its about a corrupt money-grubbing government crushing the life out of small business.
And, yes, there were kids who had this problem (some kids lemonade stand was busted on zoning regulations, or licensing, or something of the like, so there, nyeh!).
As far as I can tell, nothing here is about hate. It is anti-Facist (Facists like government regulation, that is where you get government power), and, thus, not pro-Nazi. As a result, this reaction is even stupider than the reaction to Harry Potter that the right was lambasted for.Harry Potter was at least subtle about luring young children off of the righteous path of the Lord by pretending that magic was good :p
No, this book reminds me of Nazi propaganda books for small children that were charicatures of Jews and whatnot. It's disgusting if you ask me.

Well, now we know why the Iraqis are throwing bombs at our boys "over there."
Anybody with at least half of one living brain cell knew even before the war began that some Iraqis would fight to the death to defend their home land. However, it seems that more advanced intelligence, like maybe an extra half brain cell, is required in order to understand that most of the people attacking US troops at this point are not Iraqis.

In other words... no sher, shitlock.

Read the reviews and then read the posts in here.

Capitalizm at work. Destroy the competition by any means necessary.
Don't believe everything you hear on Fox News...
Capitalism is not about destroying competition any more than any other system.
What the hell does Fox News have to do with this? Don't believe everything you hear on ANY news channel.
Why is it so hard for you to be honest?

Breath. Remember that unless you calm the fuck down right now you are going to have two dozen liberals rip you a new one in the next twenty seconds. Think about it...
Ooooooooooooo! I'm sure that he, like me, is just scared shitless! ROFLMFAO!!!!!!

Yeah, right. :rolleyes: Too bad that respect and tolerance is almost never on display. It sure as hell isn't the right that is constantly attacking Christianity. It seems like all I ever hear from the left are messages of hate. I hate Bush. I hate Rush. I hate Hannity. I hate Christians. I hate this that and the other thing. For people who pratically invented the term "hate-speech", they sure do spew an awful lot of hate-speech.
Excellent point. All too often it seems that the only "tolerance" the left wants is tolerance directed at them.

There is a difference between attacking people for their views and attacking them for who they are.
There is no difference when you stop attacking the views and start attacking the people who hold those views.

PS. The post above mine counts as irony.

What kid goes to school and comes home and says, "Mom. Billy's a liberal and he's teasing me for my political beliefs."
Actually, this very thing has happened at a number of schools, one of them very close to where I live.

Well at least its better than Liberals in your bed...Clinton has a lot to answer for.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0976726904/ref=cm_cr_dp_pt/002-7780571-4872007?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=283155&s=books
Read the reviews.
I saw more messages of hate in the first ten reviews than could possibly fit in that entire book. Not surprisingly, they were all coming from people who hate the book.

Given the choice between a Leftist Aging Hyppie Fag and a Right Conservative Redneck Id pick ,Josef Stalin. :D

It sure as hell isn't the right that is constantly attacking Christianity.

I'm pretty sure the Islamic right wing does this quite a lot of the time. The Christian right wing is generally too busy attacking Muslim cuture (Oh no, their call to prayer is PUTTING WORDS IN YOUR HEAD!) and proclaiming anything that it doesn't particularly like as being either Satanic or Dangerous.

I saw more messages of hate in the first ten reviews than could possibly fit in that entire book. Not surprisingly, they were all coming from people who hate the book.

I'm willing to bet not one of them have read it either. How tolerant.

I have no plan to buy, borrow or read it.

I wont put a review in there to praise or ridicule it either.

Clinton has a lot to answer for.

No .... no he doesn't. His marriage and everything involved in it is none of your business. What goes on in Bill and/or Hillary's bed is none of anyone's business except Bill and Hillary.

Period.

I must admit, thought, that it makes me giggle how conservatives will complain and bitch and moan about Liberal intrusion into their lives with things like taxation, forced politeness (PC), compassion, and common sense reasoning but then turn right around and say how those icky gays shouldn't be allowed to have butt sex in their own homes and how a married man who gets his knob slobbed by an intern must be held accountable to the whole country.

Hypocrisy rocks!

Hypocrisy rocks!

Their first album was okay, but they went downhill after that.

This would be funny if it weren't so sad. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0976726904/qid=1124746343/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-9677285-7681629?v=glance&s=books)

That someone would actually read this to/with their children is just plain old scary.
Is this serious...? I really cant work it out.

Good boys pray? Everyday?

This would be funny if it weren't so sad. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0976726904/qid=1124746343/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-9677285-7681629?v=glance&s=books)

That someone would actually read this to/with their children is just plain old scary.
I don't think anyone is going to read this to a child. We have more subtle ways to teach our children the value of individuality and responsibility. It's called life.

I've ordered one just for kicks, though. Thanks Fass.

I just laughed to hard my lungs fell out

Excellent point. All too often it seems that the only "tolerance" the left wants is tolerance directed at them.

You know Eutrusca, as soon as I start thinking you're an okay fellow, you have to go and say something like this...

Bad Eutrusca, bad!

You know Eutrusca, as soon as I start thinking you're an okay fellow, you have to go and say something like this...

Bad Eutrusca, bad!
You think that's bad??? Try the review I wrote on for size! LOL!


Attacks by liberals prove its validity., August 24, 2005
Reviewer: Forrest L. Horn, Sr. "American Centrist" (Kernersville, NC, USA) - See all my reviews

Finally a book that tells children the truth about the liberal agenda for America. The fact that liberals have so vehemently attacked both book and author constitues sufficient proof that this little book has hit a nerve. The true face of liberalism in America is revealed in the "book burning" comments by those who would have heart failure should the same thing be suggested for, as an example, "Heather Has Two Mommies."

It's a real pleasure to see liberals reveal their true faces.

I don't think anyone is going to read this to a child. We have more subtle ways to teach our children the value of individuality and responsibility. It's called life.

I've ordered one just for kicks, though. Thanks Fass.


I couldnt see me reading this to my children, wether or not I agree with it.

You think that's bad??? Try the review I wrote on for size! LOL!


Attacks by liberals prove its validity., August 24, 2005
Reviewer: Forrest L. Horn, Sr. "American Centrist" (Kernersville, NC, USA) - See all my reviews

Finally a book that tells children the truth about the liberal agenda for America. The fact that liberals have so vehemently attacked both book and author constitues sufficient proof that this little book has hit a nerve. The true face of liberalism in America is revealed in the "book burning" comments by those who would have heart failure should the same thing be suggested for, as an example, "Heather Has Two Mommies."

It's a real pleasure to see liberals reveal their true faces.

Eutrusca- you didnt read it, did you? Now you know all the shriekers in here will simply go write their own reviews as well. A total waste of time-nothing at all is accomplished.
I dont understand the purpose of being able to write a review-which indicates some knowledge of content-without actually having that knowledge.
This sort of takes away from the value of these reviews, if one was actually trying to get an idea before they purchased something.

I couldnt see me reading this to my children, wether or not I agree with it.
Na, I suspect most of it is satire. Satire isn't something that a young child is going to understand. On the other hand, it might be very entertaining for adults. You know The Flintstones started out as an adult-oriented cartoon. Not porno, just satire. They even had Fred and Barney smoking the advertisers cigarettes.

She taught me sweet sweet luuuuurve :eek:

You think that's bad??? Try the review I wrote on for size! LOL!


Attacks by liberals prove its validity., August 24, 2005
Reviewer: Forrest L. Horn, Sr. "American Centrist" (Kernersville, NC, USA) - See all my reviews

Finally a book that tells children the truth about the liberal agenda for America. The fact that liberals have so vehemently attacked both book and author constitues sufficient proof that this little book has hit a nerve. The true face of liberalism in America is revealed in the "book burning" comments by those who would have heart failure should the same thing be suggested for, as an example, "Heather Has Two Mommies."

It's a real pleasure to see liberals reveal their true faces.
Because we all know centrists attack liberals and praise conservatives with every political statement they make...

Excellent point. All too often it seems that the only "tolerance" the left wants is tolerance directed at them.

And to be fair the same can be said for the Right.

You think that's bad??? Try the review I wrote on for size! LOL!


Attacks by liberals prove its validity., August 24, 2005
Reviewer: Forrest L. Horn, Sr. "American Centrist" (Kernersville, NC, USA) - See all my reviews

Finally a book that tells children the truth about the liberal agenda for America. The fact that liberals have so vehemently attacked both book and author constitues sufficient proof that this little book has hit a nerve. The true face of liberalism in America is revealed in the "book burning" comments by those who would have heart failure should the same thing be suggested for, as an example, "Heather Has Two Mommies."

It's a real pleasure to see liberals reveal their true faces.

I dunno why "liberals" are such bogeymen to you, but your opinion is not based on reality.

You insult me directly, who has never done you any harm, when you flippantly dismiss all liberals.

Why?

I dunno why "liberals" are such bogeymen to you, but your opinion is not based on reality.

You insult me directly, who has never done you any harm, when you flippantly dismiss all liberals.

Why?
Well, when Eutrusca was young, he had to cross a bridge to go to school everyday. He made this trip with a few of his friends. Under this bridge lived a big and nasty liberal who wanted to do things like stop wars and provide universal health care and was often found smoking pot. Soon, however, a child would disappear each day on the way to school. One day, Eutrusca was walking alone over the bridge and decided to look under it. There he found his friends consorting with the liberal instead of walking with him to school, and that day he knew he would never trust a liberal, ever.

I've never owned a copy of either of them, so I wouldn't know. Although, I was given a New Testament by a gideon once. I hope it recycled better than it did as a paperweight.

Just going off point for a second.Youre obviously not big into Christianity,and of course what you believe or don't believe is your own business.But the Bible is something that has been nothing short of sacred to a lot of people for a long time.A little respect would'nt go astray.
I'm not Muslim but I wouldn't leave a copy of the Koran lying on the ground.

I agree with Eutrusca. America definately has hit a point where only liberals are entitled to less criticism than other opinions. Though, I think it may just be that liberals think they need to shout more when an opinion is expressed that does not agree with their. And who knows, maybe liberals are hiding under my bed and scurry off everytime I look under it.

I'm pretty sure the Islamic right wing does this quite a lot of the time. The Christian right wing is generally too busy attacking Muslim cuture (Oh no, their call to prayer is PUTTING WORDS IN YOUR HEAD!) and proclaiming anything that it doesn't particularly like as being either Satanic or Dangerous.
Basically, you're saying they're just a mirror image of the left. That sounds about right.

You know Eutrusca, as soon as I start thinking you're an okay fellow, you have to go and say something like this...

Bad Eutrusca, bad!
Yes, critisize him for being honest. The truth is evil.

Well, when Eutrusca was young, he had to cross a bridge to go to school everyday. He made this trip with a few of his friends. Under this bridge lived a big and nasty liberal who wanted to do things like stop wars and provide universal health care and was often found smoking pot. Soon, however, a child would disappear each day on the way to school. One day, Eutrusca was walking alone over the bridge and decided to look under it. There he found his friends consorting with the liberal instead of walking with him to school, and that day he knew he would never trust a liberal, ever.

Close, but I think what he found under the bridge was something that would prevent large companies from working efficiently and steal his money then give it to the prostitute at the end of the street so she can get her herpes checked.

I agree with Eutrusca. America definately has hit a point where only liberals are entitled to less criticism than other opinions. Though, I think it may just be that liberals think they need to shout more when an opinion is expressed that does not agree with their. And who knows, maybe liberals are hiding under my bed and scurry off everytime I look under it.

Lol. So how does one travel to alternate universes?

Lol. So how does one travel to alternate universes?

I love your deterrence from any real rebuttal.

I just checked. There are no liberals under my son's bed.

And I fail to see how Heather has Two Mommies or any of the other "liberal" books mentioned in this thread teach children to hate conservatives. This book, on the other hand, is obviously meant to teach children to hate liberals.

So, I guess the "liberal" agenda that has been revealed by this book is tolerance for others, while the conservative agenda that has been revealed is intolerance for others.

:rolleyes:

I dunno why "liberals" are such bogeymen to you, but your opinion is not based on reality.

You insult me directly, who has never done you any harm, when you flippantly dismiss all liberals.

Why?
I know this my be very difficult for you to accept, but it is a cold hard fact. The reality is, if you change the word "liberal" in the above quote to the word "conservative", then this statement applies just as, if not even more, aptly to you.

Close, but I think what he found under the bridge was something that would prevent large companies from working efficiently and steal his money then give it to the prostitute at the end of the street so she can get her herpes checked.
Ooh, ooh, did the liberal under the bridge prevent children from working in factories and require them to follow safety instructions which wouldn't poison the air and water supply or kill random animals?

I just checked. There are no liberals under my son's bed.

And I fail to see how Heather has Two Mommies or any of the other "liberal" books mentioned in this thread teach children to hate conservatives. This book, on the other hand, is obviously meant to teach children to hate liberals.

So, I guess the "liberal" agenda that has been revealed by this book is tolerance for others, while the conservative agenda that has been revealed is intolerance for others.

:rolleyes:

Neither teach to hate I would argue. They both just force (And I use the term in a way liberals use on a daily basis) opinions against their own onto people.

Example:

An atheist goes to a school and doesn't like saying "Under God" in the pledge and is not scolded for his desicion ::: Obviously, this is evil and "Under God" should be taken out.

Now, I went to a public school, was forced to watch a film about how abortion can be alright in my health class. ::: Obviously, this is alright.

Close, but I think what he found under the bridge was something that would prevent large companies from working efficiently and steal his money then give it to the prostitute at the end of the street so she can get her herpes checked.

Ah, as opposed to the Neo-Con (as opposed to classical Conservative) Bridge Troll who prefers that subsidies be given to big companies at the expense of the common man and who cares not about efficiency either just as long as stock-holders who do no actual work themselves are rewarded.

Hey, exaggerated hyperbole and sweeping statements are fun!

Ooh, ooh, did the liberal under the bridge prevent children from working in factories and require them to follow safety instructions which wouldn't poison the air and water supply or kill random animals?

Oh, I I think he kept mumbling something about the person who spends money wisely should give a third to saving trees and a third to people who frivilously spend money.

Ah, as opposed to the Neo-Con (as opposed to classical Conservative) Bridge Troll who prefers that subsidies be given to big companies at the expense of the common man and who cares not about efficiency either just as long as stock-holders who do no actual work themselves are rewarded.

Hey, exaggerated hyperbole and sweeping statements are fun!
Definately they are fun, just trying to loosen up people a bit. Everyone's so serious.

Close, but I think what he found under the bridge was something that would prevent large companies from working efficiently and steal his money then give it to the prostitute at the end of the street so she can get her herpes checked.

Damn right... Companies should be allowed to employ 8 year olds for jobs that require access to small enclosed spaces...
And they should be allowed to pay people so little that when they get ill they have to choose between eating and midicine.
And having to provide safety equipment to manual labourers is just dang un-American.
And i cant believe they want to fund education for the children of the poor. I mean the children should have thought about their parents ability to afford education before they were born.


All that aside you gotta admit it is for the greater good that the prostitute does get her herpes checked...

I know this my be very difficult for you to accept, but it is a cold hard fact. The reality is, if you change the word "liberal" in the above quote to the word "conservative", then this statement applies just as, if not even more, aptly to you.

Really? Are you talking out of your ass, or do you have an example?

You might be able to find an example or two of me being provoked and making a statement about "conservatives," but certainly not with the regularity and venom with which you and Eutrusca exhibit towards "liberals."

Also, I tend to tightly qualify my statements so as to not be sweeping, exaggerated or overly generalized. Go ahead, review my post history.

I expect a retraction and an apology.

All we need is Pat Robertson one where the USA prevails of the evil leftist Hugo Chavez. :D

Really? Are you talking out of your ass, or do you have an example?

You might be able to find an example or two of me being provoked and making a statement about "conservatives," but certainly not with the regularity and venom with which you and Eutrusca exhibit towards "liberals."

Also, I tend to tightly qualify my statements so as to not be sweeping, exaggerated or overly generalized. Go ahead, review my post history.

I expect a retraction and an apology.

Hey, play nice.
Is GWB not the bogeyman in a lot of people's posts. But then again he's just kinda retarded.

Because we all know centrists attack liberals and praise conservatives with every political statement they make...
No. I attack ideologicly knee-jerk idiots regardless of their political proclivities. Check the current thread about Pat Robertson. But I know you prefer to find the devil in anyone who dares to disagree with you, so it's unlikely anything will alter your opinions.

Basically, you're saying they're just a mirror image of the left. That sounds about right.
Unfortunately, you're not far from being correct about the radical right-wing fundamentalists being a mirror image in many ways of the radical left-wing elitists.

Hey, play nice.
Is GWB not the bogeyman in a lot of people's posts. But then again he's just kinda retarded.

Lol. I am playing nice. I simply asked him to back up his specific assertion about me.

Unfortunately, you're not far from being correct about the radical right-wing fundamentalists being a mirror image in many ways of the radical left-wing elitists.

lol, people on either extreme are "elitists" since they consider anyone who doesn't conform to their ideology to be inferior. It's a knee-jerk buzzword and nothing else.

lol, people on either extreme are "elitists" since they consider anyone who doesn't conform to their ideology to be inferior. It's a knee-jerk buzzword and nothing else.

Regardless of terminology what he says is true.

(laughing hysterically)
That's funny as hell!
The sad thing about it is its proof that the right has finally sunk to the level that the left has been on for years. Brainwashing kids when they're too young to know any better. Up until now, I had been under the impression that the right was the one side that was above this. Well, I guess this means that in a decade or two, right wingers below the age of 20 won't be so few and far between.

Oh so it's fine for an obese hypocrite like Michael Moore to make a book about how republicans are evil, yet a children's book that is a satire of Liberals is wrong?

This book is funny shit. Laugh at it or with it.

Regardless of terminology what he says is true.

In that specific instance, you are right, but by labelling one extreme as "elitist" and leaving the other unqualified, he's making an unfair distinction while saying there is no distinction.

Canada City']Oh so it's fine for an obese hypocrite like Michael Moore to make a book about how republicans are evil, yet a children's book that is a satire of Liberals is wrong?

This book is funny shit. Laugh at it or with it.

Ah, the Moore bomb has been dropped. Talk about a bunker buster.

The problem is, Moore's books are neither written nor marketed for children.

lol, people on either extreme are "elitists" since they consider anyone who doesn't conform to their ideology to be inferior. It's a knee-jerk buzzword and nothing else.
Elitist leftists act as if anyone who dares to disagree with their ideology is the devil. Radical right-wing fundamentalists will state outright that anyone who dares to question their "God-given" agenda has the devil in them.

As far as I'm concerned, a plague on both their houses! Preferably something along the lines of the Ebola virus.

You think that's bad??? Try the review I wrote on for size! LOL!


Attacks by liberals prove its validity., August 24, 2005
Reviewer: Forrest L. Horn, Sr. "American Centrist" (Kernersville, NC, USA) - See all my reviews

Finally a book that tells children the truth about the liberal agenda for America. The fact that liberals have so vehemently attacked both book and author constitues sufficient proof that this little book has hit a nerve. The true face of liberalism in America is revealed in the "book burning" comments by those who would have heart failure should the same thing be suggested for, as an example, "Heather Has Two Mommies."

It's a real pleasure to see liberals reveal their true faces.
American Centrist?

That's a load of rubbish.

I did a search yesterday on the threads Eutrusca started himself. I counted 6 praising left-wing values and 36 praising right-wing values. If you remove those about veterans (a hot button for Eut.) and the protest against war (which Eut sees as attacking veterans for some reason), you are still left with 16 Right wing threads.

If you go further and look at his posts in political threads, you will have about a 10:1 ration of attacks against such things as "liberal" "left wing wackos" and other attacks on the left versus "right wing religious folks" and other conservative denigration.

Granted, Eutrusca will denounce some of the Right Wing practices, like Pat Robertson's call to kill Chavez. But his record is clearly Conservative. Do not let yourself be fooled by his claim that he is a centrist. He is not.

(BTW Eutrusca, before you go into moderation to claim a flame: you did open the door by claiming you are an American Centrist.)

As for the book, everyone's entitled to make a buck. It is despicable as a book because it further divides the American nation, it infuse a climate of hate and has not redeeming values whatsoever. You should buy an Ann Coulter book before this piece of garbage. At least with the Coulter book, you can use it to destroy her credibility with her own words.

I think some folks in this thread need to learn the definitions of liberal and conservative. www.dictionary.com will help.

Seems some folks seem to forget that Republican doesn't equal conservative and Democrat doesn't mean liberal.

Yes, it was a Republican who freed the slaves, but abolishion of slavery was a liberal idea and liberal thinking. Yes, it was a Republican who stopped child labor, but that was also liberal thinking.

I think I can safely bet that 100% of the good things Republicans and Democrats have done in the United States was a direct result of Liberal thinking. Women's Suffrage, Abolishing slavery, Civil Rights Act, Constitutional Amendments 1-17 and 19-27. Amendment 18 is a clear example of conservative thinking and hurt this country terribly until liberal thinking repealed it with the 21st amendment.

Now ... that said ... if someone can give me, say, 5 examples of conservative thinking that has done the United States any amount of greater good (meaning not just benefiting an elite or focused group), then I may change my attitude.

And just so we're clear:

Conservative: Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change. (from dictionary.com, first definition).

American Centrist?

That's a load of rubbish.

I did a search yesterday on the threads Eutrusca started himself. I counted 6 praising left-wing values and 36 praising right-wing values. If you remove those about veterans (a hot button for Eut.) and the protest against war (which Eut sees as attacking veterans for some reason), you are still left with 16 Right wing threads.

If you go further and look at his posts in political threads, you will have about a 10:1 ration of attacks against such things as "liberal" "left wing wackos" and other attacks on the left versus "right wing religious folks" and other conservative denigration.

Granted, Eutrusca will denounce some of the Right Wing practices, like Pat Robertson's call to kill Chavez. But his record is clearly Conservative. Do not let yourself be fooled by his claim that he is a centrist. He is not.

(BTW Eutrusca, before you go into moderation to claim a flame: you did open the door by claiming you are an American Centrist.)

As for the book, everyone's entitled to make a buck. It is despicable as a book because it further divides the American nation, it infuse a climate of hate and has not redeeming values whatsoever. You should buy an Ann Coulter book before this piece of garbage. At least with the Coulter book, you can use it to destroy her credibility with her own words.
How flattering to have someone be so concerned about me as to research all the threads I started! I'm impressed in spite of myself. :D

If you choose to call me something other than a "Centrist," that's your business. I couldn't care less, since it changes nothing. :)

Really? Are you talking out of your ass, or do you have an example?

You might be able to find an example or two of me being provoked and making a statement about "conservatives," but certainly not with the regularity and venom with which you and Eutrusca exhibit towards "liberals."

Also, I tend to tightly qualify my statements so as to not be sweeping, exaggerated or overly generalized. Go ahead, review my post history.
First of all, you misunderstood me. When I said "you", I didn't mean just you specifically as an individual. I was referring liberals in general. If you're not a liberal, then your post was misleading.
Secondly, if I'm being regularly venomous toward liberals, this comes as a surprise to me. I was certainly unaware that that's what I've been doing. All I'm doing in this particular thread is pointing out some hypocrisy. I tried listening to Shawn Hannity, and all he kept doing was reading quotes and playing sound clips of liberal hate speech. Then I tried listening to Al Franken, and all I heard was liberal hate speech, except this time I was hearing it straight from the source. Through all of this, liberals would have me believe that conservatives have a monopoly on hate speech. That's hypocrisy.

I expect a retraction and an apology.
(laughing hard)
Since I haven't done anything to apologize for, you'll just have to live with your expectations going unfulfilled.

I'm sure my posts, especially in this particular thread, would have most people convinced that I'm conservative. That doesn't really bother me even though its not exactly true. While my views on some issues lean toward the conservative side, overall my position is just a bit left of center. That's according to one of those little political compass test thingies that someone posted on this forum a while back.

How flattering to have someone be so concerned about me as to research all the threads I started! I'm impressed in spite of myself. :D

If you choose to call me something other than a "Centrist," that's your business. I couldn't care less, since it changes nothing. :)
I aim to please ;)

I choose to call you a conservative because I love it to correct someone when they are clearly wrong. Calling yourself a centrist doesn't make you one.

In that specific instance, you are right, but by labelling one extreme as "elitist" and leaving the other unqualified, he's making an unfair distinction while saying there is no distinction.

Agreed

EDIT
And that might have been the first time that word has been used on this thread

In that specific instance, you are right, but by labelling one extreme as "elitist" and leaving the other unqualified, he's making an unfair distinction while saying there is no distinction.
Read it again. He labelled BOTH sides.
RADICAL right-wing FUNDAMENTALISTS
RADICAL left-wing ELITISTS
That's not unfair in the slightest.
It seems the reason you think it was unfair is simply because he labelled the left side. I suspect that if he had only labelled the right side, and left the left side alone, you would have no objection at all.

Ok, let's just picture gorillas doing the macarana and we can all get a good laugh.

And please no high school biology arguments concerning whether or not gorillas could do the macarana.

I think some folks in this thread need to learn the definitions of liberal and conservative. www.dictionary.com will help.

Seems some folks seem to forget that Republican doesn't equal conservative and Democrat doesn't mean liberal.

Yes, it was a Republican who freed the slaves, but abolishion of slavery was a liberal idea and liberal thinking. Yes, it was a Republican who stopped child labor, but that was also liberal thinking.

I think I can safely bet that 100% of the good things Republicans and Democrats have done in the United States was a direct result of Liberal thinking. Women's Suffrage, Abolishing slavery, Civil Rights Act, Constitutional Amendments 1-17 and 19-27. Amendment 18 is a clear example of conservative thinking and hurt this country terribly until liberal thinking repealed it with the 21st amendment.

Now ... that said ... if someone can give me, say, 5 examples of conservative thinking that has done the United States any amount of greater good (meaning not just benefiting an elite or focused group), then I may change my attitude.

And just so we're clear:

Conservative: Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change. (from dictionary.com, first definition).
Hmmm...all of the Conservative thinking, like Prohibition, Nativism, McCarthyism, etc. seems to have done no good at all in the face of progress. Only since 1980 has America experienced a conservative trend (Reagan and the Bushes, trying to go back to old traditional values and not succeeding very well). But let's face it: the US was built on liberalism and it's still fairly liberal, although economically conservative (progressive tax rates, which Bush is trying to abolish).

I aim to please ;)

I choose to call you a conservative because I love it to correct someone when they are clearly wrong. Calling yourself a centrist doesn't make you one.
No, but he could be a centrist leaning right?

Hmmm...all of the Conservative thinking, like Prohibition, Nativism, McCarthyism, etc. seems to have done no good at all in the face of progress. Only since 1980 has America experienced a conservative trend (Reagan and the Bushes, trying to go back to old traditional values and not succeeding very well). But let's face it: the US was built on liberalism and it's still fairly liberal, although economically conservative (progressive tax rates, which Bush is trying to abolish).

the US was only built on liberalism as compared to Monarchies of the time. Now we just keep becoming more and more liberal. Just like becoming more and more conservative is stupid and self-destroying, so is becoming liberal.

Agreed

EDIT
And that might have been the first time that word has been used on this thread

[shakes Hemingsoft's hand]*

*washes hand :D

Ok, let's just picture gorillas doing the macarana and we can all get a good laugh.

And please no high school biology arguments concerning whether or not gorillas could do the macarana.
But it is physically impossible for gorillas to do the macarana because.... ;)

As for the book, I think anything that tries to influence kids' political thinking at such a young age is rubbish. They should make a decision for themselves when they're old enough. (And I'm not just saying that because I'm a liberal and believe that my ideology is the most acceptable and logical one. Really! ;))

~Envoy of the Nova~

[shakes Hemingsoft's hand]*

*washes hand :D

Good thing you washed that hand, cause I just used the restroom and disn't wash :D

*washes hands too*

Thanks for reminding me.

the US was only built on liberalism as compared to Monarchies of the time. Now we just keep becoming more and more liberal. Just like becoming more and more conservative is stupid and self-destroying, so is becoming liberal.
Er...being a liberal or a conservative is stupid and self-destroying? I'm definitely not stupid and I don't seem do be destroying myself. And conservative friends of mine aren't that stupid either, just backwards thinking...

(What I'm trying to say is EXPLAIN and JUSTIFY THAT STATEMENT!!!!)

~Envoy of the Nova~

Read it again. He labelled BOTH sides.
RADICAL right-wing FUNDAMENTALISTS
RADICAL left-wing ELITISTS
That's not unfair in the slightest.
It seems the reason you think it was unfair is simply because he labelled the left side. I suspect that if he had only labelled the right side, and left the left side alone, you would have no objection at all.

Tell you what. Point me out a left-wing fundamentalist, and I'll agree with you.

Good thing you washed that hand, cause I just used the restroom and disn't wash :D

*washes hands too*

Thanks for reminding me.
ROFL....

the US was only built on liberalism as compared to Monarchies of the time. Now we just keep becoming more and more liberal. Just like becoming more and more conservative is stupid and self-destroying, so is becoming liberal.

Not really. There is no harm in continuing progress, moving forward, and embracing change. There is no harm in Liberal thinking.

When you hamper progress (outlawing science on "moral" grounds), seek the economic oppression of the citizenry (death tax, marriage tax penalty), strip citizens of civil liberties (refuse gay marriage, impede the right to bear arms), and oppose change in general (social security reform, etc), then you are hurting the country.

No amount of liberal thinking and liberal ideaology has ever once hurt this country.

Tell you what. Point me out a left-wing fundamentalist, and I'll agree with you.
That doesn't make sense. He's comparing fundamentalists to elitists. Wouldn't I have to point out a leftwing fundamentalist AND a rightwing elitist? In my eyes, they are pretty much the same for the most part.

Not really. There is no harm in continuing progress, moving forward, and embracing change. There is no harm in Liberal thinking.

When you hamper progress (outlawing science on "moral" grounds), seek the economic oppression of the citizenry (death tax, marriage tax penalty), strip citizens of civil liberties (refuse gay marriage, impede the right to bear arms), and oppose change in general (social security reform, etc), then you are hurting the country.

No amount of liberal thinking and liberal ideaology has ever once hurt this country.
Prove your last statement. I can't think of any examples offhand, but I'm sure there's an exception somewhere.

~Envoy of the Nova~

Not really. There is no harm in continuing progress, moving forward, and embracing change. There is no harm in Liberal thinking.

When you hamper progress (outlawing science on "moral" grounds), seek the economic oppression of the citizenry (death tax, marriage tax penalty), strip citizens of civil liberties (refuse gay marriage, impede the right to bear arms), and oppose change in general (social security reform, etc), then you are hurting the country.

No amount of liberal thinking and liberal ideaology has ever once hurt this country.
Wait.... I thought it was liberals who wanted to outlaw private ownership of guns. I don't believe I have ever heard a single conservative speak against the right to bear arms.

That doesn't make sense. He's comparing fundamentalists to elitists. Wouldn't I have to point out a leftwing fundamentalist AND a rightwing elitist? In my eyes, they are pretty much the same for the most part.

My point is that "elitist", by definition, applies to each side equally, while fundamentalist, by definition, is a conservative idea (which is often confused with "right-wing.")

It is nonsensical to say "that person is worse than me because they are an elitist," and yet people do it all the time.

Not really. There is no harm in continuing progress, moving forward, and embracing change. There is no harm in Liberal thinking.

When you hamper progress (outlawing science on "moral" grounds), seek the economic oppression of the citizenry (death tax, marriage tax penalty), strip citizens of civil liberties (refuse gay marriage, impede the right to bear arms), and oppose change in general (social security reform, etc), then you are hurting the country.

No amount of liberal thinking and liberal ideaology has ever once hurt this country.

I don't know about you, unless you are one of the lucky few who don't pay much in taxes, but I'm sick of seeing my tax money go to either conservative viewed shit like war or liberal viewed shit like the EPA and welfare. All we need to do is provoke the ecomony by giving breaks to people and companies. The companies part, only so they can afford to hire new employees.

Wait.... I thought it was liberals who wanted to outlaw private ownership of guns.

Nope ... that would be conservative and centrist Democrats who want that, not liberals. Look at the Democratic Party's true liberals: Howard Dean, et al.

Wait.... I thought it was liberals who wanted to outlaw private ownership of guns. I don't believe I have ever heard a single conservative speak against the right to bear arms.

Therein lies the difference between the definition of liberal and the label of liberal. Meanings have been perverted and confused in order to further political agendas.

No offense to Sheer Stupidity, but is anyone else having a hard time getting over the fact that his nickname is Sheer Stupidiy.

Damn ass pinko-liberals. Let's stop 'em while their young! :sniper: Quick gunshot to head will keep democracy rolling right laong the captialism train.

Haha, capitalism and democracy are complete opposites;

-Democracy: everyone is free, but your freedom ends where the freedom of other people begins.

-Capitalism: the state helps companies to make money, in theory everyone can be rich, but in practice, the rich use their power and money to make sure no one else gets as rich as them. You want capitalism in it's purest form?
Look at the years 1800 1900: workers were given enough money just to keep them alive and have children.

Wait.... I thought it was liberals who wanted to outlaw private ownership of guns. I don't believe I have ever heard a single conservative speak against the right to bear arms.
Liberals are anti-gun?

I always thought that was just their one conservative streak. The right to bear arms is technically liberal, because liberal is pro-change and before that only soldiers had the right to bear arms.

I don't know about you, unless you are one of the lucky few who don't pay much in taxes, but I'm sick of seeing my tax money go to either conservative viewed shit like war or liberal viewed shit like the EPA and welfare. All we need to do is provoke the ecomony by giving breaks to people and companies. The companies part, only so they can afford to hire new employees. Taxes again are a conservative idea. Since the Dark Ages people have had to pay large portions of their earnings to some authority. Only in modern times have the ideas of low or no taxes actually come up.

Prove your last statement. I can't think of any examples offhand, but I'm sure there's an exception somewhere.


Well ... I've provided many examples of Liberal thinking. Not one of it has hurt this country. If someone can find an example of truely Liberal thinking that has hurt the country, I'll concede.

However, my initial challenge was to name 5 examples of conservative thinking that has helped the country as a greater whole. It hasn't been done yet.

Haha, capitalism and democracy are complete opposites;

-Democracy: everyone is free, but your freedom ends where the freedom of other people begins.

-Capitalism: the state helps companies to make money, in theory everyone can be rich, but in practice, the rich use their power and money to make sure no one else gets as rich as them. You want capitalism in it's purest form?
Look at the years 1800 1900: workers were given enough money just to keep them alive and have children.
Actually, democracy and capitalism are not complete opposites. In fact, they can't even be compared, because democracy is a political system and capitalism is an economic one. In fact, they can coexist quite nicely. Just look at the USA of about 30-40 years ago (in case you don't believe this to be a democracy).

~Envoy of the Nova~

Tell you what. Point me out a left-wing fundamentalist, and I'll agree with you.

pick a Communist... anyone who believes that your money and property should not belong to you...

Haha, capitalism and democracy are complete opposites;

-Democracy: everyone is free, but your freedom ends where the freedom of other people begins.

-Capitalism: the state helps companies to make money, in theory everyone can be rich, but in practice, the rich use their power and money to make sure no one else gets as rich as them. You want capitalism in it's purest form?
Look at the years 1800 1900: workers were given enough money just to keep them alive and have children.

Nope.

Democracy = political system

Capitalism = economic system

Neither exists or can exist in their pure form. The key is to find the spot in their various spectrums that works best

My point is that "elitist", by definition, applies to each side equally, while fundamentalist, by definition, is a conservative idea (which is often confused with "right-wing.")
Which is probably why he laid it out that way, don't you think?
A righty fundamentalist will look at a lefty elitist and say "Your views are evil, and should not be tolerated.", while the leftie will look at the righty and say the exact same thing. That's my point.

It is nonsensical to say "that person is worse than me because they are an elitist," and yet people do it all the time.
True.

pick a Communist... anyone who believes that your money and property should not belong to you...

What does that have to do with fundamentalism?

Wait.... I thought it was liberals who wanted to outlaw private ownership of guns. I don't believe I have ever heard a single conservative speak against the right to bear arms.

Oh ... and you'll also notice certain things like the Brady Bill, which was in direct response to the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan - the Conservative God - and used as a tool to prevent gun ownership.

It is the conservatives in power who are trying to make it so that an individual cannot sell a legally owned handgun to an individual buyer without paying for a background check.

I am a Liberal. I am very proud to be a Liberal. I am a loud, screaming, outspoken Liberal. I do not own a firearm, no, but that is my choice. I would never prevent another from ownership.

Well ... I've provided many examples of Liberal thinking. Not one of it has hurt this country. If someone can find an example of truely Liberal thinking that has hurt the country, I'll concede.

However, my initial challenge was to name 5 examples of conservative thinking that has helped the country as a greater whole.
Er....I....um....well....uh.... hey, look behind you! *runs away*

I agree with you. Conservative thinking hasn't done all that much to help America. (Unless you consider Prohibition to have been the high point of American history. Personally, I like my booze. ;))

~Envoy of the Nova~

Haha, capitalism and democracy are complete opposites;

-Democracy: everyone is free, but your freedom ends where the freedom of other people begins.

-Capitalism: the state helps companies to make money, in theory everyone can be rich, but in practice, the rich use their power and money to make sure no one else gets as rich as them. You want capitalism in it's purest form?
Look at the years 1800 1900: workers were given enough money just to keep them alive and have children.

You need to read Adam Smith's book, "The Wealth of Nations," because your view of capitalism is completely wrong. You would definately be describing communistic economics. AND I would never claim that the US is truly capitalistic, moreso it is a consumerist state.

What does that have to do with fundamentalism?
Absolutely nothing.

And Communists actually believe that your property should be shared by everyone, not just owned by you. That means you still get to use it, it just technically belongs to the government.

~Envoy of the Nova~

Unless you consider Prohibition to have been the high point of American history

I've met people like that .... *shudder*.

It's because of those people that half the counties in Texas are "dry counties". Sale of liquor is outlawed. Where I grew up (Cass County), if you wanted booze, you had to drive either to the Marion County border or cross the Louisiana border.

It's still that way in Cass County.

You need to read Adam Smith's book, "The Wealth of Nations," because your view of capitalism is completely wrong. You would definately be describing communistic economics. AND I would never claim that the US is truly capitalistic, moreso it is a consumerist state.
True; it's very difficult to figure out what true capitalism really is. Its meaning has become so warped over the years.

I've met people like that .... *shudder*.

It's because of those people that half the counties in Texas are "dry counties". Sale of liquor is outlawed. Where I grew up (Cass County), if you wanted booze, you had to drive either to the Marion County border or cross the Louisiana border.

It's still that way in Cass County.Remind me never to move to Texas. I'll stay 'way over here in the nice cool East. ;)

~Envoy of the Nova~

Remind me never to move to Texas. I'll stay 'way over here in the nice cool East. ;)


Oh Texas isn't so bad. It's probably the most Libertarian state in the country. When Kinky Friedman's elected governor next year, it'll get even better. (woo!)

He'll be the first independent governor since Sam Houston.

(see my sig for link or, if you can't see sigs ... www.kinkyfriedman.com )

True; it's very difficult to figure out what true capitalism really is. Its meaning has become so warped over the years.

Very true. Capitalism is somewhat comparable to evolution. They both support that strong survive and the inept don't. Pure capitalism is zero intervention, by media or government (I added the media part personally b/c there wan't much media in Smith's day but by his discussions I would assume he would have been against media influence). Pure capitalism contains informed producers and consumers who make their decisions based on what they think is best.

Which is probably why he laid it out that way, don't you think?
A righty fundamentalist will look at a lefty elitist and say "Your views are evil, and should not be tolerated.", while the leftie will look at the righty and say the exact same thing. That's my point.


True.

My point is that he should have used a qualification other than elitist. It's my feeling that that word has been unfairly used to label liberals only. On the other hand, fundamentalist can only describe an extreme conservative. You notice he used "radical" twice. He should have used a term that applied specifically to an extreme liberal/left-winger.

(notice that I used "extreme" twice.)

Oh Texas isn't so bad. It's probably the most Libertarian state in the country. When Kinky Friedman's elected governor next year, it'll get even better. (woo!)

He'll be the first independent governor since Sam Houston.

(see my sig for link or, if you can't see sigs ... www.kinkyfriedman.com )Sounds interesting. If I wasn't too busy debating on General I'd look at it. ;)
Very true. Capitalism is somewhat comparable to evolution. They both support that strong survive and the inept don't. Pure capitalism is zero intervention, by media or government (I added the media part personally b/c there wan't much media in Smith's day but by his discussions I would assume he would have been against media influence). Pure capitalism contains informed producers and consumers who make their decisions based on what they think is best. That means there are no nations using true capitalism today?

~Envoy of the Nova~

Calling yourself a centrist doesn't make you one.
Just as you calling me a "conservative" doesn't make me one either. I've been called far, far worse. :D

No offense to Sheer Stupidity, but is anyone else having a hard time getting over the fact that his nickname is Sheer Stupidiy.
(laughing)
I chose that name specifically so that I could watch people get stuck on it, and laugh at them. Don't feel bad, though. You weren't the first, and almost certainly won't be the last.
Its kind of a joke on myself and everyone else at the same time. It has to do with people's natural tendency to think that anyone who doesn't agree with them must be stupid.

Oh Texas isn't so bad. It's probably the most Libertarian state in the country. When Kinky Friedman's elected governor next year, it'll get even better. (woo!)

He'll be the first independent governor since Sam Houston.



This is one of the signs of the End of Days....

Just as you calling me a "conservative" doesn't make me one either. I've been called far, far worse. :D
I remember that.


~Envoy of the Nova~

That means there are no nations using true capitalism today?

~Envoy of the Nova~

True. Many use versions, dare I say perversion, of capitalism. I highly suggest reading "Wealth of Nations." It may be long and dry, but well worth it if you're interested in that kind of stuff.

No amount of liberal thinking and liberal ideaology has ever once hurt this country.
Oh, BROTHER! I would try to address this statment in depth if I were so inclined, but it would do no good.

Just a short list:
* Learned dependency on government handouts
* Social Security, which is now a massive mess
* Encouraging massive, long-term entitlements
* Mogadishu
* Confiscatory taxation
* Encouragement of frivilous class-action suits
* Discrimination against those of faith
* Encouragement of drug use
* [ the list is long and dishonorable ]

Liberals are anti-gun?

I always thought that was just their one conservative streak. The right to bear arms is technically liberal, because liberal is pro-change and before that only soldiers had the right to bear arms.
:confused: I'm a little confused here. Back when this country was just getting started, we didn't even have soldiers, but we needed guns because the natives didn't seem too happy about us crowding in on their space. When they wrote the constitution, they included the right to bear arms because, since we didn't have much of an army at the time, the common people needed a means to defend themselves. As you say, liberals go for change, while consrvatives don't. So, logically, those who approve change would be the ones to want to change the right to bear arms in light of the fact that we now have a huge army and lots of armed police. Those who oppose change would want to keep the right to bear arms intact since its been part of our constitution for about 200 years or so. By the very definitions of liberal and consrvative being presented here, eliminating the right to bear arms can only be a liberal idea, while keeping it can only be a conservative idea.

Oh ... and you'll also notice certain things like the Brady Bill, which was in direct response to the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan - the Conservative God - and used as a tool to prevent gun ownership.
No, actually the Brady bill was in direct response to James Brady taking a bullet (that's why its called the Brady bill, not the Reagan bill), and ending up crippled as a result because a crazy man was able to walk into a gun store, and then be shooting at people later that same day. It was used as a tool to try to keep guns out of the hands of people who are known to be mentally ill. That's what the background checks are supposed to be for.

Heh..

Customers who bought this book also bought:
100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken Is #37) by Bernard Goldberg
Men In Black: How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America by Mark R. Levin
How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter by Ann Coulter
Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry by John E. O'Neill



Need I say anymore?

No, actually the Brady bill was in direct response to James Brady taking a bullet, and ending up crippled as a result because a crazy man was able to walk into a gun store, and then be shooting at people later that same day. It was used as a tool to try to keep guns out of the hands of people who are known to be mentally ill. That's what the background checks are supposed to be for.

WHAT!!!!!! Believing that killing the president would make Jodie Foster like you classifies one as mentally ill!!!!! Maybe I should see a shrink.

The worst part of the incident is that he was aquitted due to insanity claims.

WHAT!!!!!! Believing that killing the president would make Jodie Foster like you classifies one as mentally ill!!!!! Maybe I should see a shrink.

The worst part of the incident is that he was aquitted due to insanity claims.

Jodie Foster has a beautiful face

If you want to hear real venomous hate speech, listen to Al Franken. That guy is so pissed off all the time he probably has ulcers that have ulcers.

Yeah, Al Franken's sorta like the liberal Rush Limbaugh. I still remember when he was a guest on the Daily Show and it seemed imminent that Jon Stewart was going to rip him a new one, but he squeezed his way through. I wouldn't be suprised if Al Franken wrote "Help, mom, the republicans are under my bed." However, Al Franken has slowly receded over the years, while Rush Limbaugh and all the conservative talkers have only gotten more violent and loud.

Jodie Foster has a beautiful face

Yea, I once thought of killing someone so she'd like me. Though you ever see her in those old Disney movies, *shudders* she definately turned out a lot better.

Yeah, Al Franken's sorta like the liberal Rush Limbaugh. I still remember when he was a guest on the Daily Show and it seemed imminent that Jon Stewart was going to rip him a new one, but he squeezed his way through. I wouldn't be suprised if Al Franken wrote "Help, mom, the republicans are under my bed." However, Al Franken has slowly receded over the years, while Rush Limbaugh and all the conservative talkers have only gotten more violent and loud.
If it seems that Al Franken has been "receding" over the couple of years that he's been on the radio, its only because fewer and fewer people want to listen to him, so he gets less and less attention. For Rush, the opposite has been happening over a MUCH longer period of time. Al Franken's level of hate mongering has never decreased. As a matter of fact, it only continues to increase along with his frustration over being mostly ignored. Meanwhile, Rush acts all smug and pompous because he thinks almost everyone agrees with him, and that he's always right. That, and he does get the highest ratings of any radio talk show host.

Ooh, ooh, lets all write children's books that teach our children to fundamentally hate other groups of people at a young age!

"Mommy, there are black people in my closet."
"The Mexican in the Janitor's closet"
"The Jew and the Pauper"


Yeah sure, why not. We're already teaching them to hate conservatives.

Yeesh.

If it seems that Al Franken has been "receding" over the couple of years that he's been on the radio, its only because fewer and fewer people want to listen to him, so he gets less and less attention. For Rush, the opposite has been happening over a MUCH longer period of time. Al Franken's level of hate mongering has never decreased. As a matter of fact, it only continues to increase along with his frustration over being mostly ignored. Meanwhile, Rush acts all smug and pompous because he thinks almost everyone agrees with him, and that he's always right. That, and he does get the highest ratings of any radio talk show host.

Just wait, SNL will cover him again in 2010. "The Decade of Al Frankin"

Heh..

Customers who bought this book also bought:
100 People Who Are Screwing Up America (And Al Franken Is #37) by Bernard Goldberg
Men In Black: How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America by Mark R. Levin
How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter by Ann Coulter
Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry by John E. O'Neill



Need I say anymore?Yes...
You should have posted some of the reviews:
What could be more disgusting than a book that teaches children how to hate their fellow Americans? This book is a very sick guide on how to become narrow-minded, biggoted, and numb to reality. God help the child who's twisted, anestethized, and hypnotized wing-nut parents would poison them with this sickening swill.I suppose if it weren't for evil liberals under the bed like Abraham Lincoln, the book could have been all about how two little slave brothers serve their masters in the cotton-fields.

Does the mother in the book actually vote for the politicians who support conservative policies? If so, isn't she wickedly benefitting from those evil liberals under the bed who campaigned for women to have the vote?Humorous? Not even slightly.

Shameful? You decide. Or better yet, save your money and don't buy this thinly disguised children's book which says far more about the people who wrote it than it does about those they're targeting in their ongoing hate fest.

Let us allow our children to grow up as children and not fill their heads with poisonous adult opinions.

I would have rated this a ZERO had that been an option.A book that explains the "evils" of taxes. Only rabid neocons will be buying this book for their children. Of course they'll have a difficult time doing so because they won't wan't to drive to a bookstore--that would necessitate utilizing taxpayer funded roads. It would also mean using reading skills they and/or their children probably learned in evil tax supported public schools. And they certainly couldn't borrow the book from a tax-funded public library!

It seems the neocons don't like taxes unless they are funding war, "faith-based" discriminatory programs or something else they like. If it is something useful or humane taxes suddenly become eeeeeeeeevviiiill.

My eyes are rolling so much they are likely to fall out of my head.

Damn ass pinko-liberals. Let's stop 'em while their young! :sniper: Quick gunshot to head will keep democracy rolling right laong the captialism train.

What a great summary of the Pat Robertson Christian Coalition school of thought! How very Christian. Notice the White House's mild response to this? "Oh, he's a private citizen, he can say what he wants." Can you imagine the outrage if a "liberal" had called for the assassination of the president of another country? The Bushies and their right wing media machine would be going berzerk.

Why? How much experience have you had? :D
Um... I was 6 once. I think.

Those damned liberals! Brainwashing kids with such destructive values as respect, tolerance and equality. Because everyone knows how the right can't stand for those sissy values. :rolleyes:
those aren't leftwing values, only totalitarian. leftwingers have no respect at all, won't tolerate killing, and refuse to give people equality(they try to make laws to have quotas for certian amounts of such and such place in a workspace! if people completely ignored what race someone was then there wouldn't be that problem, but since they're bringing up the issue then people start getting defensive and racist!)

those aren't leftwing values, only totalitarian. leftwingers have no respect at all, won't tolerate killing, and refuse to give people equality(they try to make laws to have quotas for certian amounts of such and such place in a workspace! if people completely ignored what race someone was then there wouldn't be that problem, but since they're bringing up the issue then people start getting defensive and racist!)

Darn those liberals and their affirmative action. If it wasn't for them, blacks would never have been lynched in the 60's (and still some today.)

If we don't pay any attention to it, rascism will just go away. Yay!

I'm sure its just a bit of fun, besides I doubt its actually intended for children

Darn those liberals and their affirmative action. If it wasn't for them, blacks would never have been lynched in the 60's (and still some today.)

If we don't pay any attention to it, rascism will just go away. Yay!
Racism is discrimination based on skin color.
"Affirmitave Action" is discrimination based on skin color.
Imagine that.

I'm sure its just a bit of fun, besides I doubt its actually intended for children
Read the reviews. Just read the reviews.

I wonder if the pages would make acceptable rolling papers? I know the Bible and the book of Mormon work well. :D


No they don't.

You don't even smoke do you?


:rolleyes:

* Learned dependency on government handouts

Johnson's welfare programs were great and very needed at the time they were implemented. Reform is needed, but the conservative fear of change continually blocks reform.

* Social Security, which is now a massive mess

Just like Johnson's welfare, Social Security was desperately needed at the time and worked great for a long time. Reform is needed, but the conservative fear of change continually blocks reform.

* Encouraging massive, long-term entitlements

Again, many things like Medicare needs reform. Conservatives do not embrace change. Especially not sweeping change. Reform requires Liberal thinking.

* Mogadishu

I'm not sure how this is a liberal/conservative thing, but I'm guessing that it wasn't liberals who sent Rangers in there in the first place.

* Confiscatory taxation

Gotta pay for Bush's war somehow, don't we? I imagine my grandchildren will still being paying for this war when they're my age. I know I'm still paying for Vietnam.

* Encouragement of frivilous class-action suits

Such as suits to remove "offensive" materials from classrooms (like evolution theory) or the conservative judges who awarded smokers - smokers who knew better - billions of dollars? Which suits do you mean? How has liberal thinking encouraged them? Clarify.

* Discrimination against those of faith

Which faith? Zaroastrianism? Discordianism? Jedi? Liberal thinking gave all faiths freedom to begin with. All of them. A certain faction of just one faith wants to take away that freedom.

* Encouragement of drug use

More like encouragement of safe drug use. People are going to use drugs whether you want them to or not. Your President, your neighbor, your children, even those nice granddaughters of yours could very well toke up at any given time. You don't have much say in the matter.

What you can do, however, is make sure it's safe and clean. They will decide for themselves whether or not to use.

Gotta pay for Bush's war somehow, don't we? I imagine my grandchildren will still being paying for this war when they're my age. I know I'm still paying for Vietnam.
He actually tried to bleed it out of overseas citizens by lowering the amount of money that can be earned before paying taxes for ex-pats...

No. I attack ideologicly knee-jerk idiots regardless of their political proclivities. Check the current thread about Pat Robertson. But I know you prefer to find the devil in anyone who dares to disagree with you, so it's unlikely anything will alter your opinions.
Which is why you always state things about liberals in sweeping generalizations, always?

PS. Wagging your finger at some one calling for the assassination of the head of a rival state does not make you a centrist, the Bush administration is doing that and we all know they arn't centrist.

Which is why you always state things about liberals in sweeping generalizations, always?
That sounded like a Wal-Mart ad.
"Always sweeping generalizations always."
:p

those aren't leftwing values, only totalitarian. leftwingers have no respect at all, won't tolerate killing, and refuse to give people equality(they try to make laws to have quotas for certian amounts of such and such place in a workspace! if people completely ignored what race someone was then there wouldn't be that problem, but since they're bringing up the issue then people start getting defensive and racist!)
I feel that affirmative action needs to get away from race divisions and move into divisions of wealth. But guess what populations of the country would be helped by that the most?

I feel that affirmative action needs to get away from race divisions and move into divisions of wealth. But guess what populations of the country would be helped by that the most?
Considering that there are more white people on welfare than black people.....

I aim to please ;)

I choose to call you a conservative because I love it to correct someone when they are clearly wrong. Calling yourself a centrist doesn't make you one.
Trusci's still having a hard time with the whole 'being judged by what you say, not what you claim' thing.

Considering that there are more white people on welfare than black people.....
That's good. Everyone should be happy then.

I wonder if the pages would make acceptable rolling papers? I know the Bible and the book of Mormon work well. :D
dont forget text books *takes huge bong hit*

Considering that there are more white people on welfare than black people.....Considering that there are more rich white people than any other people...

Dude, why the hell are we teaching little kids political doctrine? Not just referring to this book, but the array of liberal propaganda books mentioned by this one. Can't kids be kids, instead of Democrats and Republicans?

Which is why you always state things about liberals in sweeping generalizations, always?

PS. Wagging your finger at some one calling for the assassination of the head of a rival state does not make you a centrist, the Bush administration is doing that and we all know they arn't centrist.
So if I called you "Teh_Panty-wearing_Coward," there's no problem, yes? It's only about one person, so it's not a "sweeping generalization," and it's not finger-wagging since you haven't advocated assassinating anyone ( so far as I know ) and are thus eligible to be called virtually anything. :)

So if I called you "Teh_Panty-wearing_Coward," there's no problem, yes? It's only about one person, so it's not a "sweeping generalization," and it's not finger-wagging since you haven't advocated assassinating anyone ( so far as I know ) and are thus eligible to be called virtually anything. :)
Okay, what?

So if I called you "Teh_Panty-wearing_Coward," there's no problem, yes? It's only about one person, so it's not a "sweeping generalization," and it's not finger-wagging since you haven't advocated assassinating anyone ( so far as I know ) and are thus eligible to be called virtually anything. :)
Should I link to every one of your posts say "liberals are this" or "liberals are that" or "liberals do this and that"? It would make up its own 10 page thread.

The second part didn't even make sense. You said to look in the Pat Robertson thread to prove you talk down all extremists, and that is a bogus example by the very fact the Bush administration has told Robertson he's a crazy bastard.

Should I link to every one of your posts say "liberals are this" or "liberals are that" or "liberals do this and that"? It would make up its own 10 page thread.
ROFLMAO!! Well, perhaps that's an indication that liberals ( or rather, the term I prefer, leftists ) should change a bit and stop some of those things about which I, among others, have problems. Yes? :)

It doesn’t seem that bad. From what I can tell its anti-high taxes and anti-government interference in private life.
It is healthy for people to distrust their government, and it’s never too early to learn.

ROFLMAO!! Well, perhaps that's an indication that liberals ( or rather, the term I prefer, leftists ) should change a bit and stop some of those things about which I, among others, have problems. Yes? :)
You are completely eluded by the implication.

But I will just make the statement that you arn't even the shadow of a centrist.

It was a guy running a nearby hot dog stand who wanted to cut-throat the competition. Afterward, he was regretful and apologetic, but it was too late. At least that's the way I heard it on the news...

That guy had to pay $2,200 for his vendors license, and had asked that the kids, who had no such license, be moved farther away so as not to take away from his business. The police decided that the kids had to pay up or shut down, and the mayor got involved. After discussing it, the guy running the stand, regretting the fuss, offered to let the kids continue to operate under HIS license, as subcontractors. Which is where the whole thing stands now, until the start of school, the kids are still selling lemonade.

ROFLMAO!! Well, perhaps that's an indication that liberals ( or rather, the term I prefer, leftists ) should change a bit and stop some of those things about which I, among others, have problems. Yes? :)

That would be playing dirty, cause liberals are the only ones who can say people should stop doing and believing what they think is wrong. God forbid the other way around

No they don't.

You don't even smoke do you?


:rolleyes:

It's not my fault you have low-quality religious books. I said what I said based on personal experience. So nyah! Nyah nyah nyah nyah.

You are completely eluded by the implication.

But I will just make the statement that you arn't even the shadow of a centrist.
Don'tcha jus hate when they do that? What implication is eluding me? Tell me so i can track it down and kill it! I definitely don't like implications running wild all over the place.

Don'tcha jus hate when they do that? What implication is eluding me? Tell me so i can track it down and kill it! I definitely don't like implications running wild all over the place.
Too late, it has already breeded with the sewer rats and now we have implicatiarats running around all over the place, good job Eutrusca, you failed us again.

That would be playing dirty, cause liberals are the only ones who can say people should stop doing and believing what they think is wrong. God forbid the other way around

Look, politicians as a whole suck ass. They generally do things to attain and keep power/money. So one politician here, one conservative politician there will make a big stink about some fringe issue, a bunch of dumb people will get up in arms and a whole lot of fervor and money are wasted while said dumb politician ends up getting elected.

Now, normal everyday liberals would rarely support making people stop believing what they believe. We argue. We cite our sources (much better than the other side, usually.) We remind people of the scientific method and of logical fallacies constantly. Sure, we have our idiots, our morons and our trolls. So do conservatives. Conservatives also have their share of decent individuals/debaters.

The thing is, when you and many other conservatives (and I am stating a specific thing that I just witnessed you doing,) here say "liberals this" and "liberals that" it almost never applies to me or the majority of people who share a a lot of views with me, all of whom I consider liberal. In fact, it usually goes completely counter to what we believe in. Therefore, I find your sweeping statements to not only be inaccurate, but personally offensive as well. I can't make you stop, but I am asking you to. I am not, by the way, holding my breath. :D

It just occurred to me, based on the part you bolded, that you might have been engaged in a sublte bit of satire. If not, I'm chuckling about the unintentional humor.

It'll sell just as well to commie pinko leftist students who'll buy it just to howl with laughter after taking their third bong hit of the evening... or they'll just shoplift it instead.


yay commie pinko leftist students I wanna be one of those

Considering that there are more rich white people than any other people...
If they're already rich, then they don't really need to worry too much about afirmitave action now do they? That said, what's your point?

Actually this should make one run away from the right wing....they are doing the brain washing here...not the liberals. Why would they put their own senators under the bed like a monster? The man under the bed was Sen. Ted Kennedy. So this is the facist gun loving republicans doing the propaganda here. :rolleyes:

Dude I thought there was still some morality left in politics, but this ends it. the right wing is friggin retarded. To think that someone would actually publish something like that is insane. Some people need to die. :sniper:

(laughing hysterically)
That's funny as hell!
The sad thing about it is its proof that the right has finally sunk to the level that the left has been on for years. Brainwashing kids when they're too young to know any better. Up until now, I had been under the impression that the right was the one side that was above this. Well, I guess this means that in a decade or two, right wingers below the age of 20 won't be so few and far between.

The right itself hasn't sunk. Who has sunk is some authors who like to portray the other side going to extreme lengths. I am a right myself but this book is quite silly. I learned the cons of liberalism from my own observations, not my parents reading to me from Republican fundamentalist book.

It seems like almost all of us are attacking the book. That doesn't seem fair. Hold on... lemme switch sides for a minute...

Hey, at least when the right tries to brainwash kids, they aren't all sneaky about it. They just come right out and say OMFG LIBERALS AAAAAGGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111one :mp5: :sniper: :gundge: :sniper: :mp5:

.....(thinking up a liberal conspiracy theory).....
I know! Hillary Clinton wrote it under a false name to try to make conservatives look bad!

Seriously, though, this is just f-ing hilarious. :D

ROFLMAO!! Well, perhaps that's an indication that liberals ( or rather, the term I prefer, leftists ) should change a bit and stop some of those things about which I, among others, have problems. Yes? :)

Couldn't this be applied conversely to mean that republicans or neo-cons should stop doing things that others find offensive?

yay commie pinko leftist students I wanna be one of those
*poof*

Your wish is my command.

Your Birkenstocks await, you filthy unwashed baby-hating hippie anarchist. You'll find the most recent issue of the 'International Socialist Worker's Daily' on the floor next to the lava lamp and the dog-eared copy of The Communist Manifesto with the refried beans smeared on the cover. Whoops, don't fall over your non-materialistic beanbag chair, there comrade.

You commie symp, you...

*turns Bizarro-Dobbs persona off again*

What'd I miss?

Couldn't this be applied conversely to mean that republicans or neo-cons should stop doing things that others find offensive?
Uh .... yessss. Does that come as a surprise to you?

There use to be a thing called "common courtesy" which no longer seems to be very common anymore.

You can say ****** if you want. You can say cracker kike gook chink spic raghead moon cricket jiggaboo If you want. Quit life.

You can say ****** if you want. You can say cracker kike gook chink spic raghead moon cricket jiggaboo If you want. Quit life.
huh?
:confused:

Uh .... yessss. Does that come as a surprise to you?

There use to be a thing called "common courtesy" which no longer seems to be very common anymore.

That the concept exists no? That anyone would use it nowadays? Yes. If it actually happened.

i'm sorry if this offends anyone/thing, i am not targeting this statement to anyone gender/racial/income/religion/sexual/age specific. as a white, rich, fascist, heterosexual, catholic, gun-loving, tax-hating, bush-supporting, foreign-relations-ignorant, hardly-literate, hypocritical, southern-dwelling, flag-waving, counrty-listening, barely-smart-enough-to-make-my-own-descisions American, i'm just saying:

Isn't it great how political correctness can only go one way, and how freedom of speech is only allotted to 49% of Americans?

Oh and by the way, a woman president would be great, but Hilary Clinton is a b1tch.
thank you.