NationStates Jolt Archive

For a long time I've tried very hard not to demonize those with whom I disagree. I've tried to take an objective stance and say "well, I might not agree with this guy, but that doesn't make him a bad person." I've tried to look at politics and keep myself from crying, opening a vein, or grabbing a gun. Well, thats just gotten a little bit harder.

Here we are, barely a week from mid-term elections, and a major voice in the Republican party says something so disgusting, so shocking, I'm left wondering how to even respond:
its an entire culture that focuses on the pursuit of happiness and the pursuit of personal pleasure and it is harming America.

I can't believe that was a slip of the tounge, I can't imagine that those words were just pulled out of the air. Here, you have an elected official saying that two of the three basic tenets upon which out country is based are bad.


The quote comes towards the end of a 2:30ish clip where Santorum talks up responsibility to one's society and manages to make himself sound like a socialist pretending to be a Republican.

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/10/against_the_pur.html


Ladies and Gentlemen in America, it doesn't matter if you're generally a liberal or a conservative, it doesn't matter if you can't stand the Dems or have always voted for the Grand Old Party. Next tuesday you need to go out and send a message to Washington that this kind of shit will not be tollerated. Conservatism in this country has been hijacked and only a bloodbath will let them know that we won't stand for it.

I'm with you. Good luck with convincing some of the others around here of that, though.

OK, I count one tenet that Santorum seems to oppose. I assume the other is liberty, and frankly, I don't think he feels too strongly that life in inalienable either.

And frankly, say what you will about the polls, people like Santorum will win. It's a sad commentary of our time when people look at a choice between cleaning up the deficit and denying people rights and choose to deny people rights. It's depressing.

I'd really like to see most career politicians fired.

Nominate some "regular" citizens that actually work and live in the real world, not people that have snakes write catchy sound bites- people that speak plainly in words they chose and mean.

Maybe people that dont owe other people favors might be better in office.

maybe people who have first hand awareness as to what people of their social status hold important. Not people that make a statement and then watch polls to see how they should say their next line.

OK, I count one tenet that Santorum seems to oppose. I assume the other is liberty, and frankly, I don't think he feels too strongly that life in inalienable either.

And frankly, say what you will about the polls, people like Santorum will win. It's a sad commentary of our time when people look at a choice between cleaning up the deficit and denying people rights and choose to deny people rights. It's depressing.

Nah. Santorum is toast, outside of massive voter fraud. Polls have Casey up by 11+% now, and that's major, considering he's the number 3 Republican in the Senate. Even the White House has written him off.

I can't believe that was a slip of the tounge, I can't imagine that those words were just pulled out of the air. Here, you have an elected official saying that two of the three basic tenets upon which out country is based are bad.

The point he is making (and it is a valid one) is that the kind of freedom culture is such that people may pursue their happyness at everyone elses exense. America pursues its happyness at everyone else's expense (see kyoto)

The point he is making (and it is a valid one) is that the kind of freedom culture is such that people may pursue their happyness at everyone elses exense. America pursues its happyness at everyone else's expense (see kyoto)Yeah, but Santorum is talking about personal happiness, not cultural happiness. He's talking about sex out of wedlock and homosexuality--this is the guy, after all, who compared gay sex to "man-on-dog."

Yeah, but Santorum is talking about personal happiness, not cultural happiness. He's talking about sex out of wedlock and homosexuality--this is the guy, after all, who compared gay sex to "man-on-dog."

There is a distinction to be made between pleasure and happyness. Which is also a valid point

There is a distinction to be made between pleasure and happyness. Which is also a valid point

Not when it comes to government regulation of personal freedoms.

Nah. Santorum is toast, outside of massive voter fraud. Polls have Casey up by 11+% now, and that's major, considering he's the number 3 Republican in the Senate. Even the White House has written him off.

An 11% lead by a Democrat...we have a word for a federal race like that. It's called a "toss-up."

The real danger to America comes from political extremists (on both sides) who want to polarize the American public and, essentially, set the people against each other - so far they've done a masterful job. The aggravated political, social and spiritual divisions will do more harm than anything else. We no longer look at our neighbors and try to find areas of agreement, we look at them and try to exaggerate the areas of disagreement.

I like Rick Santorum because every time he speaks, he hurts his own cause. :)

The real danger to America comes from political extremists (on both sides) who want to polarize the American public and, essentially, set the people against each other - so far they've done a masterful job. The aggravated political, social and spiritual divisions will do more harm than anything else. We no longer look at our neighbors and try to find areas of agreement, we look at them and try to exaggerate the areas of disagreement.

The biggest problem with polarized political parties - and I'm talking about even more polarized than they are now - is that, if one side gets to power, they will look for any excuse to keep it, even if it means not playing by the rules. Even if that means destroying democracy by democratic means. Forgive me for Godwinning the thread, but that's how the Nazis got to power; Germany was extremely polarized at the time, and an extremist group that didn't play by the rules got into power.

It's all fun and games until someone tries to undermine democracy.

its those kinds of ideas from the top of the republican party that make me crazy. i dont LIKE their war policy and their fiscal policies but the smarmy anti-american pandering to some ultraconservative christian fundamentalist clique sends me right over the top.

y'all dont give a damn about internet gambling BUT the bill was thoroughly debated and rejected over the summer. bill frist got it attached at the last minute to the conference version of the port security act. there was no way to get it removed AND get port security attended to before the congress recessed THAT DAY. he was pandering to christian fundamentalists who hate gambling in the hopes that they will be enough to propell him to the white house in '08. a REJECTED bill was passed so that bill frist can make some points with ultraconservatives. how anti american is that?

its not even the horrendous corruption that is rife in this congress. its the smug assurance that they have that they will NEVER lose power. that they will never have to pay for their misdeeds. how else could they justify having the president decide what constitutes torture? do you think they want hillary clinton to have that power? how else could they justify denying the right to habeus corpus to non citizens (if you dont kow, habeus corpus is the right to know what you are CHARGED with and that you cant be held forever without even being charged with a crime.) do they want john kerry to be able to do that? NO. they think that they are guaranteed power forever.

if we DONT give the republican party a slap in the face to wake them up to the idea that they DO have to pay attention to the majority of US citizens, they will just continue with this same crap. they will feel justified in their notion that they can never lose power. then we will ALL pay with more of this same anti-americanism. as long as the only voters who count are their ultraconservative fundamentalist base, they will continue to pander to them by passing laws that only appeal to the most socially conservative voters.

The point he is making (and it is a valid one) is that the kind of freedom culture is such that people may pursue their happyness at everyone elses exense. America pursues its happyness at everyone else's expense (see kyoto)

perhaps you are from another country and dont know that life, liberty and the pursuit of HAPPINESS (please note the spelling) are the fundamentals upon which the united states is founded. in fact, we hold them to be self-evident.

The biggest problem with polarized political parties - and I'm talking about even more polarized than they are now - is that, if one side gets to power, they will look for any excuse to keep it, even if it means not playing by the rules. Even if that means destroying democracy by democratic means. Forgive me for Godwinning the thread, but that's how the Nazis got to power; Germany was extremely polarized at the time, and an extremist group that didn't play by the rules got into power.

It's all fun and games until someone tries to undermine democracy.

Democracy is by it's very nature very unstable. It's only a matter of time 'til our nation falls anyway.

Democracy is by it's very nature very unstable. It's only a matter of time 'til our nation falls anyway.
Well, in the long run, we're all dead. Doesn't mean we should do things to hasten our demise.

Not when it comes to government regulation of personal freedoms.

Perhaps not, but he is entitled to express that as an opinion and state arguments as to why. You should not take it personally

Perhaps not, but he is entitled to express that as an opinion and state arguments as to why. You should not take it personally
Here's why I take it personally. Santorum is certainly entitled to his opinions, but as he's a legislator in the Senate, one of a hundred with vast power over this country, his opinions necessarily carry more weight than mine. So when he starts talking about restricting personal freedoms because they conflict with his limited view of the world, I take it personally, and I speak out against him, and hopefully enough others do the same and remove him from his position of power.

Democracy is by it's very nature very unstable. It's only a matter of time 'til our nation falls anyway.

Or turns into some other nation. Yes, democracy is constantly evolving. Sometimes it evolves more quickly. Maybe our nation will split down the middle at some point. That doesn't mean we should worry about how it will split; we only need to set ourselves in a good position for when it does happen.

perhaps you are from another country and dont know that life, liberty and the pursuit of HAPPINESS (please note the spelling) are the fundamentals upon which the united states is founded. in fact, we hold them to be self-evident.

All of which apply only to US citizens. Unfortunately, what you do during the course of your pursuit ends up fucking the rest of us. But that's beside the point. The point is...who really cares what Santorum says? His lasting gift to human kind is the word, santorum...what else will he really be remembered for?

All of which apply only to US citizens. Unfortunately, what you do during the course of your pursuit ends up fucking the rest of us. But that's beside the point. The point is...who really cares what Santorum says? His lasting gift to human kind is the word, santorum...what else will he really be remembered for?
Hopefully, he won't even be remembered for that. If we're lucky, he'll fade into obscurity like so many others.

His lasting gift to human kind is the word, santorum

I didn't really think anyone took that idea seriously...glad to hear that it actually entered the lexicon of some people's vocabulary.

I didn't really think anyone took that idea seriously...glad to hear that it actually entered the lexicon of some people's vocabulary.

It is a term that shall endure.

Hopefully, he won't even be remembered for that. If we're lucky, he'll fade into obscurity like so many others.

No, it'll be fine if that is his only legacy...it's not like we think much about the Earl of Sandwich, despite regularly eating his namesake...

Santorum is a fine word. The man, is not.

Democracy is by it's very nature very unstable. It's only a matter of time 'til our nation falls anyway.

Or turns into some other nation. Yes, democracy is constantly evolving. Sometimes it evolves more quickly. Maybe our nation will split down the middle at some point. That doesn't mean we should worry about how it will split; we only need to set ourselves in a good position for when it does happen.

Just out of curiosity, what form do you think this "fall of America" will take? I hear this from time to time, that the US will fall, but no one says how. Actually, I'd like to know in which direction, so I can get out of the way. But really, what do you think will happen? A break-up of the country into several nations? Wholesale destruction? I'd really like to know.

Most likely scenario I can think of offhand is that the political process will get more and more extreme with fewer and fewer people voting until the federal government becomes so tilted that the nation fractures.

Just out of curiosity, what form do you think this "fall of America" will take? I hear this from time to time, that the US will fall, but no one says how. Actually, I'd like to know in which direction, so I can get out of the way. But really, what do you think will happen? A break-up of the country into several nations? Wholesale destruction? I'd really like to know.

Probably eventual division into separate nations. Eventually, someone will get the bright idea to secede, the U.S. government won't be strong enough to stop them, and the whole country will either join that secession movement or go straight to hell. That or some power-hungry nut job (someone worse than Dubya) will refuse to vacate the White House and try to outlaw elections, and the nation will be irreversibly divided as a result.

That or the "United States of Canada" and "Jesusland" proposal will be taken seriously.

All of which apply only to US citizens. Unfortunately, what you do during the course of your pursuit ends up fucking the rest of us. But that's beside the point. The point is...who really cares what Santorum says? His lasting gift to human kind is the word, santorum...what else will he really be remembered for?

no we hold those truths to be self-evident for everyone.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

santorum isnt out of the senate yet. there is a good chance that come january he will be remembered only for the nasty definition of his name but there is no guarantee of that. if he stays in the senate his creepy opinions will count very much. every american should care about that.

no we hold those truths to be self-evident for everyone.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

santorum isnt out of the senate yet. there is a good chance that come january he will be remembered only for the nasty definition of his name but there is no guarantee of that. if he stays in the senate his creepy opinions will count very much. every american should care about that.

I was sort of hoping the Republicans would run a Frist-Santorum ticket in '08. I know a couple of 1st-graders who could beat them if we got the age requirement waived.

Just out of curiosity, what form do you think this "fall of America" will take? I hear this from time to time, that the US will fall, but no one says how. Actually, I'd like to know in which direction, so I can get out of the way. But really, what do you think will happen? A break-up of the country into several nations? Wholesale destruction? I'd really like to know.
Most likely, it will look like the UK in "V for Vendetta." It will still call itself the United States of America, but it will function very differently, transforming itself into a nationalistic police state in which all areas of life -- including religion, sex, and childrearing -- will fall under the interest and contol of the state. It will certainly not be a democracy. Dissenters will be outnumbered and disorganized, and most will likely emmigrate (I know I won't stick around if I think the ship is really sinking), leaving behind a majority that thinks the way Mr. Man-on-Dog does. Eventually, as with all such totalitarian states, its economy will fail to such an extent that the government will collapse and cease to function. Only then will the true believers "wake up." It's a pattern we have seen a few times over the last 100 years.

Most likely, it will look like the UK in "V for Vendetta." It will still call itself the United States of America, but it will function very differently, transforming itself into a nationalistic police state in which all areas of life -- including religion, sex, and childrearing -- will fall under the interest and contol of the state. It will certainly not be a democracy. Dissenters will be outnumbered and disorganized, and most will likely emmigrate (I know I won't stick around if I think the ship is really sinking), leaving behind a majority that thinks the way Mr. Man-on-Dog does. Eventually, as with all such totalitarian states, its economy will fail to such an extent that the government will collapse and cease to function. Only then will the true believers "wake up." It's a pattern we have seen a few times over the last 100 years.

For example? The Soviet Union comes to mind but that's only one. Are there others? I'm really not yanking your chain, by the way, I'd just like to know.

all happiness should be stoped at all cost. even if we enjoy stoping it. thats the price we must pay.

A break-up of the nation would probably give the best long-term results.

Here's why I take it personally. Santorum is certainly entitled to his opinions, but as he's a legislator in the Senate, one of a hundred with vast power over this country, his opinions necessarily carry more weight than mine. So when he starts talking about restricting personal freedoms because they conflict with his limited view of the world, I take it personally, and I speak out against him, and hopefully enough others do the same and remove him from his position of power.

He is only a legislatior because a majority of people put him in a position to be one. If his attempts to, as you see it, restrict your personal freedom are not in line with human rights in general or other principles of government that are codified or otherwise then it will be stopped.

He is only a legislatior because a majority of people put him in a position to be one. If his attempts to, as you see it, restrict your personal freedom are not in line with human rights in general or other principles of government that are codified or otherwise then it will be stopped.

Not necessarily. He voted for the MCA, after all.

For example? The Soviet Union comes to mind but that's only one. Are there others? I'm really not yanking your chain, by the way, I'd just like to know.
The USSR was the biggest and oldest such regime. Arguably, much of Africa is in the state it's in because of failed totalitarian states. Haiti qualifies, in my opinion. Some historians have speculated about the course Nazi Germany would have taken if not for losing the war when they did. They were not in good financial or administrative shape when Berlin fell.

The key to running a totalitarian state is to whip up at least 51% of the mob in support of your propaganda platform. The chaos that follows the inevitable collapse is largely fueled by factional fighting among those who supported and those who opposed the regime, vying either for power or just survival.

EDIT: I should note that I don't expect the US to collapse as quickly or catastrophically as a small African nation. The USSR took 70 years to fall apart. 70 not-fun years.

A break-up of the nation would probably give the best long-term results.

Hmm ... I am reminded of The Nine Nations of North America (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_Nations_of_North_America), from back in the 80's. An interesting idea.

An 11% lead by a Democrat...we have a word for a federal race like that. It's called a "toss-up."

Unless I knew who produced the electronic voting devices, and who programmed them, I'd be reluctant to even call it a "toss-up" -- I'd say there still a shot at having a load of Santorum in Washington next term.

perhaps you are from another country and dont know that life, liberty and the pursuit of HAPPINESS (please note the spelling) are the fundamentals upon which the united states is founded. in fact, we hold them to be self-evident.

that always makes me chuckle.

He is only a legislatior because a majority of people put him in a position to be one. If his attempts to, as you see it, restrict your personal freedom are not in line with human rights in general or other principles of government that are codified or otherwise then it will be stopped.

Yes, by him being voted out of office by the same majority that first put him there. That's how it works. That's why we are hoping for that outcome in the election.

Unless I knew who produced the electronic voting devices, and who programmed them, I'd be reluctant to even call it a "toss-up" -- I'd say there still a shot at having a load of Santorum in Washington next term.
That reminds me - this would be a good election to audit.

Unless I knew who produced the electronic voting devices, and who programmed them, I'd be reluctant to even call it a "toss-up" -- I'd say there still a shot at having a load of Santorum in Washington next term.

Well, that depends...if it's a week before the election and the lead is 55-44, then it's a toss-up. If it's a month before the election and the lead is 49-38, Santorum's the odds-on favorite. If the exit polls show Santorum losing by 11 points, then he probably lost by a close margin. Any slimmer than that and they go to a recount, and Democrats never win a recount.

That reminds me - this would be a good election to audit.

If there were a way to audit it, you mean. That's why I like optical scan machines--machine counted ballots that are easily verifiable. It's a system that fails well, as opposed to a black box system like the one I had to vote on.

as long as the only voters who count are their ultraconservative fundamentalist base, they will continue to pander to them by passing laws that only appeal to the most socially conservative voters.

Of course, as opposed to the Donkocrat Party, which never counts on their ultraliberal fundamentalist base (Howard Dean/MoveOn.org, Michael Moore-ons, etc.) and would never pander to them by passing laws and imposing judicial fiats that only appeal to the most socially extreme-liberal voters (gay "marriage," partial-birth abortion, banning the Pledge of Allegiance, etc.).

I am really going to enjoy seeing the GOP retain control of the Congress and Senate next week and hearing the Donkocrats and their information ministry, the DLM (dishonest liberal media), i.e., the CBS/ABC/NBC/CNN/NewYorkDemocratTimes/LosAngelesDemocratTimes/WashingtonCompost axis, wail and gnash their teeth :D

I fucking hate Rick Santorum.

Of course, as opposed to the Donkocrat Party, which never counts on their ultraliberal fundamentalist base (Howard Dean/MoveOn.org, Michael Moore-ons, etc.) and would never pander to them by passing laws and imposing judicial fiats that only appeal to the most socially extreme-liberal voters (gay "marriage," partial-birth abortion, banning the Pledge of Allegiance, etc.).

Right, mmm-hmm, because all liberals believe in all that. Granted, not all of them believe in gay marriage, but a majority of Americans think that gay couples should be afforded the same rights as straight couples; whether they use the term "marriage" is irrelevant. As for partial-birth abortion...arg. I didn't see that as an issue unless it involved the health of the mother, and to disallow abortions of any kind that would save a person's life is extreme.

And no one wants to ban the Pledge of Allegiance. Sure, one judge struck down the "under God" part, but let's see here...that's two words out of 31. To pass it off as the most important part of the Pledge is to violate the First Amendment. And if I recall, a lot of liberals were asking, "What's the big deal?" However, they were quick to shout down fundies who tried to shit on the First Amendment by enforcing "under God" and use it as a political tool.

I am really going to enjoy seeing the GOP retain control of the Congress and Senate next week and hearing the Donkocrats and their information ministry, the DLM (dishonest liberal media), i.e., the CBS/ABC/NBC/CNN/NewYorkDemocratTimes/LosAngelesDemocratTimes/WashingtonCompost axis, wail and gnash their teeth :D

Here, here's a tinfoil hat for believing that the media is a single entity and all of it is liberal. And yes, the GOP will retain control of both the House and the Senate, but not because they are right. It's because they are fearmongers, and the Dems haven't learned that tactic yet. That and it helps to have the upper hand already when fearmongering. There's no fear like fear of the unknown...zOMG, what might happen if t3h librul conspiracy takes over?

Of course, as opposed to the Donkocrat Party, which never counts on their ultraliberal fundamentalist base (Howard Dean/MoveOn.org, Michael Moore-ons, etc.) and would never pander to them by passing laws and imposing judicial fiats that only appeal to the most socially extreme-liberal voters (gay "marriage," partial-birth abortion, banning the Pledge of Allegiance, etc.).

I am really going to enjoy seeing the GOP retain control of the Congress and Senate next week and hearing the Donkocrats and their information ministry, the DLM (dishonest liberal media), i.e., the CBS/ABC/NBC/CNN/NewYorkDemocratTimes/LosAngelesDemocratTimes/WashingtonCompost axis, wail and gnash their teeth :D

*shudder*

do you even bother to LOOK at what is going on in this country? do you bother to ANALYSE what would happen if the democrats win congress?

the democrats CANT pander to the ultraleftwingers. or if they DO, it cant WORK. why? because the president is a republican. if the democrats hold ONE part of congress, the republican control OTHER house can block any pandering. if they hold BOTH the president can actually do his job and VETO IT.

have you thought about it YET? if they pass a national gay marriage act, SO WHAT? it will just be vetoed. if the house passes a bill changing the wording of the pledge of allegiance, the senate votes it down. all the democrats can do is stop this horrorshow of antiamericanism being shoved down our throats by the republican leadership.

if the republicans keep congress we are SCREWED. their corruption doesnt matter ,their destruction of our personal freedoms go unchecked. the budget goes all the more out of balance. it will be a nightmare of CRAP pushed by the party elite. the president has only made ONE freaking veto in 6 years in office.

if the democrats hold congress, then to get anything passed it HAS to be bipartisan. the fringes of BOTH parties are put to the back where they belong and the middle ground, the average american gets what THEY want for a change

unchecked power is a very bad idea.

perhaps you are from another country and dont know that life, liberty and the pursuit of HAPPINESS (please note the spelling) are the fundamentals upon which the united states is founded. in fact, we hold them to be self-evident.

Its kind of like: A new stereo will make me happy, I'm gonna take that guy's! Driving an SUV will make me happy, who cares that Im polluting excessively!

no we hold those truths to be self-evident for everyone.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

santorum isnt out of the senate yet. there is a good chance that come january he will be remembered only for the nasty definition of his name but there is no guarantee of that. if he stays in the senate his creepy opinions will count very much. every american should care about that.

*Coughs*

The Declaration of Independance was only a propaganda tool to get other countries on the side of the colonies, as the writers, for the most part, had no intention of following that.

*coughs*

14th amendment alludes to Life and Liberty, but not happiness...

*coughs*

Not saying it's a bad thing, the pursuit of happiness, but it is not an unalienable right, in the strictest sense of the word.

OK, I count one tenet that Santorum seems to oppose. I assume the other is liberty, and frankly, I don't think he feels too strongly that life in inalienable either.

And frankly, say what you will about the polls, people like Santorum will win. It's a sad commentary of our time when people look at a choice between cleaning up the deficit and denying people rights and choose to deny people rights. It's depressing.


Agreed. I will not support the major parties in the US anymore. Note my sig.

That reminds me - this would be a good election to audit.

Maybe...I went ahead and checked the polls and figured out who I think will win every Senate race. Couple that with the fact that I consider the House a sure thing to go Republican, and I am not at all optimistic about the Dems' chances.

AZ - Kyl (R), 54-45
CA - Feinstein (D), 61-38
CT - Lieberman, 49-40
DE - Carper (D), 69-30
FL - Nelson (D), 57-42
HI - Akaka (D), 74-25
IN - Lugar (R), unopposed
ME - Snowe (R), 76-23
MD - Steele (R), 51-48
MA - Kennedy (D), 65-34
MI - Stabenow (D), 55-44
MN - Klobuchar (D), 58-41
MS - Lott (R), 69-30
MO - Talent (R), 50-49
MT - Burns (R), 50-49
NE - Nelson (D), 59-40
NV - Ensign (R), 56-43
NJ - Kean (R), 50-49
NM - Bingaman (D), 59-40
NY - Clinton (D), 62-37
ND - Conrad (D), 61-38
OH - DeWine (R), 52-47
PA - Santorum (R), 51-48
RI - Whitehouse (D), 53-46
TN - Corker (R), 52-47
TX - Hutchison (R), 62-37
UT - Hatch (R), 67-32
VT - Sanders, 61-38
VA - Allen (R), 51-48
WA - Cantwell (D), 52-47
WV - Byrd (D), 65-34
WI - Kohl (D), 67-32
WY - Thomas (R), 71-28

Add that up and that means 56 seats go to the GOP, 42 to the Dems, and 2 to independents (thought both are, for all intents and purposes, Democrats.)

*Coughs*

The Declaration of Independance was only a propaganda tool to get other countries on the side of the colonies, as the writers, for the most part, had no intention of following that.

*coughs*

14th amendment alludes to Life and Liberty, but not happiness...

*coughs*

Not saying it's a bad thing, the pursuit of happiness, but it is not an unalienable right, in the strictest sense of the word.

yeah and no one in the 230 years since the declaration of independence was written has ever thought about it or referred to it or thought of is as the essence of america again.

i didnt say it was in the constitution now did i?

if rick santorum thinks that there is something wrong with the pursuit of happinesss, he is dead wrong and shouldnt hold office in the united states senate.

Of course, as opposed to the Donkocrat Party, which never counts on their ultraliberal fundamentalist base (Howard Dean/MoveOn.org, Michael Moore-ons, etc.) and would never pander to them by passing laws and imposing judicial fiats that only appeal to the most socially extreme-liberal voters (gay "marriage," partial-birth abortion, banning the Pledge of Allegiance, etc.).

I am really going to enjoy seeing the GOP retain control of the Congress and Senate next week and hearing the Donkocrats and their information ministry, the DLM (dishonest liberal media), i.e., the CBS/ABC/NBC/CNN/NewYorkDemocratTimes/LosAngelesDemocratTimes/WashingtonCompost axis, wail and gnash their teeth :D

You spend a lot of time over at Free Republic, don't you? There's no other group I've ever seen who's more paranoid about liberalism, especially considering that liberals haven't held real power in decades now.

all happiness should be stoped at all cost. even if we enjoy stoping it. thats the price we must pay.

There's a place for the likes of you, the metaphorical false-christian hell.

Of course, as opposed to the Donkocrat Party, which never counts on their ultraliberal fundamentalist base (Howard Dean/MoveOn.org, Michael Moore-ons, etc.) and would never pander to them by passing laws and imposing judicial fiats that only appeal to the most socially extreme-liberal voters (gay "marriage," partial-birth abortion, banning the Pledge of Allegiance, etc.).


Watch out for the ultraliberals and their GAY (zOMG) marriage. It's coming to get you.

The phrase "under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954.

How strongly would you feel about it if it was added in 1984? or 2004? or if it was added in 1844?





So if the USA goes theocracy, well, then maybe I go serial killer. :cool:

Watch out for the ultraliberals and their GAY (zOMG) marriage. It's coming to get you.

I'm thinking that every boy and girl should have to either /a/ have four years of GAY/LESBIAN high school OR /b/ have two years in a same-sex-marriage

Then they'll be allowed to get married to someone of the opposite sex ....


That's what the gay marriage law is, right?:headbang:

I'm thinking that every boy and girl should have to either /a/ have four years of GAY/LESBIAN high school OR /b/ have two years in a same-sex-marriage

Then they'll be allowed to get married to someone of the opposite sex ....


That's what the gay marriage law is, right?:headbang:

No, of course not. The government will assign all people into same-sex marriages and force them to have immoral sexual relations. The men will go off and spread AIDS while the women shave their heads and go eat babies. And no one will have any kids, and the Bible will be burned during a massive gay sex orgy. And all this will delay the return of Jesus Christ, who's scheduled to return in June of 2007 at a Waffle House in Topeka, KS. He will reveal himself to the most pious Christians, but if we allow gay marriage, the world will be full of gays and dead babies and Jesus will take one look at the world and decide to vacation on Jupiter instead.

<snip> ... the women shave their heads and go eat babies. And no one will have any kids, ...<snip>

Don't forget, in order to have babies to eat, there will have to be forced impregnation, and late term abortions to match....

Don't forget, in order to have babies to eat, there will have to be forced impregnation, and late term abortions to match....

Well, that goes without saying. And all the women getting pregnant will be unmarried teenagers, who have promiscuous sex and sell their bodies to sperm banks beofre getting married.