Did a liberal on TV ever declare they wanted Bush to fail in Iraq? Well, here’s one from the Fox News Channel. On the December 27, 2002 edition of Your World With Neil Cavuto, during a discussion with left-winger Ellen Ratner on expectations the economy would grow and the stock market would go up in 2003:
BRENDA BUTTNER: You’re basically saying he’s [Bush] going to get re-elected. I mean essentially.
ELLEN RATNER, FNC political analyst: Well, unless the economy tanks –
BUTTNER: The economy could. That’s what people vote on.
RATNER: Well, unless he messes up the war [with Iraq]. My hope.
BUTTNER: Your hope?!
RATNER: Well, I don’t want him to be reelected!
BUTTNER: Right, but I mean, "mess up the war," what do you mean by that?
RATNER: I mean, do something that will make Americans say, ‘maybe we shouldn’t have done this.’ You know, that kind of thing.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I remember seeing that when it happened
March 10, 2009 - 12:51 ET by Paul AtreidesI also don't remember anyone wailing and gnashing their teeth over it.
Those parenthetical Ds make a world of difference, ya know.
Exactly what the media did!
March 10, 2009 - 13:49 ET by MaximusBraveheartWell this time around the MSM really "learned" their "job" to blantantly attack Bush on Iraq and repeatedly attack the economy and hype gasoline prices up & up (while not focusing on market manipulation but the "evils" of demand and global warming). All fixing the result of the Obama corination. So much for "news." It is NOT fair & ballanced in the disgusting MSM! M-B
Hateful
March 10, 2009 - 13:00 ET by nkviking75Ratner is within her rights to hate Bush, but a lot of young men and women would pay for "messing up the war". That's completely inexcusable.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Ratner
March 10, 2009 - 13:12 ET by east tennessee johnRatner, a bottom feeder on the liberal ladder of deception was just sprouting the party line. Was this before the play and book calling for Bush's assassination? If Comrade O "succeeds" we all succeed, right Ellen?
Mess Up The War
March 10, 2009 - 13:54 ET by JDWHow do we reorganize by sleeping with the terrorists?
JDW
DAILY WAVE
The government works for me, not the other way around
listen real close
March 10, 2009 - 14:00 ET by candanceThat sound you hear is lefties digging up the goalposts in order to move them.
But you see, Rush has 20 million listeners! No one actually watches Neil Cavuto! It's different! *child like foot stomp commences*
Candance, Jer did that to
March 10, 2009 - 18:14 ET by LiberalliesCandance,
Jer did that to me already. I proved to him how the left wingnut media, the Liberalnuts and the Dumbcrats did not go crazy over Randi Rhodes comments and on air sound of a shot-gun killing President Bush and he claimed it was not the same thing since Ms. Rhodes does not have 20 million listners, and blah, blah, blah.
The FACT is that Liberals said much worse things about Bush, including that they wanted him to fail. However, as always, Liberals are only outraged when they believe that Conservatives are attacking Liberals using Liberal tactics.
Jer, you are great and for the most part you seem to have a straight head on, but my goodness man, how can you not see the blalant hypocrisy of the Dumbcrats reaction to Rush Limbaugh's comments given the FACT that 51% of voters wanted Bush to fail, that individuals like the Liberal above wished Bush to fail in Iraq, with Randi Rhodes comments, etc, etc, etc, etc.
I mean honestly Jer, just when I believe that Liberal hypocrisy does not surprise me anymore, something like this happens and I am still shocked by it.
Nope, don't hear a sound, candance...
March 11, 2009 - 01:55 ET by JerNope, don't hear a sound, candance...I think you must actually be hearing the sounds of your digging a deeper hole for yourself. [kidding]
Tell me, when was "whoever the heck Ratner is" described as a national treasure, the most important ideologial voice in America, made an honorary member of Congress, etc.?
To say it is an apples and oranges comparison understates the enormity of the distinction.
Jer
I seem to remember a man
March 11, 2009 - 07:50 ET by Paul Atreidesnamed Joe the Plumber who had tons of media and liberal derision heaped on him. I remember a CNN reporter telling Joe that his background was subject to scrutiny and airing for daring to question CANDIDATE Obama.
So, if we can make a public example of Rush and Joe, I think that we can certainly scale that tall pedestal that liberals have set themselves upon and question their words.
I see Jer
March 11, 2009 - 11:06 ET by candanceSo it's okay for a lib to go on TV and openly say they hope America loses a war - as long as they are not a celebrity.
It's okay for libs to get on Air America and call for people to be executed - as long as they are not famous libs.
It's okay for the Daily Kos to slime and smear because they are not influencial - and nevermind the fact that Obama campaigned at their convention.
It's okay for thousands of libs to protest Bush's inauguration, throw eggs at his car, tell pollsters they hope he fails, and criticize him at every turn - those thousands of people were not following the advice of a talk radio host, so it's different you see.
Keep living in your fantasy version of history where only kooks and fringers hoped for Bush's failure.
No, you obviously don't see, candance...
March 11, 2009 - 21:45 ET by Jernor know me as well as I thought.
Frankly I'm shocked you would even suggest that I endorse or support the behavior you reference.
So it's okay for a lib to go on TV and openly say they hope America loses a war - as long as they are not a celebrity. No, I think its stupid and inexcusable.
It's okay for libs to get on Air America and call for people to be executed - as long as they are not famous libs. Absolutely not. Is this the Randi Rhodes case again? If so, how many times do I need to condemn it before you'll accept it. However, she did apologize, unlike the conservative talk show host who called for Clinton's execution during his Presidency. I found that to be offensive also.
It's okay for the Daily Kos to slime and smear because they are not influencial - and nevermind the fact that Obama campaigned at their convention. Of course not. I have condemned it on this site and their site. Do you think it's okay for Rush to continually imply that the Clintons had Vince Foster bumped off. Or that he directly accused Clinton of "deliberately incinerating" innocent women and children at Waco? Or that Jerry Falwell shamelessly hawked videos which made outrageously absurd suggestions that Clinton had political adversaries murdered? Did you ever express any condemnation of that disgraceful behavior?
It's okay for thousands of libs to protest Bush's inauguration, throw eggs at his car, tell pollsters they hope he fails, and criticize him at every turn - those thousands of people were not following the advice of a talk radio host, so it's different you see. The election was one of the two most controversial presidential elections in American history. Do you honestly believe, if Gore were being inaugurated, there would have been no Republican protesters. How about the ones that were beating down the doors in Palm Beach at the building where the ballots were being reviewed? I've already expressed my objections about the poll respondents on the original thread, and my agreement with the Democrat spokesman and Clinton pollster who condemned the results. Again, however, that was six years into the Bush administration. Rush's comment was two days before Obama was sworn in.
Keep living in your fantasy version of history where only kooks and fringers hoped for Bush's failure. What do you think the results of a NB poll would be right now if the question were simply "Do you hope Obama fails?" I have already read many comments with an affirmative answer.
Jer
As we all know, all liberals
March 10, 2009 - 14:03 ET by goldbarAs we all know, all liberals hang on Ellen Ratner's every word. She has the ability to tank finacial markets with the slightest comment.
Good investigative journalism job, Tim!
I had never even heard of Ratner.
March 10, 2009 - 14:10 ET by JerI had never even heard of Ratner. And it's not like I never watch Fox.
Jer
ding ding ding
March 10, 2009 - 14:13 ET by candanceI called that to a T.
Do I get a prize now?
No, unless Unsane has some
March 11, 2009 - 01:58 ET by JerNo, unless Unsane has some of his consolation gifts left over. But thanks for your participation.
Jer
You kidding? "I" have
March 11, 2009 - 12:59 ET by BDYou kidding? "I" have watched Ellen Ratner on TV talk shows countless times.
Am I simply better informed than you? or are you being disingenious?
BD...
March 11, 2009 - 20:17 ET by JerYou're apparently better informed about Ratner. On which shows has she most often appeared? Is she still doing so?
Jer
She was a regular on
March 12, 2009 - 09:42 ET by BDShe was a regular on Foxnews, particularly Hannity and Colmes and I have seen her on CNN occasionally.
She must have fallen out of favor or went on sabbatiical in 2007 since she dropped out of the scene about then.
Thanks for the info, BD...
March 12, 2009 - 17:45 ET by JerThanks for the info, BD...
I've watched a fair amount of H&C and BOR pretty regularly, but I guess I either missed or "misremembered" her.
Jer
I guess your point is, "They
March 10, 2009 - 14:05 ET byI guess your point is, "They did it so we can do it too!" But for years you people have been telling liberals not to justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior, so which is it?
I believe that for eight years the liberal side of the aisle acted in an UN-AMERICAN FASHION, by desiring the effort in Iraq to fail.
Similarly, I believe that Rush Limbaugh is acting in an UN-AMERICAN FASHION by desiring the current President to fail. Period. IF IT WAS WRONG WHEN THEY DID IT, THEN IT IS WRONG WHEN YOU DO IT!
The really insidious aspect of this philosophy is the underlying assertion that , "I don't care if his policies work, I want him to fail because I care more about my ideology than I do my COUNTRY". And that's just pathetic. Such thinking implies that a person's economic theories or theories of foreign policy are Supreme. This is flawed thinking. Your economic theories have not been ordained by God they were created by men and as such are subject to failure. Some of you have more loyalty to the "STRICT ADHERENCE" to "conservative doctrine" than you do to the BIBLE! There well, it doesn't matter if you're baptized like the people in the bible! THERE, it doesn't matter if you speak in tongues like EVERYBODY else! Nooooo, all of a sudden you're a friggin' LIBERAL! LOL. Now, for your pursuit of filthy lucre, every jot and tittle of conservative doctrine must be adhered to!
Well, whoever agrees with Limbaugh's UN-AMERICAN wish of failure for this country is a pathetic individual indeed. Proving that he or she is NO BETTER than a scum sucking liberal who also wanted his country to FAIL. Because make no mistake about it, if the President fails, the COUNTRY fails.
I thought you people were more honorable than that, guess I was wrong. You're no better than the Kos Kids! Que triste.
Overstating Acts
March 10, 2009 - 14:19 ET by Tim GrahamActs, my point in this blog is simply that liberals cannot suggest they have NOT wished for the other side to fail. If they want to have a hootenanny claiming that they've "never before" heard such a thing (Chris Matthews), then they need to look back and see it.
I would not claim that Obama's economic policies are ungodly -- only his abortion/embryo-destroying/gay marriage-friendly ones.
I think it's silly to suggest that if the president fails, the country fails. The country can be stronger than that. It's also silly to suggest that anyone who disagrees at the "jot and tittle" with you is a "friggin' liberal."
Crisis V. Non-Crisis
March 10, 2009 - 14:23 ET by JDWObama was elected to create financial stabilization. Why do you think he was elected to change everything?
JDW
DAILY WAVE
The government works for me, not the other way around
here's a dollar Acts, now please go buy a clue
March 10, 2009 - 14:24 ET by candanceObama put a tough choice before all conservatives - root for the White House to succeed with destructive policies or root for the economy to recover. There's no other option, you have to choose one or the other. Limbaugh didn't create that. Obama did. And Limbaugh has repeatedly said he wants Obama to fail in his agenda because he doesn't want America to suffer. He has also repeatedly said that if Obama started making better choices he would want those choices to succeed.
That is a lot different from wishing we would lose a war simply to embarrass a president. It didn't have anything to do with America's success or saving American lives. She blatantly said that she wanted America to suffer a loss because our success would keep Bush in the White House.
But acts of kindness and generosity must be free and voluntary; no man has a right to compel another to follow his conscience. This is a concern which lies between a man and his God.
-Richard Fuhrman, pro slave advocate, 1823
Wanted America to suffer a loss: Success would keep Bush...
March 10, 2009 - 15:17 ET by JDWShe is ignoring Kerry. In 2004 he hired a pollster to organize focus groups in order to create the most aggressive change possible. Bold action would be not in the best interest of our country but to create problems and expand government.
And Obama came along.
JDW
DAILY WAVE
The government works for me, not the other way around
~Why does Acts....like a tool
March 10, 2009 - 14:27 ET by choselife3xBring baptism into everything? I think he must've been held under the water a tad too long...............(everybody likes a little quiet now and then. Even pastors.)
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
HEY! Hi BFF
March 10, 2009 - 14:39 ET by sherylsimsI didn't see you there till my own post came up right below yours. :o) How's the online flirting going?
~Jer is resting
March 10, 2009 - 14:44 ET by choselife3xWith an icepack, and Acts.....like a tool is busy attempting reverse psychology. Odd Job appears to be passed out from sheer exhaustion. *shrug* Older men tire easily....
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
he can't help it chose
March 10, 2009 - 14:43 ET by candanceHe was here several months ago under another name and got banned for fighting. Like a good little oneness believer he is obssessed with his brand of Christianity and is a nonstop quest to scream at you until you obey.
This new version of him, believe it or not, is nicer than the old one.
~Great googly-moogly!
March 10, 2009 - 14:48 ET by choselife3xAnd he called me the 'resident crazy person' yesterday! I love it when trolls are unintentionally hilarious.
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
Hhmm
March 10, 2009 - 14:57 ET by general companyZappa fan?
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
~When you say 'Zappa'
March 10, 2009 - 15:05 ET by choselife3xI think 'Frank' and have a vague idea he has something to do with music. Other than that, well, I'm 28.
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
Music
March 10, 2009 - 15:54 ET by general companyVery funny music, he used the term Great Googly Moogly
He was far more talented then most ever gave him credit for, and he could be a bit raunchy also, and he hated Republicans, well the social ones. Funny thing is, he was as conservative as anyone.
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
FYI, Frank hated ALL
March 10, 2009 - 16:34 ET by goldbarFYI, Frank hated ALL republicans and wasn't too crazy about a lot of democrats.
~I think
March 10, 2009 - 16:55 ET by choselife3xI heard it in a movie. I'm sure my husband is familiar with him though. He's older than I am and much more into the music of that era. Betcha he can give me a full bio on the guy!
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
You ARE the "resident crazy
March 11, 2009 - 14:33 ET byYou ARE the "resident crazy broad" who follows people from thread to thread harassing them relentlessly.
~Awwwwww
March 11, 2009 - 15:49 ET by choselife3xfollows people from thread to thread harassing them relentlessly.
*blushing* "Why, Acts.....like a tool....I didn't think you'd noticed" she murmured. She gazed into his glassy eyes and thought how glad she was that he had worn his loincloth today.
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
Hey CanTdance, that was GREAT! That guy
March 11, 2009 - 15:17 ET byHey that was GREAT! That guy certainly RESPONDED to your insults and stupidity with a superior knowledge of what is or is NOT called for in scripture. In short, HE PWNED YOU!
I realize his "tone" was kind of harsh but CLEARLY he was responding to your brutish and insulting behavior so I can't really blame him. HOWEVER he did "break you off" and straight PWN your light weight understanding of the bible! No pregunta sobre eso! Man, you got owned!
And you didn't even have a weak biblical response! All you did was liberal out and probably go running to the admin to get the guy banned! Wow, his truth and your gay reaction, really showed me a lot about YOU. I will certainly be wasting a lot less time, responding to your inanity as it is clear that you know very little about the bible in the first place. Thanks so much for showing me that someone has already SHOWN you what the bible says about salvation, you just continue to ignore it. Oh, well, you'll find out one day!
ROFLMAO. MAN DID THAT GUY OWN YOU! I love the way he called you "CANT DANCE", that was hysterical! Oh and by the way, my "oneness" belief isn't "my brand" of Christianity. It's the ONLY BRAND of Christianity. All others are LIARS and THIEVES and that's what Christ called 'em not me, so don't get your PANTIES in a bunch, 'kay?
Want to know why "Oneness" is the ONLY way? Because He is the Way the truth and the LIFE and no one cometh unto the Father but by Him. I know it's hard for a small mind like yours to comprehend but if God can be EVERYWHERE, can't He be in TWO PLACES at one time?I understand your confusion, the Apostles themselves were confused by Jesus constantly referring to the "father" as if it were someone separate from himself. So they asked Him about it...here's what He said..
John 14:6-11
6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
7If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
10Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
So, you see "CanTdance"? (i love that, kudos to "keith"!) There is a reason for Oneness, it is the CONCLUSION of the matter reached by the Apostles ordained before the FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD to spread Christ's doctrine! It doesn't matter WHAT the Pope thinks. Or your pastor or YOU or I for that matter, ALL that matters is what the Lord's chosen EMISSARIES thought. Did THEY believe in a "Trinity", a word that doesn't even EXIST in the bible? Or did they in fact believe that JESUS IS GOD?
Colossians 1:12-19
12. Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
13. Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
14. In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15. Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16. For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17. And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
I realize for the unregenerated this might be a "distinction without a difference" but the pope doesn't believe that Jesus is " before all things" if he did he wouldn't be praying to MARY, or that Jesus is the "IMAGE OF THE INVISIBLE GOD", if he did he wouldn't speak of a "trinity", and he certainly doesn't teach that the world was made by JESUS CHRIST.
No, CanTdance ( that shall be your name forever now!) the pope thinks that Christ is merely a PIECE of God, a third spoke in a wheel, he certainly doesn't teach that ALL OF THE FATHER DWELT IN THE BODY OF JESUS CHRIST. But the Apostles DID!
1 TIM 3:16
16. And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
So it seems that you and the pope and the fake preachers that you followed are on ONE side of the understanding of who Christ is and His APOSTLES and disciples are on the other. If you knew how stupid you sound you would NEVER ridicule "oneness" because that 's ALL THERE IS! Or is reading NOT fundamental in your church?
Ehpesians 4:5,6
5One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
6One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Now you worship a "Trinity" which means THREE not ONE, you have a different "Faith" than that of the apostles and you are BAPTIZED DIFFERENTLY than the apostles who ALL taught water baptism in Jesus name AND reception of the Holy Ghost evidenced by speaking in tongues!
See how silly you are for ridiculing oneness as "my" belief? It's the bibles belief buddy, not just mine, it's only MINE because IT'S IN THE BIBLE!
Dude, that guy "keith" straight OWNED you though, and the beauty of it is he put your smug behind in your place and he did it with scripture! Oh, his acumen was so deadly that you had no choice but to run to the admin like a little panty-waiste to get him banned, if indeed he was banned. But if you could just "man up" and realize that you don't know everything, or even very much, about the bible, that guy's writing would have helped you!
Well, I'm a little kinder and gentler than that dude so maybe you'll get your bible, check the things i write unto you and be the better for it. Good luck.
wow Acts
March 11, 2009 - 15:32 ET by botgi think you need to re-read a bit, 90% of the teaching in the BIBLE relating to salvation does not mention baptism. All teaching on baptism mentions salvation, ergo baptism is dependant on salvation and not the other way around.
would you be a teacher (in Israel) and not know these things?
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -- Chief Justice John Roberts
~That loud rattling sound you all just heard
March 11, 2009 - 15:32 ET by choselife3xWas Acts...like a tool dropping his marbles again. He's got to remember not to bend over when he shows his @$$ like that.
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
I thought you'd like that Acts
March 11, 2009 - 16:43 ET by candanceThat little trip down memory lane was fun for you, huh? A few quick points though:
1) I am not a man.
2) I did not appeal to the admins about that.
3) Those verses have all been shown to me ad nauseam and still haven't changed my mind. There's this handy little thing called context that can make a huge difference. And lest you insist that context isn't needed in the Bible, do tell me why Matthew 28 is not to be taken literal.
I think it was a salient
March 11, 2009 - 14:45 ET byI think it was a salient example of your stupidity. Something that requires strict adherence as ORDAINED BY GOD, you're kind of liberal on, something that man made up like economic policy, on THAT you mandated strict adherence. That fact, like you, is laughable.
Acts
March 10, 2009 - 14:35 ET by sherylsimsTake a deep breath. Ok, first of all, sometimes you say things I will readily agree with. Here however, you are saying that it is un-American to wish for the socialistic policies of the current administration to fail. You are wrong. That IS American as set forth in the American Constitution.
As for some here having more loyalty o their conservative doctrine than the Bible, well, what do you expect? Not everyone here even claims to BELIEVE the Bible, so why would you even put that in here. This is a CONSERVATIVE site, not a CHRISTIAN site, even though it seems like quite a few posters are both. Try and think a little before you go off on your rants. You make Christians look bad.
you got it sheryl
March 10, 2009 - 14:45 ET by candanceBy his logic the people of Russia were wrong for hoping Stalin would be thrown out of power.
Sadly, you've probably never
March 11, 2009 - 14:35 ET bySadly, you've probably never even MET a Christian. These are the requirements ( john 3:1-8, Mark 16:15-20) . Met anyone who fills that bill? I doubt it. IF you had, you wouldn't object to the truth being preached whenever or wherever!
Yea ACK, Who said this: Oh yea PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREEECH
March 11, 2009 - 15:08 ET by upcountrywaterBut I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be
guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You
good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and
whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery
hell.
If your eye causes you to stumble, throw it out; it is better for you
to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be
cast into hell,
"If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it from you.
It is better for you to enter life with one eye, than to have two eyes
and be cast into the fiery hell.
P.R.I.N.T. Money 30 sec YT
Who called someone a "Fool"?
March 11, 2009 - 15:27 ET byWho called someone a "Fool"? Clearly you don't understand what you read either. A "Fool" in the bible is one who has said in his heart that there is NO GOD. That's why it is specifically listed, the word STUPID which is what I called the moron who dissed ME, is not applicable. And what could possibly have led you to believe that I was "angry"? My use of CAPS? LOL.
Dude, if you think I who have worked miracles in Jesus' name, could be made "angry" by some unregenerated person on a blog who doesn't even have sense enough to be BAPTIZED IN JESUS NAME like everyone else in the bible, then you just don't "know me at all". To quote the song.
I laugh at people like CanTdance and Chooselife and I taunt them in the hope that in their zeal to prove me wrong, they might actually READ what's in their bible. So, I called no one a "fool" neither did I call anyone "good for nothing". Perhaps you should READ the scriptures you quote. And PREECH is spelled this way P R E A C H. If you're going to think yourself the admin and go around correcting people, AT LEAST spell it correctly, 'kay?
~Acts.....like a tool
March 11, 2009 - 15:35 ET by choselife3xI laugh at people like CanTdance and Chooselife and I taunt them in the hope that in their zeal to prove me wrong, they might actually READ what's in their bible
I'd love for you to show us where this method of evangelizing is taught in the Bible.
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
Act, Do you type with your left hand?
March 11, 2009 - 15:42 ET by upcountrywater...And if your
right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is
better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body
to go into hell.
I spelt PREEECH with 3 EEE's,
P.R.I.N.T. Money 30 sec YT
Ok, where in the Bible does
March 11, 2009 - 15:18 ET by BDOk, where in the Bible does it list the requirements for a conservative?
I know you think you're
March 11, 2009 - 15:37 ET byI know you think you're being funny, and truthfully I did snicker when I read you, but it actually DOES. When Jesus was asked about paying taxes which people didn't want to do he said, Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. Concerning feeding the "poor" Jesus specifically listed the poor , as being the "fatherless and the widows", not as the liberals do, meaning any John, Dick or Harry that is too much of a lout to work.
Concerning "laxness vs. Firmness" , "liberalism vs conservatism" Jesus was quite specific in stating that the liberal or "broad" way is the way of DEATH and that the "conservative" or "narrow way" is the way that leads to life. However Jesus was talking about morality, not money, which is all most "conservatives" talk about nowadays.
~Acts....like a tool!
March 11, 2009 - 15:23 ET by choselife3xHow lovely to see you again!
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
Your mom looks so sad in
March 11, 2009 - 15:38 ET byYour mom looks so sad in that picture!
~I see your truuuuuuuue colors shining through........
March 11, 2009 - 15:40 ET by choselife3xHope and Change= Despair and Socialism
You mean you see that I am
March 11, 2009 - 15:55 ET byYou mean you see that I am human? If thou prickest me do I not bleed? You mean you see that I am not some holier-than-thou person walking a foot above the water, that I never claimed to be? Lady, if you actually read the stuff I wrote you'd see that rather than claim to be better than you, I CLAIMED TO BE WORSE. I told you that I was a low down NOTHING that the Lord took mercy on. I told you that I was a vicious violent man earlier in my life who would have though nothing about harming another human being. But it is because of my lowness, that I was saved. It is because of my "undone condition" that I sought the Lord in TRUTH. It is precisely because of my wretched nature that the lies of the false church didn't sway me. It is because of the need to KNOW that I was forgiven that I did not stop off at the false doctrine of "just believe and you're all good". All of these things led me to swear with an oath that if the Lord showed me the truth in His word, I would follow it. Period. So i realized that the Baptist and Catholic churches in which I was raised, do not teach the truth as it exists in scripture. Therefore the Lord was able to place someone in my path who would preach to me the truth and as importantly, SHOW IT TO ME IN THE BIBLE.
That's what I do for you. Whether you know it or not. This world rests upon a tissue of lies, foretold by Christ and realized over time. But as it "pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached, to save them that believe", I print the truth so that whosoever will, may indeed learn and be changed.
God isn't as concerned with my snarky tone as you are, after all he is the one who sent John screaming at the top of his lungs, eating locusts and wild honey, that the KINGDOM of GOD is at hand! The people of his day didn't like his "tone" either. But he was still preaching the truth and the Lord still accounted it to him for righteousness.
~Go read Corinthians again
March 11, 2009 - 16:03 ET by choselife3xYou know the part I'm talking about. Examine yourself before you SCREAM at people you know nothing of.
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
Speaking freely is VERY American
March 10, 2009 - 16:02 ET by Jeff StoneWhile you may feel it is anti-American, you are completely misguided and seem to be attempting to misguide others by calling it UN-AMERICAN.
One of the Essences of being American is the ability to speak freely, without fear of government interference.
Now, if you do not like what Rush says, do not listen to him !
Try going about your life making up your OWN mind and following through on your OWN thoughts.
Dear Jeff I write VERY
March 11, 2009 - 15:45 ET byDear Jeff
I write VERY precisely. Only attribute the thoughts that I actually write to me okay? I stated that if RUSH was calling liberals ANTI-AMERICAN for their non-support of Bush, that the same thing applies to HIM NOW? What part of that is not "making up my own mind"? I stated that I personally regard anyone who wishes FAILURE on their government as Anti-american and that I had no hypocrisy issues on that because I certainly regarded the Liberals who did it, in the same way.
I'm not saying that you have to "agree" with your government. But when you publicly advocate for it's failure, I believe that crosses a line. I hope I AM WRONG for the sake of America, I hope Obama succeeds because there are Americans who need him to desperately. I hope that unlike scripture, our economic theories are not "written in stone" and God will bless us IN SPITE of the socialist marxist at the helm! Because I love America MORE than I love my tax plan.
So I guess all those
March 10, 2009 - 17:04 ET by R D HelmSo I guess all those Cambodians who were wishing for Pol Pot to fail were being anti-Cambodian, eh?
The ones who were actually still alive and actually able to wish, I mean.
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
Acts, Since when, since
March 10, 2009 - 18:26 ET by LiberalliesActs,
Since when, since WHEN does a failure of an American President's policy means that America and Americans fail and there will be utter disaster?
Think about it! and I am going to use the following anology for shock value, not to compare anyone to anyone.
If Hitler would have failed in implementing his policies in Germany, would Germany and the world have been better off? We all know that the answer is YES!
Well same thing here, many of us here believe that Obama's policies will make millions of Americans suffer. If he succeeds in implementing his economic and foreign policies, this nation AND the world will suffer greatly.
there is a great difference between what Liberals did the past 8 years to Bush and how the majority of us Conservatives and Republicans feel about Obama.
I do NOT hate President Obama. He is my President. I wish his family, wife and beautiful two daughters the best in the world. I do not wish any harm to come upon them. If anything happens to them or President Obama it would be a national tragedy and I would mourn. I respect President Barack Hussein Obama as a human being, as a man, as a father, son and President. However, I have ZERO respect for his political beliefs, Liberal ideologies and his foreign and domestic policies. I do not wish Obama the person to fail, but I hope and pray that his policies fail and fail miserably.
Now for the past 8 years Liberals compared Bush to Hitler, Conservative and Republicans to Nazis. We have been called Bible thumpers, ignorant fools. To Latinos like me who are conservative and vote Republican, we are called Uncle Toms, House N...gers. We are called every name in the book, the left attempts to shame us into beliving and thinking like them. For the past 8 years Liberals and Democrats have demanded the death of Bush, that Bush's daughters be thrown into the Iraq and Afghan war. They have called Laura Bush an assasin. They have claimed that Bush is a cocaine user. That he is mindless, stupid, ignorant.
And do not come in here and tell me that the things that I have said that Liberals have done and said are not from main stream Democras and Liberals. Moveon.org is very much Liberal main stream. The DailyKos is visited by top Democrat politicians including Obama and Hillary. These two organizations, DailyKos and Moveon.org are two of the worst offenders of the attacks on Bush, his family, Conservatives and Republicans.
You have it wrong Acts....if President Obama's Libeal policies fail, the COUNTRY DOES NOT FAIL! The country will benefit greatly if Obama's policies fail.
I want any Liberal or Conservative that makes the statement that if Obama's policies fail, the country fails to explain how this is so. Give details, ENOUGH with the rhetoric! Start giving subtance to this claim. Prove it, give it details, back it up!
Acts, Rush never said he
March 10, 2009 - 15:23 ET by pitter43Acts, Rush never said he wanted America to fail, just obama's treasonous policies and I agree with him all the way even though I don't necessarily agree with him on everything. As for obama failing, he's a failure now and always has been.
How do you separate the
March 10, 2009 - 16:37 ET by goldbarHow do you separate the president from the country? Answer: you don't. Wanting the president to fail is the same as wanting the country to fail. They are inextricably connected.
so tell me goldbar
March 10, 2009 - 16:38 ET by candanceDid the French want France to fail when they ousted King Louis?
I stand corrected--on
March 10, 2009 - 16:57 ET by goldbarI stand corrected--on orthopedic shoes.
I also forgot about Nixon.
Present Obama will succeed
March 10, 2009 - 17:52 ET by cocodriePresent Obama will succeed if it is possible to save a sinking boat by chopping holes in the hull to let in more water.
Jesus Loves You
If Obama succeeds in
March 10, 2009 - 17:02 ET by R D HelmIf Obama succeeds in tearing our economy down completely, which is what his handler(s) is/are having him do, then we lose the country.
It would be fine with me if not one more bill was signed into law by this imposter for the remainder of his "presidency." This country would be far better off four years down the road if he did absolutely nothing further.
The financial damage he has done to this nation in just seven weeks will be with us for decades as it is.
As it stands now, we are facing a probable depression, one that could last a decade, if not longer.
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
And if Obama succeeds with
March 10, 2009 - 17:44 ET by goldbarAnd if Obama succeeds with his plan for economic recovery, the republicans will be out of power for a very, very, long time.
That's a mighty big "if"
March 10, 2009 - 17:46 ET by BlondePilgrim.
Keep dreaming though. I understand that you liberals are all into that hopey changey unreality thing.
I hope he fails, too.
sure goldbar
March 10, 2009 - 18:33 ET by candanceSo far Obama's whole plan of action seems to be three pronged:
-spend all the federal money he can.
-blame Bush for all of his problems.
-tell everyone how Rush Limbaugh controls Republicans.
This is akin to asking me, "hey if I jump off the roof and magically start to fly will you apologize for doubting."
Dude
March 10, 2009 - 17:50 ET by JDWThis Acts person is hung-up on religion, reread the post.
Wanting the president to fail is the same as wanting the country to fail
Our government is today attempting to take over religion in a state. Explain why anyone who would want him to fail in this instance is no different than wishing the country would fail.
JDW
DAILY WAVE
The government works for me, not the other way around
This Acts person is
March 11, 2009 - 16:18 ET byThis Acts person is hung-up on religion, reread the post.
Guilty as charged, the Lord consumes just about my every waking moment because i have had portion of His Spirit dwelling in me, since 12-27-92 between 2 and 4 in the afternoon.
Our government is today attempting to take over religion in a state. Explain why anyone who would want him to fail in this instance is no different than wishing the country would fail.
Good question and good point! I was making a distinction between wishing something and publicly ADVOCATING it, there is a difference. I don't want Obama's plans of taxing the rich to be successful because by his criteria ( not mine!), I'm one of them! But when I was interviewed in a local paper about him I stated that I was hopeful that in spite of the history of such policies failing, this one might succeed. And I mean that. I don't think I know everything about economics, unlike the bible where I have the Lord's Spirit teaching me, so i hope I'm wrong, he's right and the country is the better for it.
That's all I meant dude. That and the negative P.R. battle that comes from publicly advocating the failure of a newly elected president. If you know there's liberal bias in the press why keep bending over for it? All Rush had to do was say that he hopes the PResided succeeds but he DOUBTS his policies will. If words are a club, why give them to your enemy to smite you with? If you know there's liberal bias why not arm yourself with carefully chosen phrases against it?
For instance, right now there are articles about none of the press reporting on Obama's dissing of our greatest ally. Now, which approach would bring some results, you tell me.
Approach number one: Piss and whine on blogs that liberals don't read about the unfairness of it all.
OR.........
Approach number two: Teach all Republican congressmen to speak with one voice when issues like this arise. Imagine if Katie Couric interviews Senator Whomever, this way.
Katie: I 'd like to talk to you about your not voting for President Obama's tax initiative.
Senator: Well Katie, I'd like to talk about why your network hasn't covered the GRAVE INSULT that Obama gave to our greatest ally.
Katie sputters something inaudible and struggles to ask another question
Katie: But senator at this time of economic woe, why wouldn't you...
Senator: Katie aren't you supposed to be impartial? Well, why would you keep the American people from knowing that Obama, because of some internecine tribalism in his family, has DISSED our greatest ally and slapped them in the face? And why aren't you reporting on his proposed ARMING OF HAMAS with the 900 million in aid to the Gaza strip. Is he planning on airdropping envelopes of cash to each Palestinian or won't this be like Africa where the warlords steal the aid we intend for the people? And since in Gaza the "warlords" are the TERRORISTS why on earth would he do this? Does he support the Palestinians?
Now, she's going to be standing there like a sputtering fool, and your message will have gone out on CBS, the exact place they were trying to prevent it from being heard! All it takes is co-ordination.
The same way you liberal
March 11, 2009 - 14:48 ET by NL207The same way you liberal turds separated the soldiers from the mission.
Don't forget Jon Stewart who
March 10, 2009 - 18:51 ET by Dave DDon't forget Jon Stewart who was actually visibly upset in one of the episodes years ago when he though Iraq was going to work out nicely for Bush. (I'm talking in the first year or 2. He was actually upset at the thought Iraq would go smoothly and Bush would get the credit.)
Cramer said on Scarborough
March 10, 2009 - 22:03 ET by JAJTCramer said on Scarborough show that the difference between Obama and Bush is that Bush never made an issues or target those who spoke against his agenda. the liberals have said it over and over thru out the last 8 years, "bush lied, kids died". what Obama is going thru is nothing compared to the insults hurled at Bush the last 8 years. he needs to man up, oh of course, after his nap.
"he needs to man up, oh of
March 11, 2009 - 14:43 ET by NL207"he needs to man up, oh of course, after his nap. "
We'd be marginally better off if he simply took a dirt nap. Biden is an incompetent who could be easily broomed out of office in 2012.
It seems that reading is not
March 11, 2009 - 14:42 ET byIt seems that reading is not all that fundamental. The thrust of my argument was not that wishing a Presidents policies to fail is "un-American". My point was that CONSERVATIVES like LIMBAUGH called LIBERALS who wanted Bush's POLICIES to FAIL, UN-AMERICAN and that it is HYPOCRITICAL to now start doing the thing for which you condemned THEM. Get it?
I was not one of the ones who had a problem with liberal Anti-War nutbags, other than to call them "nutbags" that is! But RUSH did. RUSH decried their treatment of Bush and is now returning that treatment in kind. THAT is the hypocrisy of which I speak.
There is a difference
March 11, 2009 - 15:22 ET by BDThere is a difference between seeking societal change on the domestic front, and seeking for your nation to lose a war.
If you cannot see that, you are oblivious to logic.
Generally speaking I see
March 11, 2009 - 16:26 ET byGenerally speaking I see your point and agree with it. However, this specific financial crises is akin to the war in it's impact on not only the country but the world. So our interests would better be served by working against those policies not by giving the liberals and their media allies the ammunition with which to brand us all traitors. But overall I agree with you.