A bunch of crap from Texas Young Rethuglicans. The pack of inbred gunhumping jackassses who recently brought us the “Al-Queda/Nancy Pelosi” nativity scene.

Ah here we are , a disgraceful and hamhanded attempt at the typical right wing straw man arguments.

I’m ashamed to say, I’m from the same state as these people.

Let me just break down a few of the idiocies you were so kind to cut and paste in this forum.

Calls for increased security after a terrorist attack are “political opportunism,” but calls for more gun control after a criminal’s spree killing is “a logical solution.”

Please compare the number of americans killed by terrorists to the number
of americans using killed by one of thier gun weilding fellow americans

http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html

30,000 firearms deaths per year in america… thats almost one 9-11 EVERY MONTH….

0 deaths from terrorism last year… you do the math

Disarming innocent, law-abiding citizens helps protect them from evil, lawless terrorists and other thugs.

I don’t think anyone is saying we shouldnt have any guns. I think we are saying we should keep guns out of the hands of the angry, the inbred, the wife abusers, the mentally handicapped, and the alchoholics. Which pretty much excludes 90 percent of the people who feel the need to own guns.

Every religion should be respected and promoted in public schools the name of diversity, so long as that religion isn’t Christianity.

Rrrriight.. in the world of small minded republicans “respect” = “promotion”.
In truth, every religion should be respected, and none should be promoted by public funds. While the exact words “separation of church and state” don’t appear verbatim in the constitution, the subject was discussed heavily by the founding fathers and their intent to keep the dangerous disease known as organized religion out of politics was more than apparent.

The best way to support our troops is to criticize their every move. This will let them know they’re thought of often.

Few people criticize the troops themselves. They do what their told and criticizing them would be in a sense, merely killing the messenger. We arent that stupid. We are criticizing their coward in chief. Theres a difference. Apprently your version of supporting the troops is backing politicians who send them into a war of choice with insufficient armor so millionaires can have tax breaks, and dont want to see the troops come home, except in body bags, until we have a stable iraq democracy, even if that democracy soon become an islamic theocracy..

Oh , and by the way, a majority of “the troops” currently think this war is loopy and think we should leave… I bet your wondering why a majority of the “the troops” don’t support themselves…

Minorities are blameless for the hatred of the racist; women are blameless for the hatred of the rapist; but America is entirely at fault for the hatred of Islamofascists.

wow, I dont even know what to say to something this stupid….. This is america, anyone is free to hate anyone they want.. theres a difference between hating someone and say, hating someone and then killing half a million people with the same skin color as the people you hate who have nothign to do with them whatsoever.

your “logic”, and I use that term as liberally as possible when parsing your statements, is that .00001 percent of some religious group who hates you justifies starting a war that will end up killing millions of people simply because they lived in a country who had a mean leader and they had the same skin color as the .00001 percent of the populace who attacked us.
and that somehow you biblehumping neandethals are as justified for starting the iraq war as black people are for hating the klan. or starting the iraq war makes as much sense as women hating rapists..ooooookkkkk…

The Patriot Act is a horrific compromise of Constitutional rights, but anti-Second Amendment laws and Franklin Roosevelt’s Presidential Order 9066 must be regarded “reasonable precautions.”

For those of you who arent history buffs, PO 9066 was when we put the jap-americans in interment camps… no, that is widely regarded as a pretty horrdenous error actually, much like the consitution shredding, separation of powers destroying Patriot act is now. But frankly, the PO was more justified that the PA, because WWII was a REAL war, as opposed to some war against an imaginary conspiracy of well organized jihadists with super-scary power and global reach. Since the turn of the century, slipping in bathtubs has killed more americans than terrorists have. Should we declare war on bathtubs?

And as far as your second amendment crap, see my above discussion of how you are exponentially more likely to be killed by a gun weilding american than you are some foreigner.

Bush’s toppling the Saddam regime was a “diversion,” but Clinton’s lobbing a couple of cruise missiles at Iraq in the thick of the Lewinsky sex scandal was “sending a message.”

The iraq war wasnt a “diversion”, its pretty much the only thing these people know how to do… wage war so their war profiteer buddies can make money. And by the way genius, Clinton lobbed the missles at Sudan… not that lobbing a few missles is an event of anywhere near the magnitude of starting a war. Its the equivalent of comparing throwing a snowball at a bus to launching an rpg at a bus. Clinton threw a snowball at a bus for a distraction. Bush launched an RPG at a bus for a distraction.

Poverty is the cause of all terrorism…which is why the leaders of al Qaeda are typically U.S.-educated and were raised in wealth and luxury.

wait, no, by your logic flooding the screens of the world with dead women and children, and sexually humiliated men has nothing to do with making more terrorists.. that makes more sense…

A president who lies under oath [about a blowjob] is okay, but a president who references sixteen words from an allies’ intelligence report [as false justification for scaring the country into a disastrous war] should be dragged through the streets naked.

blowjob. war. only an inbred idiot of enormous mangitude would even begin to compare these two.

Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning Second Amendment rights and shopping the courts for judges sympathetic to causes that wouldn’t pass in any legislature.

No, wait, everyone in the government should limit themselves to doing exactly what the president says, as long as the president says we are at war, even though every facet of that war is classified, so we never have any way of knowing if we have won that war, or how winning is defined, or even if the president is lying to us to keep his war powers and his war profiteers profit margins up. You know what lies are.. right? like.. “I did not have ssex with that woman” or “we know where the weapons are” or “we know without a doubt that saddam has weapons of mass destruction”.

“The People” in the First Amendment means The People; “the People” in the Fourth Amendment means The People; “the People” in the Ninth Amendment means The People; “the People” in the Tenth Amendment means The People; but “the People” in the Second Amendment (ratified in 1791) means the National Guard (created by an Act of Congress in 1903).

Another example of attempting to selectively interperet things so literally it makes your head swim. The founding fathers certainly meant for everyone is america to be protected under the constitution. I really, truly, dont think they when they said “the people’s right to bear arms”, they meant that every psychopath, drunk, inbred, criminal, retarded person, wife beater, or sexual predator (like the ones you elect to congress) should be armed. If you interpret literally your equivocation of every mention of “people” in the constitution you would in fact be implying that psychopaths and criminals have the right to have guns. H3ll, even prisoners are “people” in “we the people”.. should they get guns too?

Althought, honestly, I suspect that you people are very much in favor of keeping guns in of the hands of the inbred, the chronically angry, the mentally challenged, and the alchoholics and wifebeaters. Without those groups I doubt there would be many people left who even cared if they had guns or not, and there certainly wouldnt be many people left in the republican party.

Any time you pointy headed nazis want to debate, you just ooze your way over from SMU or UT or whereever your spore colony is located, head on over to Texas Weslyan School of law and challenge the Txwes Dems to a debate. I promise, you wet eared little mental midgets will have you a3ses handed to you.

China “evil?” What are you talking about? Oh and don’t quote any US government documentation please.

signed

cheney, reagan, george bush sr

Doubting…

…”Do you have a plan to get us out of this mess?”

Honorable Mr. NNN:

I wish to refer you to the following link, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6274147.stm, which chronicles a lost and excellent opportunity to address the Iran issue some four years ago. If, as the administration insists, Iran has fueled the attacks on US servicemen, this represents a clear failure to help protect our troops by not engaging in normal and necessary diplomacy. This level of arrogance and incompetence can be measured in the deaths and disabilities of our servicepersons. I demand the Senate brings Mr. Cheney to the floor to discuss his involvement and decisions in this matter.

Thank you for your action in this matter,

* Richard Cheney — now the vice president, he played a prominent part as a member of the joint congressional Iran-Contra inquiry of 1986, taking the position that Congress deserved major blame for asserting itself unjustifiably onto presidential turf. He later pointed to the committees’ Minority Report as an important statement on the proper roles of the Executive and Legislative branches of government.

Seems Dick may have shed a tear for the death of the Iran-Contra affair.

Mark, as usual, you’re 180 degrees off. Diplomacy is a sign of strength. Choosing aggression over diplomacy is a sign of weakness.

“If there is one principle more deeply rooted in the mind of every American, it is that we should have nothing to do with conquest. ”

–Thomas Jefferson

Think about diplomacy here. Who will do the talking? Bush? He can’t finish a complete sentence with any continuity.
Rice? She can’t pronounce more than 3-4 words without stammering of prolongin ‘uhhh’.
Cheney? His idea of diplomacy includes 12 ga. shotguns.
Bolton? I won’t even go there.
Kissinger? This tired old fart should just stay out to pasture.
Kristol? Right. Constipated & Conservaslave.

You see, this isn’t an American government as we know it. It’s a lot of rich Neosluts vying for a New World Order.
Diplomacy was never in the picture. War & mayhem is the standard.

Impeach. Imprison. Impale.