[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Britain - R_P - Jul 2, 2025 - 11:04pm
 
July 2025 Photo Theme - Stone - Alchemist - Jul 2, 2025 - 10:38pm
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - islander - Jul 2, 2025 - 9:23pm
 
Wordle - daily game - geoff_morphini - Jul 2, 2025 - 8:48pm
 
Israel - R_P - Jul 2, 2025 - 8:22pm
 
Trump - Red_Dragon - Jul 2, 2025 - 5:35pm
 
Trump Lies™ - R_P - Jul 2, 2025 - 5:01pm
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - buddy - Jul 2, 2025 - 4:06pm
 
Best Song Comments. - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 2, 2025 - 3:41pm
 
NY Times Strands - maryte - Jul 2, 2025 - 3:37pm
 
NYTimes Connections - maryte - Jul 2, 2025 - 3:28pm
 
Outstanding Covers - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Jul 2, 2025 - 2:38pm
 
Protest Songs - R_P - Jul 2, 2025 - 2:20pm
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Jul 2, 2025 - 2:11pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - bobrk - Jul 2, 2025 - 1:16pm
 
Democratic Party - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Jul 2, 2025 - 1:04pm
 
Fox Spews - islander - Jul 2, 2025 - 10:39am
 
Immigration - R_P - Jul 2, 2025 - 10:29am
 
Republican Party - ColdMiser - Jul 2, 2025 - 8:14am
 
Music Videos - black321 - Jul 2, 2025 - 8:02am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jul 2, 2025 - 7:59am
 
Economix - rgio - Jul 2, 2025 - 7:37am
 
New Music - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 2, 2025 - 7:30am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - GeneP59 - Jul 2, 2025 - 6:59am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 1, 2025 - 8:34pm
 
Carmen to Stones - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 1, 2025 - 7:44pm
 
The Obituary Page - sunybuny - Jul 1, 2025 - 7:03pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jul 1, 2025 - 5:27pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - rgio - Jul 1, 2025 - 11:06am
 
Artificial Intelligence - drucev - Jul 1, 2025 - 8:58am
 
President(s) Musk/Trump - VV - Jul 1, 2025 - 8:10am
 
June 2025 Photo Theme - Arches - Alchemist - Jun 30, 2025 - 9:10pm
 
Please help me find this song - LazyEmergency - Jun 30, 2025 - 8:42pm
 
Forum Posting Guidelines - rickylee123 - Jun 30, 2025 - 6:17pm
 
Thanks William! - buddy - Jun 30, 2025 - 5:49pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - buddy - Jun 30, 2025 - 4:50pm
 
Living in America - R_P - Jun 30, 2025 - 3:15pm
 
M.A.G.A. - R_P - Jun 30, 2025 - 12:50pm
 
Gardeners Corner - marko86 - Jun 30, 2025 - 10:39am
 
Comics! - Red_Dragon - Jun 30, 2025 - 7:59am
 
Birthday wishes - Coaxial - Jun 30, 2025 - 6:36am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Jun 30, 2025 - 5:39am
 
Global Mix renaming - frazettaart - Jun 29, 2025 - 9:23am
 
Iran - R_P - Jun 28, 2025 - 8:56pm
 
Live Music - Steely_D - Jun 28, 2025 - 6:53pm
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 28, 2025 - 10:17am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Jun 28, 2025 - 9:52am
 
Musky Mythology - R_P - Jun 27, 2025 - 3:00pm
 
Know your memes - oldviolin - Jun 27, 2025 - 11:41am
 
What Makes You Sad? - oldviolin - Jun 27, 2025 - 10:41am
 
Calling all Monty Python fans! - FeydBaron - Jun 27, 2025 - 10:30am
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Jun 27, 2025 - 10:23am
 
SCOTUS - Red_Dragon - Jun 27, 2025 - 8:30am
 
Framed - movie guessing game - Proclivities - Jun 27, 2025 - 6:25am
 
Yummy Snack - Proclivities - Jun 26, 2025 - 1:17pm
 
Parents and Children - kurtster - Jun 26, 2025 - 11:32am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Jun 25, 2025 - 9:36pm
 
PUNS- Political Punditry and so-called journalism - oldviolin - Jun 25, 2025 - 12:06pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - black321 - Jun 25, 2025 - 11:30am
 
What The Hell Buddy? - oldviolin - Jun 25, 2025 - 10:32am
 
Astronomy! - black321 - Jun 25, 2025 - 8:58am
 
The Grateful Dead - black321 - Jun 25, 2025 - 7:13am
 
Billionaires - R_P - Jun 24, 2025 - 4:57pm
 
Great guitar faces - Steely_D - Jun 24, 2025 - 4:15pm
 
Buying a Cell Phone - Steely_D - Jun 24, 2025 - 3:05pm
 
Anti-War - R_P - Jun 24, 2025 - 12:57pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Alchemist - Jun 24, 2025 - 10:40am
 
RIP Mick Ralphs - geoff_morphini - Jun 23, 2025 - 10:40pm
 
Congress - maryte - Jun 23, 2025 - 1:39pm
 
Europe - R_P - Jun 23, 2025 - 11:30am
 
the Todd Rundgren topic - ColdMiser - Jun 23, 2025 - 7:58am
 
What are you doing RIGHT NOW? - GeneP59 - Jun 21, 2025 - 6:14pm
 
Rock & Roll Facts - Coaxial - Jun 21, 2025 - 6:10pm
 
Poetry Forum - SeriousLee - Jun 21, 2025 - 5:20pm
 
And the good news is.... - Red_Dragon - Jun 21, 2025 - 3:39pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » RightWingNutZ Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 140, 141, 142 ... 175, 176, 177  Next
Post to this Topic
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 3:04pm

 ankhara99 wrote:

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership;

 

You know I could say something about these . . . and I probably will . . . but just posting to say sorry I missed you popping in here!  {#Hug}

{#Whisper} Ok. Just one.  Does No. 6 involve the elimination of the position of Commander in Chief?  
ankhara99

ankhara99 Avatar

Location: Over the Rainbow
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 1:28pm

Republicans considering ideological purity test for candidates

< type="text/javascript"><>

Ten members of the Republican National Committee are proposing a resolution demanding candidates embrace at least eight of 10 conservative principles if they hope to receive financial support and an official endorsement from the RNC. The "Proposed RNC Resolution on Reagan's Unity Principle for Support of Candidates," is designed to force candidates to prove that they support "conservative principles" while opposing "Obama's socialist agenda," according to The New York Times' Caucus blog. The proposal highlights the ongoing tug-of-war for the ideological soul of the Republican party, and has been met with skepticism both inside and outside of the party.

Some are speculating that the move was inspired by the GOP's recent loss in New York's 23rd House race, a seat the party had held since the 1800s. That contest saw Dede Scozzafava, a moderate Republican endorsed by the RNC, driven out of the race in favor of Doug Hoffman, a more conservative candidate backed by the likes of Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin. After Scozzafava dropped out of the race, the RNC endorsed Hoffman, who went on to lose to the Democratic candidate, Bill Owens.

James Bopp Jr., an Indiana attorney, initiated the resolution, saying that "conservatives have lost trust in the Republican party." Bopp Jr., who floated a failed proposal earlier this year demanding that Democrats rename their party the "Democrat Socialist Party," was joined by 10 RNC co-sponsors. The group says they cited Ronald Reagan in naming the resolution because the former president said that "someone who agreed with him 8 out of 10 times was his friend, not his opponent." The ten guidelines, distributed to RNC members in recent weeks, are as follows:

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

(4) We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership;


Predictably, the proposed resolution has elicited derision from all corners of the political spectrum, including the right wing. In criticizing the proposal, conservative blogger Erick Erickson says that Republicans "risk giving liberal candidates easy opportunities to get conservative endorsements simply by checking the box without ever meaning it," adding that the measure is essentially hollow because the "GOP cannot live up to its own platform adopted at a national convention, it sure as heck won't live up to any pledge put forward by a group of RNC committeemen."

Meanwhile, liberal blogger Steve Benen wonders if Reagan himself would even pass the 80% threshold mandated by the resolution bearing his name, noting that Reagan "voted for several tax increases, began the modern era of massive federal debt, ran huge deficits, and approved an immigration measure the far-right still resents."

However, not everyone finds fault with it. A Republican strategist and former Bush White House official, who asked to remain anonymous, told Yahoo! News that the resolution "bodes well" because "Republicans are continuing to discuss policy positions and principles," adding "this should not be treated as a purge document - as the media is portraying it - but more of a document for discussion as Republicans attempt to rebuild the party in 2010."

Despite the debate that it's already inspired, whether or not the resolution even gets voted on by the RNC's membership remains up in the air. A spokeswoman for RNC Chairman Michael Steele told The Wall Street Journal that until the deadline for submitting resolutions for the party's winter meeting is reached, "we do not know what resolutions will be submitted, nor what the final language of any resolution ultimately submitted may be."

— Brett Michael Dykes is a contributor to the Yahoo! News Blog

 


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 5:13pm

 hippiechick wrote:

Hi MD, nice to see you! {#Wave}

It's one thing to criticize the pres and his policies, it's another thing to accuse him of being a Socialist, Communist, or Hitler. It is irresponsible for tv personalities to spew this kind of hatred. For as much as we libs hated the actions of the Bush Admin (and not to say that there weren't nuts out there) I can't say that I ever heard anyone on tv use this kind of hateful rhetoric. 

...
 

Ok, D,

Serious question,

What is wrong in calling Obama a Socialist ?  Forget the other two, they are not valid.  But what is wrong with being a Socialist ? 

I have long called Bush the most Socialist President in the history of this country.  He implemented more socialist actions into government than any before him put together.  Or is it unfair to Bush to call him a Socialist ?  Bush was never a conservative, at least in my opinion.  And to blame him on conservatives is a tremendous disservice to conservatives, again in my opinion.  Bush was straight out of the Woodrow Wilson school, but no one saw it coming.  Anyway, eh ?
Monkeysdad

Monkeysdad Avatar

Location: Simi Valley, CA
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 9:50am

 hippiechick wrote:

Hi MD, nice to see you! {#Wave}

It's one thing to criticize the pres and his policies, it's another thing to accuse him of being a Socialist, Communist, or Hitler. It is irresponsible for tv personalities to spew this kind of hatred. For as much as we libs hated the actions of the Bush Admin (and not to say that there weren't nuts out there) I can't say that I ever heard anyone on tv use this kind of hateful rhetoric.

Gang mentality to encourage violence should never be acceptable. I doubt these guys like Glenn Beck even believe what they say. Limbaugh has admitted that his one and only belief is the Almighty Dollar. They don't seem to recognize the damage they are doing.

If angry people are encouraged by the mainstream media (and, with their viewership, Fox is definitely mainstream) to act out, these angry delusional people think that their feelings are legit and even heroic.

So, for one thing, I think that these personalities need to stop thinking about their ratings and getting reelected, and the money, and be responsible for what they say.

 

Nice to see you too, Mz. D!
You've gotten me all confused. I thought we were commenting on tasteless bumper stickers, internet slogans, and anger...but now we're on to tv personalities encouraging violence, name calling, and getting reelected(?).
I sit around and watch news all night, well,...at least until the Monkey's homework is done and he's off to bed. I watch Fox, CNN, CNNi, BBC, CCTV and listen to NPR while on the road. I've never been under the impression that someone was stoking me towards violence by virtue of any of them reporting the news or even expressing their opinion on world or political matters,...ever!  So I'm not too sure what you mean when you say "Gang mentality to encourage violence whould never be acceptable", it just doesn't happen on my TV. I do see lots of angst, finger-pointing, sniping, and ill will from various pundits, hosts, guests, etc. from both sides of any issue that certainly may get some viewers dander up but again....that can come from either Glenn Beck or Keith Olbermann. And just for the record...I personally believe that both Glenn and Keith believe everything they say and that they believe that they're legit, heroic, and patriotic.
Coaxial

Coaxial Avatar

Location: Comfortably numb in So Texas
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 9:32am

 phineas wrote:


 
That scene still brings a tear to my eye.



I stole it.

hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 9:20am

 Monkeysdad wrote:

So what do you suggest we do?
 
Hi MD, nice to see you! {#Wave}

It's one thing to criticize the pres and his policies, it's another thing to accuse him of being a Socialist, Communist, or Hitler. It is irresponsible for tv personalities to spew this kind of hatred. For as much as we libs hated the actions of the Bush Admin (and not to say that there weren't nuts out there) I can't say that I ever heard anyone on tv use this kind of hateful rhetoric.

Gang mentality to encourage violence should never be acceptable. I doubt these guys like Glenn Beck even believe what they say. Limbaugh has admitted that his one and only belief is the Almighty Dollar. They don't seem to recognize the damage they are doing.

If angry people are encouraged by the mainstream media (and, with their viewership, Fox is definitely mainstream) to act out, these angry delusional people think that their feelings are legit and even heroic.

So, for one thing, I think that these personalities need to stop thinking about their ratings and getting reelected, and the money, and be responsible for what they say.
phineas

phineas Avatar



Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 9:19am

 Coaxial wrote:


Dueling would be nice...Pay per view...You are talking money maker.

 


Coaxial

Coaxial Avatar

Location: Comfortably numb in So Texas
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 9:17am

 Monkeysdad wrote:

So what do you suggest we do?
 

Dueling would be nice...Pay per view...You are talking money maker.
Monkeysdad

Monkeysdad Avatar

Location: Simi Valley, CA
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 9:04am

 MsJudi wrote:

Let's not confuse anger with violence. I'm angry at the lies, wars and financial ruin forced onto us by a puppet administration. I'm not, however, violent. The fact is, some angry people are violent, too, and if we don't take any of them seriously, we're buying trouble.
 
So what do you suggest we do?

(former member)

(former member) Avatar



Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 8:20am

 Beaker wrote:

Still posting messages filled with anger directed at moi?  You should know better by now. You're building a history dude - and it ain't pretty.


 



pragma
EleventhMan

EleventhMan Avatar

Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 6:33am

 MsJudi wrote:

Let's not confuse anger with violence. I'm angry at the lies, wars and financial ruin forced onto us by a puppet administration. I'm not, however, violent. The fact is, some angry people are violent, too, and if we don't take any of them seriously, we're buying trouble.
 
I agree Judi.....what's most upsetting to me are the talking heads who are actively, purposely inflaming people, without a clear agenda other than "they're bad, we're good....now go get 'em!"  There are enough REAL problems in our country right now, and inciting people to violence (carrying guns into town meetings for crying out loud ?!?!!  ) is NOT the answer.   Anger is OK, violence is NOT.

(former member)

(former member) Avatar



Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 6:20am

 phineas wrote:

Is that where the idiot puts its head up its... oh, wait...
 
Bring me that icepick & have Beaker sit in this chair, and I'll show you how it works.

MsJudi

MsJudi Avatar

Location: Houston, TX
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 19, 2009 - 6:12am

 Monkeysdad wrote:

There are a lot of very very angry people out there HC, there always have been, there always will be. But I'm pretty sure you know that, it's nothing new.
There have been folks right here on these very forums who've wished Bush and Cheney(and others) dead too, I've seen it with my own eyes; my guess is that that didn't bother you as much as the Obama haters though. I see no difference between them. Anger is anger no matter which side of the aisle you're on, right?!
 
Let's not confuse anger with violence. I'm angry at the lies, wars and financial ruin forced onto us by a puppet administration. I'm not, however, violent. The fact is, some angry people are violent, too, and if we don't take any of them seriously, we're buying trouble.

HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 18, 2009 - 10:26pm

 OlderThanDirt wrote:
"Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument is an exchange of ignorance."

~Robert Quillen

 
       {#Clap}
Monkeysdad

Monkeysdad Avatar

Location: Simi Valley, CA
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 18, 2009 - 6:56pm

 hippiechick wrote:

Because these are very very angry people. They are wishing death on our president. We have already seen some events from people like these, like the guy at the Holocaust Museum. I consider them to be dangerous.
 
There are a lot of very very angry people out there HC, there always have been, there always will be. But I'm pretty sure you know that, it's nothing new.
There have been folks right here on these very forums who've wished Bush and Cheney(and others) dead too, I've seen it with my own eyes; my guess is that that didn't bother you as much as the Obama haters though. I see no difference between them. Anger is anger no matter which side of the aisle you're on, right?!

phineas

phineas Avatar



Posted: Nov 18, 2009 - 5:59pm

 OCDHG wrote:

Its kinda like a suppository for your brain, I think
 
That's what I was thinking...

DownHomeGirl

DownHomeGirl Avatar

Location: American Russia
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 18, 2009 - 5:59pm

 phineas wrote:

Is that where the idiot puts its head up its... oh, wait...
 
Its kinda like a suppository for your brain, I think

phineas

phineas Avatar



Posted: Nov 18, 2009 - 5:57pm

 OCDHG wrote:

or a lobotomy...
 
Is that where the idiot puts its head up its... oh, wait...

DownHomeGirl

DownHomeGirl Avatar

Location: American Russia
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 18, 2009 - 5:55pm

 phineas wrote:

Something tells me it will be in the form of a suppository...
 
or a lobotomy...

phineas

phineas Avatar



Posted: Nov 18, 2009 - 5:54pm

 OCDHG wrote:

I'm still hoping for a scientific breakthrough.
 
Something tells me it will be in the form of a suppository...

Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 140, 141, 142 ... 175, 176, 177  Next