November 2nd a CLEAR and DECISIVE message was sent, (who was listening?)

[mr73551]

George Bush can barely speak in cognitive sentences. He probably couldn't win a debate with a box of tic-tacs. Media polls claimed his approval rating was below 50%.

An all out attack was waged on the President, CBS with forged documents, ABC with their memos and lies, full feature movies, hundreds of millions of dollars in false adds, radio shock jocks going on for hours, etc.

Liberals were going to turn out 100% of their voter base...

All tolled, the cost had to run into the billions.

Why would anyone vote for Bush?

The answer to that question is simple, they didn't vote for George Bush they voted against the Democratic agenda.

Gay marriage, legalized drugs, activist judges who think they alone are the law, raising taxes, turning free speech and freedom of religion into a crime. These are the ideas that produced the Democrats devastating defeat.

How far out of touch with reality is the Democratic Party when it outlaws freedom of speech and freedom of religion and then proceeds to call people who go to church "dangerous radicals"?

As Democrats and their media allies continue to insult the intelligence of the average American on a daily basis.

Consider this… Bill Clinton never garnered 50% of the popular vote. Only a psychotic billionaire who was willing to throw away hundreds of millions of dollars to split the Republican vote allowed Clinton to gain office. And even as that happened, Republicans gained control of the Senate, House and most state Governors mansions.

Today the very bastions of liberalism, California, New York and Massachusetts all have Republican Governors.

In the few states Bush lost, many were only decided by a narrow 1-2% margin. Imagine if a charismatic leader had been at the helm of the Republican Party….

The American people are not stupid and they were not fooled.

With Republicans needing only 5 more seats for a Super-Majority in the Senate the Democratic Party stands at brink of irrelevance and possibly extinction.

And since liberal lawmakers clearly don’t understand the message the American people sent November 2<SUP>nd</SUP>, let me make it clear…

Either stop your narrow-minded, obstructionist tactics and come back to the middle or like so many of your colleagues you will be gone.

 

[toon67]

Nuff said...Good Post!!!

 

[GAMEFACE]

George Bush can barely speak in cognitive sentences. He probably couldn't win a debate with a box of tic-tacs. Media polls claimed his approval rating was below 50%.

An all out attack was waged on the President, CBS with forged documents, ABC with their memos and lies, full feature movies, hundreds of millions of dollars in false adds, radio shock jocks going on for hours, etc.

Liberals were going to turn out 100% of their voter base...

All tolled, the cost had to run into the billions.

Why would anyone vote for Bush?

The answer to that question is simple, they didn't vote for George Bush they voted against the Democratic agenda.

Gay marriage, legalized drugs, activist judges who think they alone are the law, raising taxes, turning free speech and freedom of religion into a crime. These are the ideas that produced the Democrats devastating defeat.

How far out of touch with reality is the Democratic Party when it outlaws freedom of speech and freedom of religion and then proceeds to call people who go to church "dangerous radicals"?

As Democrats and their media allies continue to insult the intelligence of the average American on a daily basis.

Consider this… Bill Clinton never garnered 50% of the popular vote. Only a psychotic billionaire who was willing to throw away hundreds of millions of dollars to split the Republican vote allowed Clinton to gain office. And even as that happened, Republicans gained control of the Senate, House and most state Governors mansions.

Today the very bastions of liberalism, California, New York and Massachusetts all have Republican Governors.

In the few states Bush lost, many were only decided by a narrow 1-2% margin. Imagine if a charismatic leader had been at the helm of the Republican Party….

The American people are not stupid and they were not fooled.

With Republicans needing only 5 more seats for a Super-Majority in the Senate the Democratic Party stands at brink of irrelevance and possibly extinction.

And since liberal lawmakers clearly don’t understand the message the American people sent November 2<SUP>nd</SUP>, let me make it clear…

Either stop your narrow-minded, obstructionist tactics and come back to the middle or like so many of your colleagues you will be gone.

Excellent post, RACK HIM!

 

[petre]

it's all good

 

[GAMEFACE]

petre,

did you lose it all? the 10 dimes? was that a real bet?

 

[American]

I felt that I was voting AGAINST Michael Moore and his rabid followers just as much as I was voting FOR Bush.

 

[xpanda]

How far out of touch with reality is the Democratic Party when it outlaws freedom of speech and freedom of religion and then proceeds to call people who go to church "dangerous radicals"?

Let's hope that you understand the exaggeration in this claim. Especially in light of the fact that it has been the Republicans, over the past four years, who have been encroaching on civil liberties.

Further, 'people' who go to church aren't 'dangerous radicals' nor have they been called that. But Rapture nutters, who believe in and hope for Armageddon in the MidEast are absolutely dangerous radicals. It's most unnerving that a Messianic, Apocalyptic President is leading this fight, and he happens to be in a position to win it if he's willing to tap into the arsenal he presides over.

Catholics, fine. Anglicans, fine. Baptists, fine. Jews, fine. Muslims, fine. Hindus, fine. Evangelical fundamentalists, dangerous. Islamic fundamentalists, dangerous, too.

The separation of Church and State was the best idea our civilisation has ever come up with. Apparently 59 million Americans disagree.

 

[bblight]

xpanda - you don't live in the US - so you don't have a clue how the Politically Correct agenda can punish a person with traditional and religious views.

mr73551, an excellent post - I wish I coould have written it. You're right, many Democrats don't see that the turnout was as much against them as it was for Bush.

The problem is that the Dems could marginalize themselves to the point where a two party system is no longer viable - and the two parties have been the strength of our nation.

I hope the Dems see the light and move their poles to the right.

 

[xpanda]

xpanda - you don't live in the US - so you don't have a clue how the Politically Correct agenda can punish a person with traditional and religious views.

Canada is more politically correct than the US and draws a much thicker and less penetrable line between Church and State. Evangelicals claiming persecution in the US would go positively batty here. I've read their news editiorials and watched them talk about us on their message board. Here, people don't wear their religion on their sleeve, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a mass movement of people wanting god in Parliament. I'm not yet sure why, but we simply don't attract religious extremists, and it is treated very much as a private affair here.

 

[eek.]

On the 2nd Nov a clear and decisive message was received by the world.

God wants the world to believe Americans are a nation of religious asshats.


I've seen enough on this board to know better.
There are plenty of moderate Americans, but I don't envy them the next few years.
The crucifix wavers are running the asylum.

 

[mr73551]

Originally Posted by mr73551
How far out of touch with reality is the Democratic Party when it outlaws freedom of speech and freedom of religion and then proceeds to call people who go to church "dangerous radicals"?

Let's hope that you understand the exaggeration in this claim. Especially in light of the fact that it has been the Republicans, over the past four years, who have been encroaching on civil liberties.

Further, 'people' who go to church aren't 'dangerous radicals' nor have they been called that. But Rapture nutters, who believe in and hope for Armageddon in the MidEast are absolutely dangerous radicals. It's most unnerving that a Messianic, Apocalyptic President is leading this fight, and he happens to be in a position to win it if he's willing to tap into the arsenal he presides over.

:WTF:

Let's hope that you understand that there isn't once of exaggeration in this claim.

Further, 'people' who go to church aren't 'dangerous radicals' nor have they been called that.

LMAO.. I guess you haven't watched a television or listened to radio in 25 years.

In 1994 Congressional Democrats went as far as organizing the Radical Right Task Force

From the congressional record...

There was a meeting yesterday, and I think Mr. Moran was there, where the Democratic participants arranged for nine Capitol Hill policemen to guard the meeting of the Radical Right Task Force. Mr. Fazio, Ms. Slaughter, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Farr of California, Ms. McKinney, Mr. Swett, Mr. Synar, Ms. Pryce of Ohio, and, yes, Jim Moran, were all there meeting to do something about `these Christians.'

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r103:H12AU4-119:

Every time you turn on a TV or radio you hear some Democrat blasting the "dangerous religious right"

As far as the that nonsense about Bush wanting a nuclear Armagedon, I'll let that idiocy speak for itself.

I guess it just goes to show you can't live in the real world and be a liberal.

 

[xpanda]

You're talking about the liberal reaction to the Religious Right, which as far as I can tell, is the radical fringe, not the mainstream. Further, you follow your spew by ending that I can't live in the real world if I'm a liberal. Could you kindly explain to me how your version of persecution doesn't cover your last sentence as well???

Bush has, himself and on many occasions, implied that god is watching over the US, that the 'other side' are the 'evildoers' that he just might agree that god is currently in the White House. Further, the religion he belongs to believes in the End Times. I don't know for certain if Bush believes that the whole of the MidEast is supposed to blow wide open in order to bring on Christ's second coming (his unprecedented support for Israel seem to suggest he might) but at best he knows his base believes all this horsecrap and frankly, I'd be much more content knowing that there was no chance that he believed in such nonsense than even a marginal, outside chance. Religion and politics simply don't mix.

Funny that for every post from one of these evangelicals trying to convince someone that they're neither radical nor dangerous, my fear of them rises in perfect proportion.

 

[docmercer--banned]

I am a Liberal ..

Used to be a Republican but saw a party shift in which they actually believe they are "Holier than thou .."

Bush and his belief system .. go sell that hogwash to the Hannitys of the world

By the way .. 51 -48% is decisive? I guess winning a football game by 3 pts is a rout??

 

[cussin'it]

X, I firmly believe that these "radcons" are convinced that the "end game" is upon us, and that they are facilitating God's will

 

[xpanda]

I'm going to make fairly xenophobic statement here, but evangelicals seem to me a fundamentally radical, mean-spirited, un-Christian bunch. I don't know any personally (I think I'd have to move to find one) so I'm basing this entirely on what I read from them online, here and elsewhere. Do they really see the world as being this black and white, all good or all evil, Leviathans and Angels and all that? Are they as self-righteous as they seem? What percentage of them believe in the End Times?

 

[RobFunk]

i just watched the news and all the conspiracy talk we had going last weekend is very much real. i didnt think it was. i didnt want to believe it. a petition for a re count is very much a possibilty. they reported that the kerry campaign holds the same stance that i do: the election was fair, and the correct party was determined the victor. however, their are several groups and people digging away why cant they just let it go.

ohio and florida (obviously) were the two states mentioned in the NBC nightly news piece.

i was just suprised to see them run a report on this.

 

[mr73551]

You're talking about the liberal reaction to the Religious Right, which as far as I can tell, is the radical fringe, not the mainstream. Further, you follow your spew by ending that I can't live in the real world if I'm a liberal. Could you kindly explain to me how your version of persecution doesn't cover your last sentence as well???

Bush has, himself and on many occasions, implied that god is watching over the US, that the 'other side' are the 'evildoers' that he just might agree that god is currently in the White House. Further, the religion he belongs to believes in the End Times. I don't know for certain if Bush believes that the whole of the MidEast is supposed to blow wide open in order to bring on Christ's second coming (his unprecedented support for Israel seem to suggest he might) but at best he knows his base believes all this horsecrap and frankly, I'd be much more content knowing that there was no chance that he believed in such nonsense than even a marginal, outside chance. Religion and politics simply don't mix.

Funny that for every post from one of these evangelicals trying to convince someone that they're neither radical nor dangerous, my fear of them rises in perfect proportion.

Xpanda, your hypocrisy is simply astounding.

You claim that no person who professes their Christianity is fit to govern, presumably your including Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, FDR and JFK in that mix...right?

Did they all want to start Armageddon?

You go on to claim that only the "radical fringe, not the mainstream" of liberals have tried to label Christians as dangerous.

Lets look at your own posts -

Further, 'people' who go to church aren't 'dangerous radicals' nor have they been called that.

Funny that for every post from one of these evangelicals trying to convince someone that they're neither radical nor dangerous, my fear of them rises in perfect proportion.

So I guess your saying that YOU are the radical fringe?

Sadly, the truth is your not. You are a typical liberal and YOU are why the Democratic party is dead.

America was founded on a few simple principles. Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech being chief amongst these.

YOU would gladly take away these rights.

YOU are what is dangerous.

 

[bblight]

Damned, but this guy is good!

Keep up the good works mr73551 - weneed a few more like you in here.

 

[RobFunk]

oh yea. the message was loud and clear today, i want more border hopers and id like to give them their own bank account.

and mr283472, there is a fine line between professing your religion and ramming it down voters throats. that isnt freedom of religion, thats choose this or get lost. you tottaly condradict yourself but im glad you impressed BB by putting 2 words in bold.

 

[xpanda]

You claim that no person who professes their Christianity is fit to govern, presumably your including Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, FDR and JFK in that mix...right?

Well, no, I never claimed that anyone who professes their Christianity isn't fit to govern. Never said that once. I'm talking about a guy whose specific version of Christianity believes in the Rapture. He also happens to sit on the deadliest arsenal ever known to humankind. Forgive me for being a wee bit paranoid.

In the MidEast, as an example, a Muslim leading a nation is one thing, but an Islamic Fundamentalist leading a nation is quite another. The fundies over there have their own Armageddon theory, too.

I grew up Catholic and not once was I taught this whole Rapture thing. Not even hinted at. It's simply not part of my version of Christianity. Forgive me for being nervous about people who might think a nuclear confrontation in that region is merely 'god's will.'

You go on to claim that only the "radical fringe, not the mainstream" of liberals have tried to label Christians as dangerous.

No, I said liberals are labeling the radical fringe of Christianity (or any religion for that matter) as being dangerous.

Lets look at your own posts -

Further, 'people' who go to church aren't 'dangerous radicals' nor have they been called that.

Funny that for every post from one of these evangelicals trying to convince someone that they're neither radical nor dangerous, my fear of them rises in perfect proportion.

So I guess your saying that YOU are the radical fringe?

See my previous reply. I believe the evangelicals to be the radical fringe of Christianity. Though, interestingly, I came on here this morning specifically to apologise and set the record straight as I may be mislabeling the group that scares me as "evangelical." But you'll find my thread on this subject, no doubt.

Sadly, the truth is your not. You are a typical liberal and YOU are why the Democratic party is dead.

You aren't a typical Christian, that's for certain. The Christianity I was taught didn't involve hatred for any one group of people as you seem to feel towards liberals. You would be wise to note that your country was founded on liberal principles. This fact will probably only bore you, though.

Further, I'm a Canadian and have diddly to do with the demise of the Democratic party. In fact, they really bother me. If I were American, I would have voted for Nader.

America was founded on a few simple principles. Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech being chief amongst these.

YOU would gladly take away these rights.

YOU are what is dangerous.

Freedom of Religion involves the freedom to not practice religion at all, as well. It seems you have a rather rabid problem with keeping religion out of state affairs. We could get into a detailed discussion about some of the things Bush has done to favour Christianity above all others. There is preferential treatment here. In Canada, we have separated Church and State, people don't wear religion on their sleeves, and it is considered a personal and private affair. I could give a crap what religion you or anyone practices, unless and until they start talking about the end of the world, and have the popular support and the will to affect foreign policy decision-making to that end.

I'm terribly sorry if you can't see that my issue is not religion in general, because I could care less. I just don't want to see my country nuked one day because some lunatics south of the border thought a major global confrontation was exactly what god wanted.