Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Gary Busey

ban aclu counterplan?

Recommended Posts

what do you have against the ACLU?

 

They claim to be for everyones civil libererties:

1) this includes terrorists, murders, rapists, communists, etc. (sure, they sure have rights, but not to the point they can get out of everythin with a slap on the hand. Justice must still exist!!! )

2) If they're for everyone, how come that doesn't include the majority, even when they are being abused at a higher degree than most of the cases the ACLU takes. They are never on the side of security, christianity, or the right wing of the political spectrum. Are these people not included in everybody?

3) Ruth Bater Ginsberg used to head it... Need I say more?

4) I strongly recomend you read "The Savage Nation" and "The Enemy Within"... or are you worried about finding out you are wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since no one here has really explained the dynamics of RICO, I'll take a shot.

 

I think Savage's justification for the use of RICO goes back a few years ago when NOW (National Organization for Women) sued a group of anti-abortion protesters under RICO. Their argument was that these protesters were hindering the legitimate commerce of abortion clinics through their protests. Courts ruled in their favor and legalized the use of RICO to crack down against political protesters. The problem with RICO goes back to this one section in which it indicates that one can be charged if he or she commits a "pattern" of crime. The problem is that some interpreted that a pattern of crime could be anything.

 

Unfortunately for those who like this idea, the Supreme Court overturned the above court cases and ruled that RICO can't be used to prosecute anti-abortion protesters, and that RICO is limited to groups that illegally distribute or take property.

 

 

Here's what The court had to say

 

 

On February 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a federal racketeering law, designed to combat organized crime, was improperly applied to pro-life protestors.

 

In an 8 to 1 decision written by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, the Court concluded that the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) could not be used to punish abortion clinic protestors. It also stated that vigorous protests outside abortion clinics did not constitute the crime of extortion under the Hobbs Act. Unlike Hobbs, the protestors did not "obtain" the abortion clinic¹s property. In fact, RICO was originally designed to penalize drug dealers and organized crime.

 

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Rehnquist agreed that the pro-life protesters interfered with abortion facility operations. "But," he stated, "Even when their acts of interference and disruption achieved their ultimate goal of Œshutting down¹ a clinic that performed abortions, such acts did not constitute extortion."

 

The Court lifted the injunction against the accused, reversing the lower courts¹ decisions on these cases.

 

The 8 to1 ruling is considered a victory for all those who protest, even though the case specifically sited members of the Pro-Life Action Network and Operation Rescue. Both were convicted in 1998 under this "racketeering" law. The original case dated back to 1986; the1998 convictions occurred after numerous delays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Do you guys get Air America where you are.

not to mention :

MoveOn.org

CNN

CBS

the Liberals in power

you (if you dont get why look at your signiture)

 

STOP THE HATE!!! STOP THE HATE!!!

did you go to the site?

"[sen. Joe] MCCARTHY WAS A 100% RIGHT.....MCCARTHY WAS A HERO" [MARCH 28, 2002]

and

“The White Race is being snuffed off the planet through immigration.”

also try http://users.nlamerica.com/tharden/savage.html

Liberals in power? cnn9(owned by time warner)? cbs(owned by viacom)?

http://www.liberalslant.com/mediaownership.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They claim to be for everyones civil libererties:

1) this includes terrorists, murders, rapists, communists, etc. (sure, they sure have rights, but not to the point they can get out of everythin with a slap on the hand. Justice must still exist!!! )

1. You conceded everyone deserves rights. Ss why does this matter?

2. Justice still exists.

3. Turn: with out legal representation justice is impossible.

4. I like your inclusion of communists on that list.

2) If they're for everyone, how come that doesn't include the majority, even when they are being abused at a higher degree than most of the cases the ACLU takes. They are never on the side of security, christianity, or the right wing of the political spectrum. Are these people not included in everybody?

1. ACLU of New Jersey Successfully Defends Republican Candidates' Right to Political Speech

February 10, 2005

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: media@aclu.org

NEWARK - The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey announced today that it successfully obtained a court order dismissing a libel suit filed against the Piscataway Republican Organization and its recent slate of candidates for township offices. The lawsuit against the Republicans was filed by the Piscataway Democratic Organization and centered on language used on campaign billboards and fliers.

"Free political speech is a founding American belief," said Deborah Jacobs, Executive Director of the ACLU of New Jersey. "The way to fight speech that you don't like or don't think is accurate is to speak out yourself, not to silence or suppress what others say."

During the November 2004 elections, the Piscataway Republican Organization erected a billboard stating: "Bribery. Corruption. Indictment. Had Enough?" with a picture of a broom. The sign then urged viewers to vote for the Republican slate for township mayor and council.

The Democratic incumbents asked that the signs be removed. The Republicans refused. The Democrats then filed suit for libel, claiming that the sign implied that they, as individuals, were guilty of bribery and corruption. Although the entire Piscataway Democratic slate of candidates won in the November elections, they refused to dismiss the lawsuit.

On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, Judge Yolanda Ciccone granted the ACLU of New Jersey's motion to dismiss the lawsuit based on the fact that the ad contained protected, non-libelous speech. The ACLU of New Jersey’s brief explained that the ad was political rhetoric, and did not direct allegations at a particular individual; rather, it was impersonal criticism of a government administration.

"Political discourse should be uninhibited and this was political speech in its most basic form," said Frank Corrado of Barry Corrado Grassi & Gibson, the ACLU of New Jersey's cooperating attorney in the case. "The candidates had the right to comment on the political climate as they saw it and to ask voters to remove the incumbents to change the status quo."

The case is Piscataway Democratic Organization, et al. v. Piscataway Republican Organization, et al. It was filed in New Jersey Superior Court, Middlesex County.

2. The majority isn’t abused at a higher degree

3. The ACLU has defended Christian’s free speech many times

3. Security doesn’t need civil liberties

 

3) Ruth Bater Ginsberg used to head it... Need I say more?

1. so

2. you quote Weiner…Need I say more?

4) I strongly recomend you read "The Savage Nation" and "The Enemy Within"... or are you worried about finding out you are wrong?

1. I don’t like hate speech much

2. I tried

3. read lies, lies, lies, and the lying liars who tell them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Go ahead.

 

"When you hear 'human rights,' think gays. When you hear 'human rights,' think only one thing: someone who wants to rape your son. ... When you hear 'human rights,' think only someone who wants to molest your son, and send you to jail if you defend him. Write that down, make a note of it." -Michael Savage

 

THATS THE ACLU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DO YOU NOT GET IT? The left wing of the political spectrem is always telling us we have to "be tolerate of them ... they're just like you and me ... we have to treat them like there's nothing different about them"

BUT THERE IS SOMETHING DANGEROUSLY DIFFERENT ABOUT THEM!!! THEY WANT TO BE FREE TO RAPE AND MOLEST AND IF YOU CALL FOUL ON THEM, YOUR BEING INTOLERENT, AND YOUR A HITLER, AND YOU SHOULD BURN IN HELL! THE ACLU IS MAKING IT THAT WAY! SORRY BUDDY, I DONT WANNA HAVE TO BE SURRONDED BY THE IMMORALITY, THE EXPOSURE, THE FEMINISTIC MEN THAT INFLUENCE ME AND MY KIDS NEGATIVLY!! DID YOU KNOW THAT THE MAJORITY OF HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE ABOUT THE SEX, AND ARE ABUSIVE!!! "THEY WANT MARRIAGE." HA!!! THEY WANT RECOGNITION AS O.K.! THEY WANT THAT SURE PLATFORM AS "NORMAL" SO THEY CAN HAVE THEIR SEX AND HAVE THEIR PARADES AND SHOW THEIR STICKERS!!! I WOULDNT HAVE A PROBLEM IF THE GAYS JUST WERE GAY AND THERE, BUT THEY WANT TO BE EVERYWHERE , IN YOUR FACE, IN THE STREETS!!! HOW BOUT BEING TOLERANT OF MY WANTS TO LIVE MY LIFE NOT HAVING TO SEE GAYS AND LESBIANS MARRYING AND KISSING AND WALKING IN THIER PARADES IN THONGS!!! HOW BOUT ALLOWING ME TO BELEAVE AND SUPPORT MY MORAL, CHRISTIAN, CONSERVATIVE BELIEFS!!!

GIVE ME MY COUNTRY BACK YOU ACLU ********!!!!!!!!!!!! YOUR KILLING IT!! THATS WHAT SAVAGE IS SAYING, AND THATS WHAT I SAY!!! SORRY IF I OFFEND YOU, BUT SOMEONE HAS TO STAND UP TO THESE SLOBS!!! THEY'RE GOING TO DESTROY THIS COUNTRY!!! IM NOT GOING TO LET MY COUNTRY DIE BECAUSE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE ACLU AND PEOPLE LIKE YOU LIBERALS ARE WANTING TO BE "SENSETIVE" TO THOSE WHO WANT TO SEE THE COUNTRY'S STREETS "RUN WITH BLOOD" (AND DONT THINK THAT DOESNT INCLUDE YOU). BE TOLERANT OF THE ONES WHO ARE GETTING FOR FREE WHAT MY PARENTS AND I WILL BE WORKING MY BUTT OFF TO GET!!! I'm sorry if i come across as "radical". Then i guess i'll just have to be, because this is how i feel, and as you can tell, i feel very strongly this way. And this is what savage is saying that quote. the aclu and others pushing for this "tolerance" and "humanity" toward everyone is going to get us all killed. Remember what rome was doing when they collapsed. Remember why Sadem and Gamorah were destroyed. Immorality and "tolerance" of the enemy will destroy this country. and I dont know about you, but i love democratic, republic, capitalist America. I also love moral, peacefull, safe America. Thats all. Sorry bout the anger.

 

Savage on the tsunami: "I wouldn't call it a tragedy. ... We shouldn't be spending a nickel on this" http://mediamatters.org/items/200501050006

 

Did you see the clip of the man in the Osama bin Laden T-shirt getting aid from the soldier. Do you know anything about the Tamil Tigers? How many countries flees to aid us when our coasts get nailed. There are still people in Florida who dont have roofs that were torn off 5 years ago. How bout we worry about our country before we go out and try and save the rest of the world?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
did you go to the site?

"[sen. Joe] MCCARTHY WAS A 100% RIGHT.....MCCARTHY WAS A HERO" [MARCH 28, 2002]

and

“The White Race is being snuffed off the planet through immigration.”

also try http://users.nlamerica.com/tharden/savage.html

Liberals in power? cnn9(owned by time warner)? cbs(owned by viacom)?

http://www.liberalslant.com/mediaownership.htm

 

I thought you didnt like hate speech and lies? What happened buddy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. You conceded everyone deserves rights. Ss why does this matter?

2. Justice still exists.

3. Turn: with out legal representation justice is impossible.

4. I like your inclusion of communists on that list.

 

On your 1.:ya, right....not anarchial freedom

2.:a)ya, but you dont want the death penalty either, so that wont last long.

B) then why is O.J. free? Why was WACO ok? Why can people kill dozens, but be kept alive because they are "mentally ill" (not mentally retarded, just disturbed)

3. thats what real laywers and real justices are for, not ACLU pussys who want to ban christianity, silence the political right, and defend the enemies of america.

4. Thanks. You can replace it with radical liberals with agendas if you like. The two are synonomys.

 

 

1. ACLU of New Jersey Successfully Defends Republican Candidates' Right to Political Speech

February 10, 2005

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: media@aclu.org

NEWARK - The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey announced today that it successfully obtained a court order dismissing a libel suit filed against the Piscataway Republican Organization and its recent slate of candidates for township offices. The lawsuit against the Republicans was filed by the Piscataway Democratic Organization and centered on language used on campaign billboards and fliers.

"Free political speech is a founding American belief," said Deborah Jacobs, Executive Director of the ACLU of New Jersey. "The way to fight speech that you don't like or don't think is accurate is to speak out yourself, not to silence or suppress what others say."

During the November 2004 elections, the Piscataway Republican Organization erected a billboard stating: "Bribery. Corruption. Indictment. Had Enough?" with a picture of a broom. The sign then urged viewers to vote for the Republican slate for township mayor and council.

The Democratic incumbents asked that the signs be removed. The Republicans refused. The Democrats then filed suit for libel, claiming that the sign implied that they, as individuals, were guilty of bribery and corruption. Although the entire Piscataway Democratic slate of candidates won in the November elections, they refused to dismiss the lawsuit.

On Wednesday, February 9, 2005, Judge Yolanda Ciccone granted the ACLU of New Jersey's motion to dismiss the lawsuit based on the fact that the ad contained protected, non-libelous speech. The ACLU of New Jersey’s brief explained that the ad was political rhetoric, and did not direct allegations at a particular individual; rather, it was impersonal criticism of a government administration.

"Political discourse should be uninhibited and this was political speech in its most basic form," said Frank Corrado of Barry Corrado Grassi & Gibson, the ACLU of New Jersey's cooperating attorney in the case. "The candidates had the right to comment on the political climate as they saw it and to ask voters to remove the incumbents to change the status quo."

The case is Piscataway Democratic Organization, et al. v. Piscataway Republican Organization, et al. It was filed in New Jersey Superior Court, Middlesex County.

2. The majority isn’t abused at a higher degree

3. The ACLU has defended Christian’s free speech many times

3. Security doesn’t need civil liberties

 

1. cool, now they're hypocrits too.

2. what do you call the average white male being not allowed into a school because the applicant he is up against is black with less qualifications. we wont start on the aclu's role in that.

3. Oh ya, like prayer in public, the ten commandments, and the cross on a state seal. They wouldn't be being hypocritical again woule they?

3 ( you mean 4). but "civil liberties" can destroy security.

 

 

1. I don’t like hate speech much

2. I tried

3. read lies, lies, lies, and the lying liars who tell them

Hey, same feeling ive gotten reading the sites you've posted!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please Note: I rarely line-by-line on cx, because quite frankly, it's dumb. But I felt this post warranted it. Fight fire with fire, right?

 

THATS THE ACLU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DO YOU NOT GET IT? The left wing of the political spectrem is always telling us we have to "be tolerate of them ... they're just like you and me ... we have to treat them like there's nothing different about them"

BUT THERE IS SOMETHING ILLEGALLY DIFFERENT ABOUT THEM!!!

I wasn't previously aware, but I guess it is illegal to be a homosexual. I wish people would keep me more up to date. Please let me know when it becomes illegal to be Black, Arab, or Jewish. And if you could tell me when it's illegal to be not a Republican, let me know as well.

 

THEY WANT TO BE FREE TO RAPE AND MOLEST AND IF YOU CALL FOUL ON THEM, YOUR BEING INTOLERENT, AND YOUR A HITLER, AND YOU SHOULD BURN IN HELL! THE ACLU IS MAKING IT THAT WAY! SORRY BUDDY, I DONT WANNA HAVE TO BE SURRONDED BY THE IMMORALITY, THE EXPOSURE, THE FEMINISTIC MEN THAT INFLUENCE ME AND MY KIDS NEGATIVLY!!

Actually, you've missed a few things. Not only do I rape and molest, but being a liberal gay Jew, I also eat Christian children. Just thought I should let you know.

 

I WOULDNT HAVE A PROBLEM IF THE GAYS JUST WERE GAY AND THERE, BUT THEY WANT TO BE EVERYWHERE , IN YOUR FACE, IN THE STREETS!!!

If they shouldn't be gay in the streets, where should they be gay? In private? Have you read any Foucault or Butler? I think you should. Actually, on second thought, it's just liberal propaganda promoting the gay agenda. I guess the only literature that isn't un-American and un-Christian is by Savage, right?

 

HOW BOUT BEING TOLERANT OF MY WANTS TO LIVE MY LIFE AWAY FROM HOMOSEXUALVILLE AND NOT HAVING TO SEE GAYS AND LESBIANS MARRYING AND KISSING AND WALKING IN THIER PARADES IN THONGS!!! HOW BOUT ALLOWING ME TO BELEAVE AND SUPPORT MY MORAL, CHRISTIAN, CONSERVATIVE BELIEFS!!!

Actually, I'm not going to be tolerant of your wants for government-sponsored democide. Besides, at least gays can spell correctly.

 

GIVE ME MY COUNTRY BACK YOU ACLU ********!!!!!!!!!!!! YOUR KILLING IT!! THATS WHAT SAVAGE IS SAYING, AND THATS WHAT I SAY!!! SORRY IF I OFFEND YOU, BUT SOMEONE HAS TO STAND UP TO THESE SLOBS!!! THEY'RE GOING TO DESTROY THIS COUNTRY!!! IM NOT GOING TO LET MY COUNTRY DIE BECAUSE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE ACLU AND PEOPLE LIKE YOU LIBERALS ARE WANTING TO BE "SENSETIVE" TO THOSE WHO WANT TO SEE THE COUNTRY'S STREETS "RUN WITH BLOOD" (AND DONT THINK THAT DOESNT INCLUDE YOU). BE TOLERANT OF THE ONES WHO ARE GETTING FOR FREE WHAT MY PARENTS AND I WILL BE WORKING MY BUTT OFF TO GET!!!

You are correct. The ACLU despises America and is fighting to destroy it. That's why the seek to preserve our constitution. I mean, everyone knows that the Constitution is devicive gay liberal propaganda.

 

I'm sorry if i come across as "radical". Then i guess i'll just have to be, because this is how i feel, and as you can tell, i feel very strongly this way. And this is what savage is saying that quote. the aclu and others pushing for this "tolerance" and "humanity" toward everyone is going to get us all killed. Remember what rome was doing when they collapsed. Remember why Sadem and Gamorah were destroyed. Immorality and "tolerance" of the enemy will destroy this country. and I dont know about you, but i love democratic, republic, capitalist America. I also love moral, peacefull, safe America. Thats all. Sorry bout the anger.

Name a country destroyed by homosexuals. No really, I challenge you to name a country.

 

Savage on the tsunami: "I wouldn't call it a tragedy. ... We shouldn't be spending a nickel on this" http://mediamatters.org/items/200501050006

One of the tenents of Christianity is giving to the poor. I would say more on this, but it doesn't really need further explaination. All your claims of "morality" above are nulled by your affirmation of this statement.

 

Did you see the clip of the man in the Osama bin Laden T-shirt getting aid from the soldier. Do you know anything about the Tamil Tigers? How many countries flees to aid us when our coasts get nailed. There are still people in Florida who dont have roofs that were torn off 5 years ago. How bout we worry about our country before we go out and try and save the rest of the world?

We do have problems at home that need to be addressed before we look elsewhere. Afterall, there are still thousands of gays in our country who haven't been exterminated yet.

 

Well, that was my attempt at line-by-line. But what it really comes down to is that your post was amazingly offensive. Please don't post again. Ever.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly are we debating? Is the ACLU actually defending the right to molest or simply providing representation for those accused of it? There is a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I asked the question and didn't get an answer. Perhaps none is forthcoming because the answer is not known? Let's broaden this a bit. Does the ACLU defend the right to murder, rape, assault or terrorize? I actually don't know if they ever have defended such things. If nobody on either side can respond, what should I think?

 

Shifting gears, I notice the ACLU is involved in one the current cases before the high court regarding the constitutionality of the Ten Commandments. I'm not impressed with the logic of the ACLU on this one. It would be one thing if a law, passed by some legislature somewhere required their display. It's quite another if the display in question is somebody's voluntary exercise of religion. Judge Roy Moore of Alabama was removed from the bench for refusing to remove his own donated display of the decalogue and to this day I don't get the point. What law, if any, was being struck down? What law did Judge Moore actually violate? It getting a little rediculous to have to worry about whether you are upsetting or offending some non-religious person just because you are on public property.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"1. I don’t like hate speech much

2. I tried

3. read lies, lies, lies, and the lying liars who tell them" ;)

1. The wimp factor is not hate speach. you all should read it. It talks about svage, and clinton and lots of other politicians

2. I dout you tried

3. Lies is a book. It specific to Savage. You should read it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On your 1.:ya, right....not anarchial freedom

2.:a)ya, but you dont want the death penalty either, so that wont last long.

B) then why is O.J. free? Why was WACO ok? Why can people kill dozens, but be kept alive because they are "mentally ill" (not mentally retarded, just disturbed)

3. thats what real laywers and real justices are for, not ACLU pussys who want to ban christianity, silence the political right, and defend the enemies of america.

4. Thanks. You can replace it with radical liberals with agendas if you like. The two are synonomys.

1. Anarchical freedom? Link? Hobbes?

2. What makes you think I am against the death penalty? Oh, I am a crazy terrorist liberal. Have you seen the death penalty stats (number of blacks, error, etc)? Are mental hospitals not good enough or is your desire for revenge to great?

3. “Real” lawyers cost money. Can anyone say threat construction?

4. You miss my point. Communism is an economic philosophy, not a violent crime

 

1. cool, now they're hypocrits too.

2. what do you call the average white male being not allowed into a school because the applicant he is up against is black with less qualifications. we wont start on the aclu's role in that.

3. Oh ya, like prayer in public, the ten commandments, and the cross on a state seal. They wouldn't be being hypocritical again woule they?

3 ( you mean 4). but "civil liberties" can destroy security.

1. How?

2. “Not being allowed into school” you know, Yale uses a point system for admissions. The president got more points because his daddy went to Yale than for tests scores.

3. no like, “

ACLU Supports Right of Iowa Students to Distribute Christian Literature at School July 11, 2002

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DES MOINES--The Iowa Civil Liberties Union today announced that it is publicly supporting the Christian students who recently filed a lawsuit against the Davenport Schools asserting the right to distribute religious literature during non-instructional time. “

And

After ACLU Intervention on Behalf of Christian Valedictorian, Michigan High School Agrees to Stop Censoring Religious Yearbook Entries

May 11, 2004

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DETROIT – The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan today announced an out-of-court settlement between the Utica Community School District and a local student over the censorship of her 2001 yearbook entry. The student’s entry had been deleted from the yearbook because it contained a passage from the Bible.

 

4. Supply a mechanism, or just an example. I don't think we should focus on security in such a maner, Ben Franklin said it best, “Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.”

 

 

Hey, same feeling ive gotten reading the sites you've posted!!!

You read them? I applaud you. I am sorry if I posted a link to something hateful. I don’t hate people. And *try* not to use hate speech. Weiner’s (and your) attacks on immigrants and gays sounds hateful to me. I am sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I asked the question and didn't get an answer. Perhaps none is forthcoming because the answer is not known? Let's broaden this a bit. Does the ACLU defend the right to murder, rape, assault or terrorize? I actually don't know if they ever have defended such things. If nobody on either side can respond, what should I think?

they don't

 

Shifting gears, I notice the ACLU is involved in one the current cases before the high court regarding the constitutionality of the Ten Commandments. I'm not impressed with the logic of the ACLU on this one. It would be one thing if a law, passed by some legislature somewhere required their display. It's quite another if the display in question is somebody's voluntary exercise of religion. Judge Roy Moore of Alabama was removed from the bench for refusing to remove his own donated display of the decalogue and to this day I don't get the point. What law, if any, was being struck down? What law did Judge Moore actually violate? It getting a little rediculous to have to worry about whether you are upsetting or offending some non-religious person just because you are on public property.

I think the ACLU might be going to far on this one. On the other hand, I don't think it is apropriate ti put the ten cammandments in a court house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you ever actually listened to savage? he is against liberalism because it is no longer the traditionalist stance the party once held (Liberals up to about JFK). He does pick the best policies, it just so happens that none of them are liberal ones.

Also, he's no hard-core "bushie". He disagrees with several policies of the Bush administration because he does want the best policies.

If you say so. I just think he takes the compassionate out of compassionate conservative.

 

BORDERS LANGUAGE CULTURE!!! you plan on coming to america, learn english. This isn't intolerant, its how we have to work things. If you come to america, you need to learn its language so you can contribute and succede (live the american dream). We cant change the system for the lazy. I wanna still be speaking english in twenty years, not have to know spanish, arabic and french just because those coming in refuse to adapt to the situation they want to get into so bad. Clear communication is very important to a successful society. My dad is a doctor in a area where there are a number of minorities, most of them mexican. They are not all here legally (but that is beside the point). He recently had to examine a man who only knew spanish and had to have and interpreter. A average 1 hour interview took 4. This not prolonged transfer not only took a rediculous amount of time, resulting in less alowable appointments and getting behind on patients and paperwork, but also could mean mistakes in translation that could result in a inproper diagnosis. We should post it on the border! WELCOME TO AMERICA (now speak english/pay taxes)

The problem with this argument is that ENGLISH is NOT a native language of America. Again, what happened to the Compassion thing.

 

 

 

Again, listen to his show. he uses his web site to post articles he talks about on his program for the listeners to read to get informed, to find what his listeners are thinking through poll questions, promote causes he finds just and worthy (like the one now with helping a lutenient who is being prosecuted for doing his job in iraq), and to keep his website running he advertises (just like any other common website). These advertisments portray certain opinions because they are the opinions of the majority of the people who are visiting that web site, and so they will buy the product, the seller will gain and continue to advertise with that website. Its not that hard to figure out.

really, I didnt see any articles.
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. The wimp factor is not hate speach. you all should read it. It talks about svage, and clinton and lots of other politicians

2. I dout you tried

3. Lies is a book. It specific to Savage. You should read it

 

1. The Enemy Within and the Savage Nation are not hate speech. (HEY FLUFFY COMMIE... I THOUGHT YOU SAID LIBERALS SPELLED RIGHT? GET A LOOK AT THIS ONE!!! "Speach") You should all read them. They talk about the ACLU and crazy liberals and gays and lots of other politics.

2. I doubt you've tried before (NOTE TO COMMIE: "dout"-Add to the "corektle speld bie libralz" list)

3. Treason is a book. It is specific to Liberals. You should read it.

 

After notes:

-I edited that post changing "illegal" to "dangerous". I apolagize.

-I'm going to not answer fluffy commie's post because, well, its proof that liberalism is a mental disorder. :D

-Since we're never going to agree on this, i think we should leave this thread for those who want to talk about the CP instead of the politics of disolving the ACLU (but if you wanna argue forever, i'll play along, but i will get bored because i do have a heterosexual, christian, conservative, capitalist life)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a sidebar Gengis: The idea is not that tolerance is what is needed. The term tolerance has become a central talking point to promote a free-for-all nation. Where we go from being a nation of immigrants to being a nation FOR immigrants. He promotes English as the national language. I see no problem with this.
Just because English is the "national language" doesn't mean everyone has to speak it fluently. I dare you to find a persyn in your city that doesn't speak some modicum of english. I guarantee you won't, and here's why: people like to succeed, fit in, and make money. That's not possible in the United States, because, as you said, English is the national language. Furthermore, when was the last time you were horribly inconvenienced because an "immigrant" (because those are the only people who have trouble with english) had trouble with english?

The point I'm making here is that Mr. Savage is characterizing immigrants as incompetent people that muck up our country with their complete lack of respect for our adopted language. However, to become a naturalized citizen of the United States, you must, and I quote, "be able to read, write, speak, and understand words in ordinary usage in the English language." So where is this problem? It's practically non-existent, and the only reason dickless is constructing this image is because he seems to be generally opposed to all that is good and right with this country. He promotes an attitude of intolerance, which is NOT the attitude we've founded this country on. Whatever happened to "give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free?" We ARE a nation FOR immigrants, because that's the concept our country is based upon. We welcome those yearning for rights and the ability to prosper to become citizens, and that's exactly what our founding fathers had in mind when they created our constitution.

When our forefathers came here they all made every attempt to learn the language of the land (mostly English with some hints and borrowings from other languages).
Little history lesson for you, buddy: English is our national language because nearly everybody ALREADY SPOKE IT before we even became an independent nation. Since the US started out as British colonies, and British people speak English, it's only natural that all of the people in positions of authority spoke fluent English, and almost everyone else did. Our forefathers didn't have to make any attempt to learn English, because they already knew it.
This is in stark contrast to modern America where you are being "intolerant" if you don't provide everything in twos (one copy in English and another in Spanish) Its not a matter of being tolerant. It is a matter of being logical and pragmatic.
First problem with this: it's not considered "intolerant" if you fail to provide copies of anything in other languages, it's generally considered more convenient than anything.

Second: as long as our governing philosophy has switched from democracy to pragmatism, we should probably kill all the handicapped and obese people, and enforce a policy of strict gene pool control. It'll be tough at first, but GODDAMN WILL THE TRAINS RUN ON TIME.

 

Have you ever actually listened to savage? he is against liberalism because it is no longer the traditionalist stance the party once held (Liberals up to about JFK). He does pick the best policies, it just so happens that none of them are liberal ones.
No, no, no. You missed my point. There's a giant difference between being "against liberalism" and "against liberals." This dude targets liberals as PEOPLE, not their policies, which is exactly the attitude of scapegoating that will run this country into the fucking ground. His website is chock full of links to newspaper articles about how liberals are bad people, not about how their policies are ineffective.
Also, he's no hard-core "bushie". He disagrees with several policies of the Bush administration because he does want the best policies.
Did I say anything about Bush?
BORDERS LANGUAGE CULTURE!!! you plan on coming to america, learn english. This isn't intolerant, its how we have to work things. If you come to america, you need to learn its language so you can contribute and succede (live the american dream). We cant change the system for the lazy.
First, see above; it's more specific.

Second, our national laws already agree with you; you have to speak and write english to become a naturalized citizen. What's the problem?

I wanna still be speaking english in twenty years, not have to know spanish, arabic and french just because those coming in refuse to adapt to the situation they want to get into so bad.
Yes, I'm certain this is a reasonable concern. . . Or not. Yeah, definitely not. Actually, even considering this scenario is fucking stupid.
Clear communication is very important to a successful society.
Yes, many societies have crumbled because a few people didn't speak the same language. MANY.

By which I mean none.

My dad is a doctor
This explains a lot.
in a area where there are a number of minorities, most of them mexican.
You mean "the United States of America?"
They are not all here legally (but that is beside the point).
Actually, that is exactly the point; illegal immigrants are probably the only people you will meet that can't speak english. This loops back to our immigration requirements of being able to speak and write english.
He recently had to examine a man who only knew spanish and had to have and interpreter. A average 1 hour interview took 4. This not prolonged transfer not only took a rediculous amount of time, resulting in less alowable appointments and getting behind on patients and paperwork, but also could mean mistakes in translation that could result in a inproper diagnosis.
Your dad must have been furious when he got back into his Mercedes and drove to your mansion. Maybe he should learn to speak a little Spanish if he lives in an area with a lot of Spanish-speaking minorities. That's what most good doctors who live in urban areas do.
We should post it on the border! WELCOME TO AMERICA (now speak english/pay taxes)
We should also post: WE'RE A BUNCH OF ARROGANT FUCKS. HAVE A NICE DAY.
Again, listen to his show. he uses his web site to post articles he talks about on his program for the listeners to read to get informed, to find what his listeners are thinking through poll questions, promote causes he finds just and worthy (like the one now with helping a lutenient who is being prosecuted for doing his job in iraq), and to keep his website running he advertises (just like any other common website). These advertisments portray certain opinions because they are the opinions of the majority of the people who are visiting that web site, and so they will buy the product, the seller will gain and continue to advertise with that website. Its not that hard to figure out.
Yes; Ionic Air Purifiers are most certainly a product aimed at a conservative audience.

Moreover, I certainly doubt his website requires egregious advertising to support; the most expensive package that his site's host offers is $50 a month. . . I could pay that out of my goddamned pocket and I don't even have a steady job.

WHAT HAPPEND TO BEING TOLERANT? OR DO I HAVE TO BE A MINORITY FOR THAT TO APLY TO ME?
Umm, I'm not quite sure what you're implying. How am I being intolerant by claiming this man is a stupid fuck who is corrupting people's minds? I, at least, have evidence supporting my claim.
I dont wanna get into MTVs politics, but i will say this: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

(let me know if you dont get why im laughing [lets hope you do, or you might be falling "pray to such a closed-minded and dishonest mindset"])

The point here is that: the MTV culture may be turning the youth of our country into witless dolts, but at least they never advocate hating any specific group.

And yes, I do understand why you're laughing. It's because you're an arrogant jackass with lots of money who's had everything handed to him and thinks he's right about any given subject. You've been raised in a wealthy environment and conservative policies support the continued excesses of the white upper class. Please, tell me if I got any of this wrong. Otherwise, sit your white-bread, 2% milk, republican ass down, and quit wasting my time with your brainwashed logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. Anarchical freedom? Link? Hobbes?

2. What makes you think I am against the death penalty? Oh, I am a crazy terrorist liberal. Have you seen the death penalty stats (number of blacks, error, etc)? Are mental hospitals not good enough or is your desire for revenge to great?

3. “Real” lawyers cost money. Can anyone say threat construction?

4. You miss my point. Communism is an economic philosophy, not a violent crime

 

1. anarchial freedom- if nobody is every accused of their crimes and justice is not delt to them, not only does it undermine the entire legal system of the US, but it means all one has to do is commit a crime and then say he is being accused because he is a minority or has some other issue and the ACLU will come to the rescue

2. I have seen the #s :

a) blacks commit more major offenses then others ( i dont know about crimes in general, but it wouldnt surprise me.)

B) ya, error is going down significantly due to new developements in dna and evidence analysis technology.

c) mental hospitals are exactly the problem. anyone can claim they killed because they were on some drug or they were depressed by some event in their life, or they just plain arent all there. This is another way justice isn't being served. Not to mention it is so much more expensive (tax money) to keep a murderer alive for the rest of his life then to lethally inject him.

3. Threat Construction? are you running a k on me or something? And you just showed another problem with the ACLU. It allows for people to push their agenda's (removing prayer, ten commandments, gay marriage, etc.) for free without having to insert a financial loss. This gives people the ability to pull crap they wouldnt if they had to pay for it.

4. you miss my point: communism sucks-so does liberalism (not to mention the phylosophical connection between the two)

 

1. How?

2. “Not being allowed into school” you know, Yale uses a point system for admissions. The president got more points because his daddy went to Yale than for tests scores.

3. no like, “

ACLU Supports Right of Iowa Students to Distribute Christian Literature at School July 11, 2002

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DES MOINES--The Iowa Civil Liberties Union today announced that it is publicly supporting the Christian students who recently filed a lawsuit against the Davenport Schools asserting the right to distribute religious literature during non-instructional time. “

And

After ACLU Intervention on Behalf of Christian Valedictorian, Michigan High School Agrees to Stop Censoring Religious Yearbook Entries

May 11, 2004

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DETROIT – The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan today announced an out-of-court settlement between the Utica Community School District and a local student over the censorship of her 2001 yearbook entry. The student’s entry had been deleted from the yearbook because it contained a passage from the Bible.

 

4. Supply a mechanism, or just an example. I don't think we should focus on security in such a maner, Ben Franklin said it best, “Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.”

 

1. You show another example in this post- They say its ok to have bible passages/refrences in yearbooks, but not in school activities, the pledge, on currency, or in courthouses or state seals.

2. O goody:

a) nice applicable answer (that was sarcasm)

B) what happened to no hate speech. You wouldnt happen to be hating Bush would you?

3. cross apply what i said on 1

4. those who let terrorists who want to kill them loose, or just let them be can look forward to another 9/11 (lets not forget Franklin was refering to his experience with a bad government, not a rouge group that answers to no one but the 72 virgins allah gives them in heaven)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with this argument is that ENGLISH is NOT a native language of America. Again, what happened to the Compassion thing.

 

It is the official language of the United States of America, the country real immigrants come to join. You dont get what Compassionate Conservative means...

 

really, I didnt see any articles.

LOOK AGAIN!!!! (or did you not look in the first place) Thats what the majority of the page is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, no, no. You missed my point. There's a giant difference between being "against liberalism" and "against liberals." This dude targets liberals as PEOPLE, not their policies, which is exactly the attitude of scapegoating that will run this country into the fucking ground. His website is chock full of links to newspaper articles about how liberals are bad people, not about how their policies are ineffective.

 

HOW BOUT YOU LISTEN TO THE SHOW FOR ONCE AND SEE HIM ATTACK THE POLICIES!!!

 

Second, our national laws already agree with you; you have to speak and write english to become a naturalized citizen. What's the problem?

 

THEN HOW COME IM HAVING TO STILL COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS? SHOULDNT LAW ENFORCEMENT BE GETTING THESE GUYS OUT?

 

Yes, I'm certain this is a reasonable concern. . . Or not. Yeah, definitely not. Actually, even considering this scenario is fucking stupid.

WHY? YOU DONT SEEM TO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE SPANISH LANGUAGE BEING SPOKEN INSTEAD OF ENGLISH ALL OVER AMERICA? AND APPARENTLY YOUR OPINION IS THE MAJORITY...

 

Yes, many societies have crumbled because a few people didn't speak the same language. MANY.

BUT THATS IT, ITS NOT "A FEW." HAVE YOU SEEN THE NUMBERS OF THOSE COMING OVER THE BORDER EVERY DAY?

 

Actually, that is exactly the point; illegal immigrants are probably the only people you will meet that can't speak english. This loops back to our immigration requirements of being able to speak and write english.

JUST CROSS APPLY WHAT I SAID TO THAT ABOVE

 

Your dad must have been furious when he got back into his Mercedes and drove to your mansion. Maybe he should learn to speak a little Spanish if he lives in an area with a lot of Spanish-speaking minorities. That's what most good doctors who live in urban areas do.

WHY? SHOULDNT THE MEXICANS BE TALERENT OF MY DADS IGNORENCE OF THE SPANISH LANGUAGE AND LEARN SOME ENGLISH? NOT TO MENITION THAT MY DAD WORKS IS BUTT OFF AND IS THE BEST RHEMOTOLOGIST IN THE STATE AND HAS A GREAT REGIONAL REP. SO I'D SHUT YOUR PIEHOLE

 

We should also post: WE'RE A BUNCH OF ARROGANT FUCKS. HAVE A NICE DAY.

I'M PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN

 

Moreover, I certainly doubt his website requires egregious advertising to support; the most expensive package that his site's host offers is $50 a month. . . I could pay that out of my goddamned pocket and I don't even have a steady job.

IT DOES COST MONEY TO RUN A RADIO SHOW, PAY EMPLOYEES, KEEP UP AN INTERNET SITE, LIVE, ETC. (or did you forget you had to actually work for a living while you were day-dreaming of Marxism)

 

Umm, I'm not quite sure what you're implying. How am I being intolerant by claiming this man is a stupid fuck who is corrupting people's minds? I, at least, have evidence supporting my claim.

LIKE?

 

The point here is that: the MTV culture may be turning the youth of our country into witless dolts, but at least they never advocate hating any specific group.

REMEMBER "ROCK THE VOTE" & RECENTLY "VOTE OR DIE". THEY SEEM TO GET SO HYPED OVER THE ELECTIONS AND VOTING FOR THE RIGHT CANIDATE (THEY HELD A BIG BASH AFTER CLINTON WAS ELECTED, BUT CANCELLED IT FOR BOTH BUSH WINS)

 

And yes, I do understand why you're laughing. It's because you're an arrogant jackass with lots of money who's had everything handed to him and thinks he's right about any given subject. You've been raised in a wealthy environment and conservative policies support the continued excesses of the white upper class. Please, tell me if I got any of this wrong. Otherwise, sit your white-bread, 2% milk, republican ass down, and quit wasting my time with your brainwashed logic.

 

OR IT COULD BE BECAUSE YOU ARE SO MISLED ABOUT THE POLITICS OF TV, THE ACLU, LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES THAT IT IS HALERIOUS. AND I HAVE NOT BEEN HANDED EVERYTHING AND WE ARE NOT UPPER CLASS. MY FAMILY WORKED HARD TO GET WHERE IT IS AND STILL WORKS HARD AND HAS BEEN BLESSED FOR THAT WORK (ahhh Capitalism). WE HAVE ALSO FOUND THE BEING CONSERVATIVES IS THE RIGHT CHOICE, SO I'D SHUT IT. AND IF THE UPPER CLASS IS SO CONSERVATIVE/REPUBLICAN, WHY'S HOLLYWOOD SO LIBERAL? OR IS THAT THE EDUCATED UPPER CLASS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. The Enemy Within and the Savage Nation are not hate speech. (HEY FLUFFY COMMIE... I THOUGHT YOU SAID LIBERALS SPELLED RIGHT? GET A LOOK AT THIS ONE!!! "Speach") You should all read them. They talk about the ACLU and crazy liberals and gays and lots of other politics.

2. I doubt you've tried before (NOTE TO COMMIE: "dout"-Add to the "corektle speld bie libralz" list)

3. Treason is a book. It is specific to Liberals. You should read it.

 

After notes:

-I edited that post changing "illegal" to "dangerous". I apolagize.

-I'm going to not answer fluffy commie's post because, well, its proof that liberalism is a mental disorder. :D

-Since we're never going to agree on this, i think we should leave this thread for those who want to talk about the CP instead of the politics of disolving the ACLU (but if you wanna argue forever, i'll play along, but i will get bored because i do have a heterosexual, christian, conservative, capitalist life)

1. Ok

2. I admit, only Savage Nation

3. Lies talks a lot about Treason. It is actually useful no matter what your politics are. Great sections like "How to Lie with Footnotes" (about Treason, mostly)

on your after notes

-cool

-If you say so

-Originaly I posted a k of the cp for debate. But "Savage" realy anoys me

-Isn't this part of that life?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...