jump to last post 1-48 of 48 discussions (323 posts)

Indefensable

  1. Doug Hughes profile image61
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    Washington (CNN) - Civil rights icon and veteran Rep. John Lewis, D-Georgia, said anti-health care bill protesters Saturday repeatedly yelled the "N" word at him as he left a heath care meeting and walked to the Capitol.

    "I haven't seen heard anything like this in more than 40 years, maybe 45." Lewis said. "Since the march from Selma to Montgomery really."

    "Yeah, but it's okay," Lewis added. "I've faced this before. So, it reminded me of the 60's. There's a lot of downright hate and anger and people are just being downright mean."

    The incident was confirmed by Rep. Andre Carson, D-Indiana, who was walking with Lewis at the time. Protesters were yelling, "'kill the bill, kill the bill' and the 'N' word several times," Carson said.

    Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Missouri, released a statement late Saturday saying he too was called the "N" word as he walked to the Capitol for a vote and that he was spat on by one protestor who was arrested by U.S. Capitol Police. Cleaver declined to press charges against the man, the statement said.

    Protesters also hurled anti-gay comments at Rep. Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts, who is openly gay, as he left the same health care meeting that Lewis attended in a House office building.

    A CNN producer overheard the word "faggot" yelled at Frank several times in the lobby of the Longworth building. Frank said he heard someone yell "homo" at him.

    "I'm disappointed," Frank said. "There's an unwillingness to be civil."

    Frank, who said he rarely hears such slurs anymore, said the health care issue has become "the proxy for a lot of other sentiments. A lot of which are perfectly reasonable but some of which are kind of ugly."

    1. GypsyDream profile image60
      GypsyDreamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yes and it is indefensible. Racial and hate slurs have no place in any circumstance. Well, at least the are perpetrators (protestors) were caught showing their true colors, and so the rest of can see the way these people really think.

    2. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      That's awful when people call others the N word.

      But as far as Barney Frank......uh...he openly admits to being homosexual,  so why would he be upset when people call him that?

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image88
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Openly admitting that you are overweight and being called a fat-a$$ slob isn't really the same thing... is it?

        1. GypsyDream profile image60
          GypsyDreamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I agree with you. Besides, making derogatory remarks is totally off subject and a distraction. The issue is not about Franks being gay, its about healthcare reform. (Maybe the protestors are trying to trying to distract? I don't know.)

        2. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          The two issues are worlds apart.
          Being fat isn't the same as being a pervert.

          1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
            Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            And some people might consider some of your beliefs and views "perverted". That does not give them the right to scream names at you in public. The F word is just as bad as the N word.

          2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Neither is being gay.  Hating people and screaming obscenities at them for their sexual orientation is though.

            Would Jesus do that?

            1. 0
              Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Jesus woulda left them to their own hogswill (which they should KEEP to themselves).  Not condone them shoving it in their fellow man's faces by trying to legalize it.

              1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Would he hate them and call them names like you do?

                1. 0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  If you wanna ask me questions about Jesus, get your facts straight first about me.
                  I don't hate anyone.

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Pervert is a term of endearment?  It's not surprising that you can't answer my question. You seem to have confused yourself.

          3. 0
            cosetteposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            wow, Brenda

            you've managed to surprise me.

            and not 'good' surprise as in a party with cake and balloons but 'bad' surprise like realizing your cat left a little something in your slipper... yikes

      2. mcbean profile image83
        mcbeanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        What a load of rubbish.

        If I openly 'admit' to being black, does that make it acceptable to call me a N!#@er?

        Your pathetic arguement promotes hate in the name of religion without a hint of hipocracy.

        Take your sad views to the religious forums and preach there.

        Your old pal Jesus used to treat the poor but it seems you conservatives think he should have first asked if it might cost others anything and if the answer was yes, "you're on your own leper."
        Oh I forgot. If Jesus is talking to a leper it would have been in modern day Israel which has a public health system like the rest of the developed world.

        1. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You talk like you have no common sense at all.

          Skin color is a matter of race.

          Perversion is not.


          Someone also asked where the "N" word came from.

          I would assume it came from the word Negro, which I believe was simply a descriptive term.   It was used in the shorter term of "N--" as an insult, so yes that was really bad!

          But it's getting very confusing these days, because so many people say that black people don't want to be called Negros, and it's been changed to African-Americans even though many aren't even FROM Africa.....and now I guess it's just "black", which, to me, shouldn't even be an issue unless used as a term of description when needed.

          I compare it to the term Christian.

          That term was used in a derogatory manner toward those who followed Christ.

          But it doesn't stop ME from still calling myself a Christian, because I know it's NOT really something derogatory.

      3. TheGlassSpider profile image80
        TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Would you like it if someone called you a "cracker" or whatever? I mean, we all know crackers are wonderful little crunchy baked goods covered in salt, but if someone points their finger, yells that word at you, and spits on you...you would know they were not calling you a baked good, right?

        1. wyanjen profile image89
          wyanjenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          If this happened in a HubPages forum, it would qualify as a personal attack.
          Oh wait - it's a personal attack in real life too.
          A person who is open about homosexuality does not have to accept being slandered and insulted.
          smile

      4. Petra Vlah profile image61
        Petra Vlahposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Open? What does openly admiting to be gay has to do with anything?
        We see people colore that too is "open", but will that justify calling them offensive names?

        1. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          When someone's openly proud of engaging in shameful behavior,  it does indeed put them at risk for being ridiculed.
          Not that the ridicule is necessarily a good thing....but it's better than condoning the crap.

          1. arthriticknee profile image88
            arthritickneeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Define perversion. Define Shameful

            For me you are perverted for coming on here and spreading your hate in the name of religion.


            I am impressed you manage to see your hate-filled self as somehow better than a peaceful homosexual who lets everyone go about their business.

            Homosexuals don't come knocking on your door telling you how great it is to be homosexual and ask if you want to join up. Just as they don't threaten you with a life in hell if you don't see things their way.

            Your arguement about choice is a joke. You choose to spread hate.
            Shame on you.

            1. 0
              Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I am disgusted at your hate-filled false accusations.

              You're behaving very very shamefully.

              Or in the mannerisms of Barney Frank------vewwy vewwy shamefuwweee.

              1. arthriticknee profile image88
                arthritickneeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Is that it?

                What a comeback.

                Just like 7 year olds in the playground.

                1. 0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Yup. That's how Barney...errr...Elmew Fwuuud ...sounds...

                  Just thought I'd level the playing field a bit.

    3. 0
      Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yes it was reported that those yelling were plants from OFA, but the MSM didn't bother to mention that. Whatever.

      1. GypsyDream profile image60
        GypsyDreamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        cute...

        1. 0
          Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Actually, I made that up to illustrate a point. Nobody knows if the person that shouted out those remarks was associated with any particular group, but they will readily report it was a "tea bagger" without any evidence to back their claim!

          Why? Because they want to disparage the opposition and discredit them. They want to change the debate from the actual issues to something else and what better subject to advance their cause than racism?

          This is standard operating procedure for the left. Pull the race card, end the debate, change the subject and hide from the truth. You know what's disgusting? That tactic, and I'm frankly sick of it!!!

          1. GypsyDream profile image60
            GypsyDreamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Oh I didn't mean the story was cute. I only meant that you were being "cute" by trying to throw that story out. (And I didn't mean the good cute.)

    4. JON EWALL profile image46
      JON EWALLposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hey Hubbers
      Does anyone know what a nigger is or why someone would be called that name?

      There is an old saying ,  sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me.

      Today we live in a different world when right is wrong and wrong is right,
      when good is bad and bad is good.

      A Congressman ( black ) said that in this Congress (Democrat controlled ), there are no rules,we make up whatever rules that we need  to pass legislation.

      Democrats are good and Republicans are bad, a simple conclusion for all liberals and progressives.Democrats are right and Republicans are wrong.

      We all will find out the truth when the Judicial Branch ( the Supreme Court )  of our government will decide who is right and who is wrong. Will the American people, both liberals,progressives and conservatives accept the law of the land,the constitution.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Jon, You just couldn't bring yourself to disavow the frothing-at-the-mouth yahoos who insulted the black congressmen, spat on one of them, and called Barney Frank a fag. You are trying to defend the indefensible.

        1. 0
          Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          If it happened

        2. Arthur Fontes profile image88
          Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          There is no excuse for this if it happened.  Even if it was left wing plants sent into the crowd to do exactly this kind of thing they should be ashamed of themselves.

    5. Arthur Fontes profile image88
      Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Not only do you obviously just regurgitate what you see on CNN.


      You quote them verbatim.

      Very intelligent and original sunshine

  2. IntimatEvolution profile image80
    IntimatEvolutionposted 6 years ago

    Let me guess, all these bashes and hate mongers were Republican Christians. 

    I bet there is a lot of truth to that.

  3. Ohma profile image79
    Ohmaposted 6 years ago

    Which proves how desperately people do not want this bill to pass.

  4. IntimatEvolution profile image80
    IntimatEvolutionposted 6 years ago

    Still...

    That does not give "Christians" the right to act in devilish manners.

    1. Ohma profile image79
      Ohmaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I absolutely agree bad behavior is not acceptable from anyone Christian or not.
      The only point I was trying to make is that the Obama gang has really stirred up a mess by thinking they do not have to answer to the peoples wishes.

      1. Doug Hughes profile image61
        Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Obama was elected by a large majority and HCR was a signature item of the democratic platform.  A lot of people don't know what to think about this bill because there has been a well-financed campaign of lies and fear-mongering starting with death  panels that never existed in the bill and coverage for illegal aliens that never existed in the bill and coverage for abortions that never existed in the bill lies about igher premium rates when the majority will see a rate reduction or slowed increases, false claims of higher deficits when HCR will reduce the deficits 1.3 TRILLION.

        The people don't know what's in the bill - because of a deliberate campaign of deception. Congress knows that the people want reform and this qualifies. The actions of the teabaggers in DC is disgusting, but the real vilains are the fat cats who dreamed up the deception that feeds the paranoia. May they rot in hell.

        1. GypsyDream profile image60
          GypsyDreamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I wonder if it was not out of sheer stubborness in trying to make sure Obama's administration fails. They seem to have been crying foul since the day he took office.

        2. Ohma profile image79
          Ohmaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I will give you credit for you unwavering dedication to you beliefs.
          I personally hope that I am proved wrong if this thing actually passes but I do not really see where any good can come of this health care bill because the health care part of it is so lost and so mutilated by all the other crap that has been attached to it that even calling it health care reform is kind of ridicules.

          1. PrettyPanther profile image86
            PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            For me personally, the immediate benefit is that my teenage autistic boys will be covered by my insurance until they are 26 years old.  That is definitely an improvement, and is a great relief for me and for them.

            1. GypsyDream profile image60
              GypsyDreamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              That is just it- this is a moral issue and not a financial issue that the opposition has "cooked" it up to be. Studies in other countries have shown that universal healthcare has helped financially and in overall citizen health. I hope that this this is passed, so that you and your boys can do what you and they are able to- without the burden of worry.

              1. PrettyPanther profile image86
                PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I agree with you that it is a moral issue.  Others don't seem to see it that way.

        3. Sab Oh profile image61
          Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          " A lot of people don't know what to think about this bill "


          Typical liberal attitude. Anyone who disagrees just 'doesn't understand.' No wonder these corrupt SOBs are so eager to give the American people the finger and ram this mess down our throats. They will 'make' us understand one way or another whether we like it or not!

        4. JOE BARNETT profile image59
          JOE BARNETTposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Also doug it's the right wing fox news that perpetuates this stuff. valid news agencies will immediately call mis-information but, fox  allows it. i can't understand this.

    2. GypsyDream profile image60
      GypsyDreamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No it does not, but I have seen more disbehaving out those that call themselves "Christain" than any other example I can think of- sadly...

    3. tony0724 profile image60
      tony0724posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I love the way you automatically assume their Christians. Why can't they just be dumb angry people. You are no better then them by making that assumption !

      1. GypsyDream profile image60
        GypsyDreamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        We can not all assume that they are Christians, you are very correct. Sadly, though, the majority of what carries the Rebublican party- which opposes the bill- are so-called Christians.

      2. IntimatEvolution profile image80
        IntimatEvolutionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        If you would have read my earlier post before this one, you'd have that answer.  Duh....

        I admittedly said it was a guess.  Do you just like to b@tch to b@tch?  Or were you seriously trying to add something?

    4. creepy profile image60
      creepyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      saying it doesnt make it true

      how do you know they were christians

      you dont   you just like to demonize cause you have no argument

      hate speech  hate speech hate speech

      1. IntimatEvolution profile image80
        IntimatEvolutionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Again class, we have another winner.  Past the point little cap Creepy's way. 

        Read.  Or have you not made it out of the first grade?

  5. IntimatEvolution profile image80
    IntimatEvolutionposted 6 years ago

    Yes, you'll receive no arguments for me.

  6. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago

    It reminds me of the representative who commented on the suicide attack on the IRS office in Austin recently.  He mildly condemned the act, then insinuated it was somewhat justified because of attitudes toward the IRS.

    These cowardly acts are crimes - end of story.  There is no justification, the victims are not at fault.

    1. Doug Hughes profile image61
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      This is what you can expect from the GOP from now to November. They will denoucne violence (wink, wink) and cater to these groupa and incite them to act intended to intimidate. I EXPECT and PREDICT that voter intimidation by gun-weilding teabaggers will characterize the November election.

      That's because they will be protecting the REPUBLIC (which is not a democracy according to the new conservative narrrative).

      1. Sab Oh profile image61
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So, you honestly think the Republican Party wants to incite violence in the political process?

        1. Doug Hughes profile image61
          Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I think the Teabaggers want to incite violence - the GOP will play to that crowd in an inflamitory way, because that group responds with violence to any hint of moderation. The GOP has pretty much driven moderates from their ranks - but for the mid-tems, the  GOP and teabaggers will feed on each other in rage.  Where the outcome hangs in the balance, I think there will be deliberate, orchestrated campigns of intimidation to reduce democratic turnout.

          1. tony0724 profile image60
            tony0724posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You mean like the unions did and the guys in Philidelphia during the Prsidential election ? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black !

            1. Doug Hughes profile image61
              Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You got pictures of democrats with guns on their hips outside a rally where Bush is speaking?  Unions intimidating republicans??? Yeah - and a lot of black men in hoods lynched white people in the South, too. Save that stuff for the south 40 where it might do some good.

              1. srwnson profile image61
                srwnsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                You know we will never live that down, but the South has changed.

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Most of it.  There appear to be some holdouts, some even post in these forums.

                2. Randy Godwin profile image93
                  Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Some in the south have changed.  The "fundies" are still in strong force, though.  I hear this anti-Obama crap all of the time.  Many will only watch Fox News for their misinformation with the obvious results.

              2. Sab Oh profile image61
                Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                "Save that stuff for the south 40 where it might do some good."

                Did you just throw an insult at a large portion of our nation? Are you that far gone with the partisan fervor?

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  You apparently are unfamiliar with the term South 40.  Either that or your zeal to attack someone caused your error.

                  I'd belive either one TK.

                2. srwnson profile image61
                  srwnsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  That's the way I took it...I used to hear it all the time when I was trucking, because of my accent and the fact I'm from New Orleans. People assumed I was racist. I grew up in a poor neighborhood played with african american kids. We are not all racists.

                  1. Sab Oh profile image61
                    Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    And you should not have to put up with being called one.

              3. Sab Oh profile image61
                Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  7. tony0724 profile image60
    tony0724posted 6 years ago

    your democracy in action Doug.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

    1. Doug Hughes profile image61
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      OK.. I admit a black man outside a polling place not threateniong anyone is scarey. Try this.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOhhjXPfXrg

      1. Sab Oh profile image61
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Oh, is that what the sticks were for? For not threatening anyone? How much of a hypocrite can one person be?

        1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
          Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I just think it is a case of a person who lacks integrity.

          1. Sab Oh profile image61
            Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Clearly.

  8. Arthur Fontes profile image88
    Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago

    Doug Hughes wrote:
    Actually, I think the shoe-throw guy should be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor


    It is OK when Doug Hughes applauds violence.

    Right Doug!

    It is alright for you to call peoople derogatory names.

    Isn't it Doug.


    HYPCRT

    1. Doug Hughes profile image61
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The Shoe-thrower knew that if some security nut didn't shoot him, he might spend years behind bars. As an Iraqi patriot, he wanted to make a statement that was worth the risk. This is called civil disobedience, See Therau on the subject.

      The spitter knew that at most, he was risking a few hours detention and a rebuke from a magistrate for his assault.

      Yeah, I will buy the show-thrower a cup of tea or a new pair of shoes.

  9. 0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    By the way, Ron,
    exactly what or what scenario or what teaching did you "evolve" from?

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      One very sililar to yours.  I blindly accepted it until about the age of 12.  Maybe there's hope for you yet, assuming you live longer than Methuselah did.

  10. 0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    But they're all born with a conscience, yes or no?

    With the exception of those who're born with severe mental abnormalities, etc...

    1. creepy profile image60
      creepyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      humans   yes

      but a conscience can be developmentally challenged

      as you may have noticed

  11. 0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    or deliberately changed/subdued?

    1. creepy profile image60
      creepyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      whatever the result is the same

  12. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    I'm not a member of the Tea Party, although I do agree with some of their points. HOWEVER, these actions were abhorent!! I think they stained the whole Tea Party image to those who might have previously been interested in the cause. It's sad that a few bad apples always have to mess everything up!

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Tea stains?

    2. wyanjen profile image89
      wyanjenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I'm not on board with the tea baggers. Nothing they do is productive.

      Look into the coffee party instead...

      smile

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It's getting out of hand with these beverage-inspired political parties.

        I'm gonna start the

        Half-caf, vanilla, mocha latte extra foam party.

        1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
          Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I'd join that...

          1. PrettyPanther profile image86
            PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I don't know...why are we compromising already with HALF-caf? 

            I say let's stand on principle and drop the "half."  I'm on board with the extra foam, though.

            1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
              Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              With chocolate sprinkles?

            2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
              Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              We'll lose the Mormons if we go full caf.  They're very influential out here.

            3. wyanjen profile image89
              wyanjenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Extra foam makes me gassy.
              How's about we add a splash of Bailey's? Or Kahlua...

              1. PrettyPanther profile image86
                PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, this party embraces all flavors.

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  kumbaya will be our anthem

          2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            OK, what are we pissed-off about? can't have a movement without being pissed.

            1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
              Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              People who do not accept election results and do anything to discredit anyone remotely connected to the winner?

              1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                That's a good start.

              2. Sab Oh profile image61
                Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                "People who do not accept election results "

                The cause and cure for that ailment is the same for both sides.

                1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                  Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  No,only for the losers.

            2. rebekahELLE profile image91
              rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              lol  coffe au lait with chocolate sprinkles

  13. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    Yeah, Ron, and those tea stains are hard to remove!

  14. 0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    Do you two believe and adopt every philosophy or scientific definition just because it's been coined by someone else?

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No, that would make us Christians.

  15. Ohma profile image79
    Ohmaposted 6 years ago

    Dictionary: mam·mal   (măm'əl)   

    Home > Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary
    n.
    Any of various warm-blooded vertebrate animals of the class Mammalia, including humans, characterized by a covering of hair on the skin and, in the female, milk-producing mammary glands for nourishing the young.

    1. srwnson profile image61
      srwnsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Oh I don't know why but I'm all a tingle.

      1. 0
        Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I gotta crack up at that one!
        lol


        Was it the hairy skin or the milk-producing glands???

    2. Randy Godwin profile image93
      Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, I usually depend on knowledgeable sources for my info, not fundies.

  16. 0
    Madame Xposted 6 years ago

    NO ONE said the N word or made any racist remarks.

    Take a look at this video that someone took who was there.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SCs6pSE … r_embedded

    These are our fellow countrymen who are exercising their right to protest peaceably against actions of their government that they disagree with. To vilify them is unconscionable.

    What's indefensible is spreading this propaganda.

    1. Doug Hughes profile image61
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I  did not quote some obscure web site with an unnamed witness.

      The article was from CNN. Video can prove what DID happen but it can't prove what did NOT happen. It could have edited out the spitting or simple been taken before or after the incident.

      I'm amazed that you think anyone silly enough to think that video proves anything. Your fellow teabaggers are brown shirt nazis working on intimidating the governemnt of this country. Judging from the vote the next day  it didn't work.

      1. 0
        Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        pure crap - just like all your other posts

      2. Arthur Fontes profile image88
        Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this



        You are very good at baiting people to get an angry response.


        Very good!

        One could even say you were a Master Baiter

        1. 0
          Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          HAHAHAHAHA
          lol lol lol

          1. 0
            Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            LOL
            That IS cause for a chuckle!
            big_smile

  17. Ohma profile image79
    Ohmaposted 6 years ago

    http://www.deafadvocacy.org/blog/uploaded_images/blinders-712826.jpg

  18. Doug Hughes profile image61
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    Interesting! ALL you cn do is call names when I point out that the incident reported by CNN and confirmed by THREE members of Congress who were THERE has mora authority than the assurance of MadamX that it didn't happen - when she wasn't there!  Oh, and yess, I pointed out that the video might as well be Lady Gaga for all the value it has.

    And the quality of response from you three is name calling and snickers because you are so totally wrong - defending the indefensable - and you don't want people to notice what kind of vermin you are associating yourselves with.

    You are known by the company you keep. Considering the source, your insults are a badge of honor.

    1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
      Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this





      Insults?


      You are not worthy.

      Ridicule.

      Maybe.

    2. 0
      Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Kind of like when you call women you don't know "sugar" smile

  19. Doug Hughes profile image61
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    And you can't touch the original topic because you support the racist hmophobes who SPAT on our Congressmen.

  20. 0
    Madame Xposted 6 years ago

    If it happened at all

    1. Doug Hughes profile image61
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It happend, sugar. And it doesn't look pretty. CNN doesn't make stuff up - they are very strict about multiple sources and in this case there are THREE memebers of congress who back up the story.

      1. 0
        Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Can't support his so-called stance with facts so resorts to 1950's forms of condescension toward women. This post is designed to enrage and stab.

        To hurt.

        Nothing more.

  21. Arthur Fontes profile image88
    Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago

    I just checked youtube  not one video.

    Not one.

    All those people with all those cell phones.

    No video?

    Not one.

    1. 0
      Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this
      1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
        Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I knew there would be video.  I also saw many other people with their cell phones out recording.

        All I could hear was "Kill the Bill"

        1. 0
          Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Maybe if you listen to it over and over you'll hear the "N" word . . . smile

          1. 0
            Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I think you can only hear it if you play it backwards at 33RPM! wink

  22. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago

    It ain't on the youtube?  Gollllllllllly Gomer, I guess it didn't happen then.

    1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
      Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I do not know if it happened or not. 

      Anyone who would do this is a disgusting individual IMO.

      It is strange that no one pulled out a cell phone.

      Maybe there is video that has not surfaced.

      Video would help though wouldn't it?

      Spitting on someone is a felony assault isn't it?

      The person or persons should be brought to justice.

      If it happened?

      Doesn't the government film crowds of protesters to identify potential terrorists?

      I have seen videos of this.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        We never knew the truth before video cell phones?

        Credible witnesses gave eyewitness accounts.

        Video - yes video- showed Republican congressmen enciting the teabaggers.

        Audio recording captured another Republican shouting out "baby killer" at, of all people a pro-life Democratic congressman.

        So we're left with a choice of believing eyewitnesses with corroboration or people who think FOXNEWS is a legitimate source of facts.

        hmmmmmmmmmmmm,

        gosh, that there's a head scratcher.

        1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
          Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          It is possible that there were plants there to create disruption.

          A picture would be helpful.

          1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Arthur, your pitiful attempted denials don't become you.

      2. Ralph Deeds profile image68
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        If you knew it happened, may we assume you would condemn it? I hope so.

        1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
          Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I would condemn anyone who would commit acts like this.

          1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Thanks. I assumed you would. Not sure about some of your associates in HubPages.

            1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
              Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I only consider people by one race the human race.

              I support women's rights.

              I support gay rights.

              I oppose abortion but would never impose my will on another.

  23. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago

    http://www.bifuteki.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/plantsvszombies.jpeg

    Found one!

    I guess you were right.

    1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
      Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I told you. smile

    2. Doug Hughes profile image61
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Your research skills are beyond compare, Ron.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It explains a lot doesn't it wink

  24. Doug Hughes profile image61
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    ".....he was spat on by one protestor who was arrested by U.S. Capitol Police. Cleaver declined to press charges against the man, the statement said."

    These are the CORE of the Tea Party Movement. Hateful bigots, supported by liears - desparate to make excuses. When the excuses are too feeble, they attack me.

    1. 0
      Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      So your report says one protester was arrested... first off, he wasn't arrested, he was detained remember "no charges were filed".

      But from that "one protester" who wasn't identified as belonging to any one group, or even identified by name you are able to conclude that a whole group of people are bigots!

      Sounds to me like you're the owner of the very hate you claim to despise!

    2. Arthur Fontes profile image88
      Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this




      No one is attacking you it is just that you do not play well with others.

      1. 0
        Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        See above post.

    3. TMMason profile image74
      TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Again. I see no proof of these events occuring. not one tape.... none. I find it impossible to think all these things would have happened and none of them were caught on tape.

      Impossible!

      But we all know the leftist progressives and dems lie... they have over and over. Why should they tell the truth now.

      1. 0
        Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        They lie because they have nothing else.

        This is their last hurrah.

  25. Arthur Fontes profile image88
    Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago
    1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Assault charges should be filed. I doubt that the SEIU condones such "goon" activities.

      1. 0
        Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Why would you doubt it? Because the left is above such tactics? They haven't shown themselves to be, Ralph.

      2. Sab Oh profile image61
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        " I doubt that the SEIU condones such "goon" activities."


        HAHHAHAAHAAhahahahahaahHAHAHAAHAhahaaaaaa!

    2. 0
      Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You're surprised?
      hmm

  26. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/201003 … tico/34907

    I suppose this latest report of Right-wing terorism will have it's deniers as well.

    If'n it ain't on the you-tube, it did'n happen!

    1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
      Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Anyone who is making threatening calls or trying to intimidate Congressmen should be prosecuted.

      That means Rahm (Deadfish) Emanuel as well...

    2. 0
      Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If they're right wing they're not terrorists. The very far right is anarchy, no government - the very far left is totalitarianism.

      Only those who want to control others need to resort to those tactics. If someone, or a group, is doing this kind of thing and they are calling themselves "republicans" or "conservatives" it is a misnomer. Those who are genuinely on the right find these acts abhorrent.

      I know I'm going to get all sorts of flak for this post but I don't mean it as simply as it comes across smile

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        If they're Right-wing they're not terrorists?

        Maybe the funniest thing posted all day lol

        1. 0
          Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          . . . sigh . . .

          try reading it again Ron - I just know you can connect the dots if you really try

          oh, wait, you don't know anything about the different forms of government

          nevermind

    3. TMMason profile image74
      TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I heard the tape of the call. Did not hear a death threat, but did hear the woman explain to him alot of people are wishing him ill. That is not a death threat, simply a fact being stated.

      And anyone can call their rep or senator, or president a piece of shit. It is legal to call someone a peice of shit and to state facts.

      No. I do not condone threats or violence, but everything spoken is not a threat.

  27. TMMason profile image74
    TMMasonposted 6 years ago

    I simply do not believe the N word was used. You cannot convince me that of all the tape and film of that day, some evidence would not have been caught on those records.

    And yes. I do believe the dems would group up and play the race card. I do believe they, the dems and progressives, would say it happened regardless of if it did. Simply to assassinate the charactor of those protesting the Health Care bill.

    That is their M.O. They have been doing it since McCarthy and will continue to do it. If it works. Why change it.

  28. TMMason profile image74
    TMMasonposted 6 years ago

    You know for a bunch of you all claiming not to hate, and being holier than thou. You sure throw that derogatory term, "teabaggers", around an awfully lot.

    Guess it just shows your true intent in the discussions. Talk about trying to incite someone to violence.

    1. Sab Oh profile image61
      Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Oh, it's ok if they're liberals. Liberals always 'mean well' so they can do or say anything...

      1. AdsenseStrategies profile image73
        AdsenseStrategiesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        We're not saying that "teabaggers" and the N word are on a par here, are we

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
          Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Of course we are.  Teabaggers suffered centuries of oppression and violence before Sarah Palin set them free.  It's in the Texas history books!

        2. TMMason profile image74
          TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Yes I am equating them.

          1. AdsenseStrategies profile image73
            AdsenseStrategiesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            No problem. I am willing to consider any statement backed up by a cogent argument. So, let's have it

    2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      They named themselves, I didn't name them.

      1. TMMason profile image74
        TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Their name is not teabaggers. That is a lefty democrat progressive slur.

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
          Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Lefty-Democrat should be hyphenated.

          1. Doug Hughes profile image61
            Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Don't you dare hypehate me - I'm not that kind of guy.

      2. 0
        Madame Xposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        the liberal media named them that

        but of course, they're above name calling . . .

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
          Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Who in the "liberal media" named them that?

          1. AdsenseStrategies profile image73
            AdsenseStrategiesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            That would be the liberal media that called the 2000 election for Bush, I guess

            1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
              Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Ahhh, the good old days.

              1. AdsenseStrategies profile image73
                AdsenseStrategiesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                The liberal media who didn't bother to vet the facts on Iraq leading up to the war.

                1. TMMason profile image74
                  TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  isn't that the same lefty media that took hundreds of thousands from Sadam to not report the atrocities he committed.... who was that again.... C....N....? IDK?

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Are you actually sneakorocksolid?

                  2. AdsenseStrategies profile image73
                    AdsenseStrategiesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I am not defending CNN trust me. That makes them a-holes, but I am not sure how you get to "liberal" from this little piece of history... I think you are mixing up the words "liberal" and "bad" (like, I think this milk has gone liberal... see, doesn't work for EVERY CASE)

                2. Uninvited Writer profile image84
                  Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  No...that was the president...

        2. Ralph Deeds profile image68
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Some of the Tea Partiers, in their naivete, referred to themselves as Tea Baggers. I don't pretend to know who was the first to use the term. I recall Ron Reagan joking about it on one of the CNBC talk shows. He would know, I assume.

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            More "plants" probably.

          2. TMMason profile image74
            TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Garroffolo, the comedian is who attached that name to the tea partiers.

          3. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            It should be noted that the term “teabagger” appears on Oxford’s list because of the usage cited on that list, not because of any other meaning. Citations for the political sense were found in a number of legitimate sources throughout the year. As a reference to members of the currently active Tea Party, the word has been used in speech and print by both liberals and conservatives. In this context, the term “teabagger” is a reasonably conceived informal name for an affiliate of the Tea Party, and as a word in the news, it earned a mention for the year 2009. Having deliberated carefully over the word-usage evidence, Oxford’s lexicographers are confident in their judgment that “teabagger” the political term stands distinctly apart from “teabagger” the vulgar term.

            http://www.mediaite.com/tag/teabagger/

        3. Doug Hughes profile image61
          Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Ron - and other perverts (no offense meant) will appreciate this.

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/0 … 85058.html

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Funny, perverted, AND American.

            You've hit the trifecta my friend.

  29. Doug Hughes profile image61
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    OK. Let me get this straight. You want to convince an impartial observer that thre US Congressmen conspired to discredit the Tea Party 'patriots'. The Capitol Police were in on the plot, because they heard and/or made an arrest. And we can believe this because thegroup has a history of such good manners.

    Someone posted the link to the story today. The Tea Party 'patriots' posted the incorrect address for a member of the US House of Representatives who voted fot HCR, inviting people to 'stop by'. Someone did and cut the tank to his propane which fortunately did not result in a fire. (The address was to the brother of the US Congressman.)

    The defense that if someone gets killed as a result of posting addresses with the veiled suggestion of violence, it's not their fault is bull. The Tea Party Movement at its core is a bunch of thugs who will incite violence when they strike out at the polls.

    1. TMMason profile image74
      TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      One the cut gas line was a grill on the back porch, not the houses main.
      And no I do not condone it.

      2  there were no arrests in Wa. for any of the incidents they claimed happened. NO ARRESTS. And the police did not hear anyone say anything or spit on anyone. no witnesses except the accusser and another dem congressman

      3  I do believe the dems would stoop so low as to create this story to annahilate the charactor of the tea partiers.

      And I have yet to see the tea partiers go anywhere near as extreme as the leftists and SEIU and the abortion folks.

      Now if you can believe those things happened in WA. over the weekend, yet the teapartiers were clever and lucky enough to get it done without getting it caught on film or tape, then feel free.

      I cannot believe all those things happened and none of them were caught on tape or film. It is an impossibility. And I am speaking here of the event alleged to have happened at the rally in Wa.

      As far as a brick thru the window. Who threw it? no one knows. Could have easily been a lefty.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "The abortion folks." I seem to recall that one of the anti-abortion folks murdered an abortion doctor in his church. And a whackjob who was having a hard time with IRS flew his plane into an IRS office building. Not to mention Tim McVeigh, former militia man who blew up the federal government office building in Oklahoma City.

        1. TMMason profile image74
          TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          What makes you assume I am speaking of the lefty abortion fanatics when I say abortion folks?

          lol.... stop assuming things ralph.

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Yes, there must be thousands of them lining up in protest over the scarcity of abortions.

            1. TMMason profile image74
              TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You talk about restricting abortion in this country and all the freaks come out in support of that murderous procedure.

              That is a fact.

              Speak of restricting it in any way and the streets will be mobbed with femi-nazis and leftists from all over. Screaming about their right to murder the unborn.

              1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                No, that is your opinion.  The law of the land says otherwise.

                1. TMMason profile image74
                  TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  What are you talking about?

                  It is a fact that abortion fanatics take to the street if you speak of restricting it.

                  That is a fact ron. lolololol

                  And abortions in this country are far from scarce.

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    You expressed the OPINION that abortion is murder.

                    You are wrong.

      2. Doug Hughes profile image61
        Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Mason - Skip the Fred Astaire routine and look at the one uncontested FACT that makes the teabaggers thugs.

        They published the address (they thought) of a Congressman with the invitation that people 'stop by'. In the heat of the political moment, can you believe they were not inciting violence?

        The conspiracy theory won't hold up. I don't know who did the deed, but I know who invited the violence.

        1. TMMason profile image74
          TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          No.

          I do not believe posting public info, like your congressman's address, (which is what the poster thought it was), and telling people to stop by and see him, (as is their right), is inciting violence.

          Big leap from one to the other. And to continuously use that term shows your true nature to all.

  30. Uninvited Writer profile image84
    Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago

    Funny how history is being rewritten...

  31. Uninvited Writer profile image84
    Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago

    Most people who protest are for the choice of others. Why are those who are so against government controls the ones who want more laws to control things they disagree with?

  32. livelonger profile image90
    livelongerposted 6 years ago

    Why is it that the most prominent anti-abortionists here seem to be men and post-menopausal women?

    I suppose freedoms should only be restricted when they're other people's freedoms.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I believe one is a post-menopausal man.

      1. Uninvited Writer profile image84
        Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        lol or going through it now...

        1. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Explains the hot flashes.

    2. Uninvited Writer profile image84
      Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Sounds like it smile

  33. TMMason profile image74
    TMMasonposted 6 years ago

    Am I speaking to fast for you all?

    You seem to be having trouble keeping the focus of the discussion. And call me whatever names you want, it is the way you liberals roll. I am used to it.

    Can't stand your ground.... name call.

    Unless your one of the people who actually believe in Life UW, then you protest against murdering babies.

    No one has the right to commit murder. And we damn sure do not have to condone a choice to kill babies.

    1. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      We don't consider abortion the murder of babies.

      (Take as much time as you need to digest this.)

      1. Sab Oh profile image61
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        That doesn't mean it's not. Calling it whatever soothes your conscience doesn't change what it is.

        1. 0
          china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Like saying that China is 'not Communist' calling things what you want them to be never works does it.  A foetus is not a baby and so concsience does not come into it.

    2. Uninvited Writer profile image84
      Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Of course, that is so different than you and your friends who say "liberal this" and "liberal that" whenever anyone disagrees with you.

    3. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Do you condone masturbation? Maybe we should make that illegal, too.

      1. TMMason profile image74
        TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        you know I remember having intelligent conversations with you live,... what happened?

        You throw up junk like masterbation and expect to be taken serious? So sad.

        1. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Why?

          - masturbation results in the death of seeds that could eventually develop into human lives
          - it's proscribed in the Bible (as "onanism"), which Christians pledge (some) obedience to

          I'm guessing the fact that men would be thrown in jail might have something to do with the fact that you find the idea ridiculous.

          1. TMMason profile image74
            TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            An abortion is the ending of a human life. We all know, even the seventh grade biology teachers, that life begins at conception.

            Big difference.

            And women masterbate too.  this has nothing to do with who would be in jail. it has to do with killing a viable human being because they are an inconveinance.

            1. livelonger profile image90
              livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              When life begins is not a settled matter, and if you were taught that it starts at conception, then you were probably homeschooled.

              Science hasn't even decided if a virus is considered alive or not. Judaism (my religion) does not consider a baby alive until it has been born.

              Female masturbation does not result in the "spilling of seed." But I suppose you can lock up all women who have a period, you know, with that wasted ovum and everything.

              In your worldview, I suppose the concept of human liberty takes a backseat to our primary purpose: being relentless baby-making machines.

              1. TMMason profile image74
                TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, life begins at conception liv.

                lolol You guys are funny. lolololol

                Well thats enough poking the critters in the cage for me tonight. lololol

                now you all be sure to stay in the shallow end...

                nite.

              2. Sab Oh profile image61
                Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                "When life begins is not a settled matter"

                You could err on the side of life or you could err on the side of someone's convenience.

                1. 0
                  china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Pay attention !   the point is that a foetus is not formed into a living creature yet - not hard to grasp if you try.

            2. AEvans profile image71
              AEvansposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I am not for abortion I hope that doesn't make me a bad human being. sad

              I am also against name calling, racism and hate.

          2. Ralph Deeds profile image68
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Check my hub entitled "Just Started Masturbatin'" for a treatise on the subject and a couple of quite funny videos.

            1. Sab Oh profile image61
              Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You can type with one hand?

              1. 0
                Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Hahahaha that was a good retort to him;  he was asking for that one!

    4. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No one has the right to commit murder.

      Has nothing to do with abortion, but that statement is correct.

      You mistakenly equate the two, but you are confused.

  34. TMMason profile image74
    TMMasonposted 6 years ago

    you may not, livel.... but many of us do.

  35. The Dix View profile image61
    The Dix Viewposted 6 years ago

    The part that gets me is these guys are protesting because they believe no one should impose on their rights, in this case their rights not to have insurance I guess.  So if their rights are so important, why arent everyone elses?

    1. Ohma profile image79
      Ohmaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The right for you to want something and the right of the Government to impose your wants on me are not the same thing.

      1. AdsenseStrategies profile image73
        AdsenseStrategiesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I bet you're not like your picture in real life are you. I bet you're some crotchety old man with a half-burned cigarette hangin' out his mouth, huddled in his rockin' chair... wink
        (I know I'm right)

        1. Ohma profile image79
          Ohmaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Actually you are wrong. I am none of these things.

          1. AdsenseStrategies profile image73
            AdsenseStrategiesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            A young, lithe teenage boy?

            1. Ohma profile image79
              Ohmaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Wrong again but I am not surprised.

            2. AEvans profile image71
              AEvansposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You are such a nut haven't you read her profile? Naughty, lololo She is a good person and seems to me you are being flirty! big_smile

              1. Ohma profile image79
                Ohmaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Thank-You AE.

                1. AdsenseStrategies profile image73
                  AdsenseStrategiesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  No I didn't read her profile, until now....

                  I just assumed everyone was actually how they looked in their profile picture (Audrey)... I really do have pointy things growing out of my head, for example...

                  1. AdsenseStrategies profile image73
                    AdsenseStrategiesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    OK, so it's not Audrey Hepburn... a guy can make a mistake roll

                  2. AEvans profile image71
                    AEvansposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    You are so funny!!! lololo big_smile I love the pointy things coming out of your head it makes you look soooooo masculine!!!! grrrrrr lolololo !! you are the man!!! hehehehhehe big_smile  Shall we gallop of together my knight in pointy armor? big_smile

      2. The Dix View profile image61
        The Dix Viewposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I understand how yucan demostrate against thegovernment, but how does that excuse the name calling and spitting onother people?  Also if you cherish Democracy, doesn't that imply majorith rule?  Isn't that why we have elections?  And if so, then if a politian wins an election based in part on fulfilling a promise, how do you spit on them for fulfilling that promiose to those who elected him democratically?  I don't see how youget it both ways.

        1. Ohma profile image79
          Ohmaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          It does not excuse the name calling and other ugly things I was only replying to your post not The OP

  36. arthriticknee profile image88
    arthritickneeposted 6 years ago

    I'm afraid I am unable to come down to your level.

    I have huge moral issues with anyone who says a homosexual is asking to be abused and spat on in the street because they do not hide their sexual orientation.

    Your sad attempts at defending these actions are themselves indefensable

    1. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      There's no point. The woman is tortured by the fact that the Christian doctrine she purports to follow to the letter spells out an eternity in hell for her transgression of divorce and remarriage.

      She's desperately trying to point out the sins of gay people (since she doesn't know any) in order to "distract" Jesus so he'll look kinder on the fact she's living, by Christian doctrine, in a state of unrepentant sin.

      She knows she's condemned but is basically pleading with the judge at this point.

  37. 0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    That's not a moral issue.  It's an immoral issue.
    Sawwweeee to bust your bubble.

    1. AEvans profile image71
      AEvansposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Nobody should be spat on regardless of who they are, being a Christian remember you have to always love the man, but you can hate the sin. A person should never be taunted, belittled or destroyed. Although I realize you believe it is immoral remember forgiveness is the key to life. smile

      1. 0
        Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Umm...

        I never "taunt" anyone for things they can help.
        Mr. Frank can talk well if he wants to.  He has, after all, been touted as being so very "eloquent" by the libs. 
        roll

        AND he CAN help where he sticks his appendages!

        So he's inexcusable.

        As far as forgiveness?..........a person has to admit they're doing something wrong before they can accept the forgiveness that's always there available to them.
        Jesus Himself wasn't tolerant of the immoral crap like Barney's pulling.  He called people things like fools and referred to sin in some very descriptive terms.
        I personally wouldn't spit on anyone, no.   Unless I was driven to it by personal attacks on me, and I usually have a lotta patience, so it's hard to "drive" me to doing anything.

        ...When people like Frank go messing with MY country, especially the social atmosphere that influences MY grandchildren and the other children in this nation, then I WILL speak out about it just as strongly as the opposition flashes it in this nations face and tries to shove it down our throats.   And no, I don't care if it IS his country too!  Just because someone lays claim to citizenship doesn't mean they can defy the laws of God and man and twist the Constitution around to suit their hogwash.

    2. Doug Hughes profile image61
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Benda - I think almost eveeryone will defend your right not to engage in a lesbian affair. No one (as far as I know) has suggested you are reqired even to try it.. (Not a pretty mental picture)

      If you were a guy, I would not suggest you engage in a gay (homosexual, not jolly) affair UNLESS you were inclined to do so.  You are not getting any resistance for your beliefs for your own life.

      The problem - and this is hard for you, I know - is that other people resent your attemts to impose your morality on THEM. Some of us are accustomed to FREEDOM, and nowhere is it more important than in our relationships.  So do pursue yours, as you see fit.

      And  keep your long nose out of mine.

    3. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Kind of like getting a divorce and remarrying? And continuing to live in that sham of a remarriage?

  38. Randy Godwin profile image93
    Randy Godwinposted 6 years ago

    Can you imagine being reared amongst hordes of these type of moralizers?  And the women are the worst.  The malicious gossip they spread through small communities is much worse than the sins they imagine taking place in their little hamlets.

    Many were once the wildest girls in town, but now to hear them tell it, they were pure as the driven snow.  Like the line in the old western movie goes, "the only thing worse than a lady turned whore, is a whore turned lady

    Most of the Christians I know see sin everywhere but in themselves.  Sound familiar?

  39. Ralph Deeds profile image68
    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago

    U.S. Rep. Stupak, other Dems get threats over health care reform vote

    By EMILY WAGSTER PETTUS
    ASSOCIATED PRESS

       
    Editor's note: The audio of voice mail recordings left for U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak contains profanity that some may find offensive. The audio is under "related materials."

    U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan is among the Democratic lawmakers who have been threatened after voting for a federal health care bill.

    Stupak, a former state trooper from Menominee, has received phone messages with profanity, his office confirmed today.

    “I hope you bleed ... (get) cancer and die,” one male caller told the Catholic congressman between curses.

    In another message, a female caller said, "There are millions of people across the country who wish you ill.”

    Stupak received a faxed letter with a drawing of a noose. The note says, "All Baby Killers come to unseemly ends Either by the hand of man or by the Hand of God."

    Another note to Stupak includes a racial slur about President Barack Obama.
    FBI investigates threats

    Bricks have been hurled through Democrats’ windows, a propane line was cut at the home of a congressman’s brother and lawmakers who voted for the bill have received obscenity-laced phone threats in the days before and after passage of the sweeping legislation.

    The FBI is investigating the vandalism and threats, which include the shattering of windows at four Democratic offices in New York, Arizona and Kansas. At least 10 members of Congress have reported some sort of threat, though no arrests have been made.

    The brick tossed through the window of a county Democratic Party office in Rochester, N.Y., over the weekend had a note attached that said: “Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice,” roughly quoting 1964 Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater.

    A New York congresswoman whose window was smashed with a brick accused the Republican leadership of failing to denounce attacks against lawmakers who supported the legislation. The vandalism was at Democratic Rep. Louise Slaughter’s district office in Niagara Falls early Friday, two days before the House passed the health care overhaul bill.

    Comment: Can we all agree I hope that things are getting out of hand?


    http://www.freep.com/article/20100324/N … tories_8pm

    1. 0
      Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Looks like the loons on the left are equally violent!

      http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/25/ … l?hpt=Sbin

      1. livelonger profile image90
        livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Well, the vast majority of threats and violent acts have been happening against Democrats, which is unsurprising.

        Why would someone threaten a Republican after the bill had passed? Something makes me think this will end up being exposed as an inside job (like the "backwards B" victim in Pennsylvania before the 2008 election).

        1. 0
          Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Oh but the left would NEVER resort to such tactics to demonize say the Tea Party! No Never! roll

  40. livelonger profile image90
    livelongerposted 6 years ago

    ...says the woman who openly flaunts her defiance of Christ's commandments, and purports to have repented to God's satisfaction.

    1. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I'm quite interesting to you, aren't I?
      Wonder why.

      1. livelonger profile image90
        livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Hypocritical self-righteousness is something that always bothers me.

        Homosexuality is a particular fascination for you. Wonder why.

  41. 0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    P.S.

    For you, Doug----

    I will stick "my long nose" into politics anytime I choose.
    But I know a few places it won't go.  The places you're advocating.

  42. Padrino profile image60
    Padrinoposted 6 years ago

    Most political terrorists in this country have been left leaning, its surprising to see liberals deny the heritage of terrorism that runs throughout their history.

    1. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No denial. In the 60s and 70s, most of the terrorists were left-leaning.

      In the past decade, though, (well, I'd imagine at least since Oklahoma City) the tables have turned and most of the domestic terrorism threats have been at the hands of right-wingers.

      1. Padrino profile image60
        Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Really? Would you care to tell me what terrorist acts have occurred?

        1. livelonger profile image90
          livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          - Oklahoma City (right-wing)
          - Atlanta Olympics (right-wing)
          - Anthrax in the mail (right-wing)
          - Holocaust Museum shooting (right-wing)
          - IRS building plane crash (right-wing)

          1. 0
            Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I know for a fact that the IRS plane cras was NOT a right wing extremeist. I'll have to check some of the others.

          2. TMMason profile image74
            TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Lets get this straight....

            NAZIs are left.

            KKK is left.

            1. livelonger profile image90
              livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              And, let me guess, black is white, up is down, and the moon is really made of green cheese.

      2. 0
        Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yes the lefty radicals have changed their tactics, now they're in the White House!

  43. Padrino profile image60
    Padrinoposted 6 years ago

    - Oklahoma City (right-wing)***Yes
    - Atlanta Olympics (right-wing)***Yes
    - Anthrax in the mail (right-wing)***No
    - Holocaust Museum shooting (right-wing)***No
    - IRS building plane crash (right-wing)***No

    Anthrax case was done by by Islamic terrorists, while considered right wing they represent a different right wing.

    The actor in this case had a bone to pick with government in general and the Bush Administration, hardly a right winger.

    Joe Stack flew his plane into the IRS building purely for personal reasons, however, his manifesto read like the ramblings of a diseased mind his anger was directed at Bush!

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Not all the crazy Tea Baggers are "right wing" depending on how you define it. However, the Tea Party movement is providing a focal point and outlet for a variety of ordinary dissatisfied citizens sprinkled with more than its share of whackjobs and members of anti-Semitic, anti-gay, anti-government, anti-tax, anti-world government conspiracy groups, etc.

      1. Padrino profile image60
        Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You are demonizing the Tea Party people for political reasons, a tactic used by the left constantly. Most people are aware that they are no more violent than the girl scouts, but that knowledge just doesn't play well for the lefties.

        1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          True, I'm not fond of the Tea Party. How about you? My comment about the Tea Party was probably unduly kind.

    2. livelonger profile image90
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      This is really amusing, and tells me how some right-wingers have constructed an alternate reality to explain things to themselves.

      Anthrax: please Google "Bruce Ivins."

      Holocaust Museum: white supremacist. I'll be polite here and say that while most right-wingers aren't white supremacists, most white supremacists are definitely right-wing.

      Joe Stack: tellingly, most of his defense has come from right-wingers, not left-wingers.

      1. TMMason profile image74
        TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The american NAZI movement is as left as the Germans were.

        hahahahahaha

        And the KKK is a hostorical fact of the democrat party. ie; See Dixiecrats.

      2. Padrino profile image60
        Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Ivins allegedly involved! Allegedly means something.

      3. TMMason profile image74
        TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        And Liv... do you really believe that all racists are white?

  44. Padrino profile image60
    Padrinoposted 6 years ago

    Stack and Brunn were not right wing, we will just have to agree to disagree.

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Brunn:

      In 1981 Von Brunn attempted to place the treasonous Federal Reserve Board of Governors under legal, non-violent, citizens arrest. He was tried in a Washington, D.C. Superior Court; convicted by a Negro jury, Jew/Negro attorneys, and sentenced to prison for eleven years by a Jew judge. A Jew/Negro/White Court of Appeals denied his appeal.

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/1 … 14006.html

      Brunn is a White Supremicist, Anti-Semitic, Birther

      Among the myriad of disturbing qualities of James Von Brunn, the 88-year-old man who shot and killed a security officer inside the Holocaust Museum on Wednesday, is his apparent belief that Barack Obama is not a citizen of the United States and therefore has no right to the presidency.

      The reason it sticks out is that, even among Von Brunn's other characteristics -- including heavy streaks of anti-Semitism, disdain for the federal government, and threads of white supremacy -- being a "birther" has a modicum of political credibility.

      Certainly, the vast majority of people who are skeptical of Obama's birth in the state of Hawaii tend to be harmless conspiracy theorists. And there has been no suggestion that Von Brunn's distrust of the president's citizenship solely drove him to this violent act.

      "In addition to being a birther," said Abraham Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League, "he also believed that Hitler didn't kill enough Jews. He had a history of anti-Semitic, hateful views."

      Indeed a "birther" mindset is more a symptom of extremism than a cause.

  45. Ralph Deeds profile image68
    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago

    Seems to me that Scott Roeder, killer of Dr. Tiller in church in Topeka qualifies as a right-winger.

    1. Padrino profile image60
      Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Probably was but that wasn't terrorism it was murder.

      1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I'm not interested in quibbling about the difference between murder and terrorism. It could be argued that it was terrorism by murder. It's purpose was clearly designed to terrorize abortion doctors. There are exceptions but most liberals aren't involved in the anti-abortion movement.

        1. TMMason profile image74
          TMMasonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Big big difference between murder and terrorism ralph.

      2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        No, it fits the very definition of terrorism.  You don't have to kill hundreds with a suicide bomb to commit an act of terrorism.  The murder was perpetrated to intimidate other doctors - terrorism.

        1. Padrino profile image60
          Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          How do you know what his intent was? Did he have a history of bombing abortion clinics? Had he committed any crime before this one?

          You don't know his intent unless he stated what it was and I haven't seen anything about that. If you have some tangible proof of what he intended please share it.

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            So you're view is that it was a random act?  Pure coincidence that it was a victim who performed abortions?

            A single act of terrorism is still terrorism.  His history is irrelevant.

            1. PrettyPanther profile image86
              PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I don't believe that is truly his view.  He knows good and well it was terrorism but is perfectly comfortable arguing that it isn't for the sake of his ideology.

              1. Padrino profile image60
                Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                If I had some proof that he intended to cause fear in abortion Dr.s then I would say it was terrorism. The prosecutor will not seek to prove that he was a terrorist.

              2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                You are wise to the ways of ideologues.

                Are you a plant? smile

                1. Padrino profile image60
                  Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Interesting comment. I am always open to the possibility that I may be wrong about something, but after reading some of your comments I would say you are not.

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Ok, let's scan up a bit and see....

                    No.........hmm mm.......... not here........

                    I'll stick with my original post.

            2. Padrino profile image60
              Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              No, I don't think it was a coincidence. I think he meant to kill Tiller, and? I think most murderers mean to kill their victims, what exactly is the point you are trying to make? You still have no idea what his intent was other than to kill Tiller.

  46. Padrino profile image60
    Padrinoposted 6 years ago

    I'm not sure but I think Eric Rudolph's actions would constitute terrorism, he clearly targeted abortion clinics and meant to instill fear to get what he wanted.

    Tillers killer just targeted tiller.

    Sorry if I sound like Dr. Seuss.

  47. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago

    • In April 1996, a 38-year-old Scott Roeder — thought to be the same man — was arrested in Topeka, Kans., after Shawnee County police stopped him for not having a proper license plate. Officers said they found bomb-making supplies in the car: ammunition, a blasting cap, a fuse cord, a 1-lb. can of gunpowder and two 9-volt batteries.

    • At that time, police said Roeder was part of the antigovernment Freemen group, which engaged in a three-month standoff with the FBI from a remote Montana farmhouse in 1996.

    • Roeder was sentenced to 24 months of probation. The conviction was overturned on appeal the next year when a higher court said the police search of his car had been illegal. Authorities have yet to confirm that the present suspect was the man in question.

    • Posting on the website for Operation Rescue, which included a "Tiller Watch" feature, a man identifying himself as Scott Roeder asked in 2007 whether anyone had considered going to Tiller's church to ask the doctor about his work. (Operation Rescue's president has denounced the crime, calling it a "cowardly act." The group's founder, Randall Terry, issued a statement calling Tiller a "mass murderer" whose "hands were covered with blood.") Read "Right-Wing Reactions to Tiller Murder."

    • Roeder reportedly subscribed to Prayer and Action News, a magazine that advocated "justifiable homicide" as a way of protesting abortion. Read "Understanding



    Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article … z0jDaSeHPN


    Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article … z0jDaSfbi1


    http://www.time.com/time/nation/article … 89,00.html

    He was obviously just your everyday common criminal.

    1. 0
      Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yes just like all those guys in Gitmo. Just common everyday criminals.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I didn't realize Roeder had ever been held at Gitmo....

        Oh wait, you're just attempting to obfuscate once again with pointless comments.

        Carry on.

        1. 0
          Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Apparently you're so lost in the fog of your own argument that you missed the point.

  48. Arthur Fontes profile image88
    Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago

    Was the FT. Hood shooter a terrorist?

    1. Padrino profile image60
      Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If you are asking me I would say yes, he had made statements prior to his actions that would indicate his intent.

      1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
        Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        How about a person who would fly their private plane just above the rooftops of Manhattan without notifying the govt of New York?

        1. Padrino profile image60
          Padrinoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I'd just say that person was an idiot.

          1. Arthur Fontes profile image88
            Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            LOL

    2. 0
      Poppa Bluesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      No he was a right wing extremeist posing as a marine posing as a Muslim posing as a terrorist pretending to be a criminal.

 
working