Reply With Quote
Nah, I read the article.
And you're wrong.
And a super .
I'm telling you, this is exactly like trying to argue with my 4 year old nephew.
Nah, I read the article.
And you're wrong.
And a super .
Nah, I read the article.
And you're wrong.
And a super .
I'm telling you, this is exactly like trying to argue with my 4 year old nephew.
Your nephew thinks you are a super too.
Your nephew thinks you are a super too.
You were wrong and you didn't want to admit it so you resorted to name calling. It's obvious you didn't have an answer to my original question so you played the "I was only kidding" card.
Clearly you are having an off day as usually you would have come up with an actual argument to defend your stance, but as I pointed out, your original stance was so off base that the best you could come up with is the joking thing.
Ehhh, I'm done with you for now.
again.
You are complete idiot for trying to find a serious point in all this. Clearly you are too tightly wound to even function at this time.
So long, super .
Really neocons, is this the best you can come up with? "America was founded by Christians"? What's next -- "Terraists are bad"? "The sky is blue"?
Ever since you got your asses handed to you in the elections, you've been incredibly weak in your posting. I'm going to start finding right-wing talking points and post them for you.
You're welcome.
Went back and read the article did ya?
Nah, I had already read it, super .
It just reminded me how ty neocon posting has been.
Nah, I had already read it, super .
Of course you had
Yes, I had.
Yes, I had.
Can we be done with this now?
Good talk.
Sure.
chump, you are coming off pretty stupid on this one.
Yes I am.
Chump - why must you be so dismissive of the threads I start. I'm not like Dan, who starts 15 threads a day - most of them from far-left kooks. I very rarely start new threads, and then only if I've read something that I think has merit and could start a good discussion. I read lots of stuff that I personally believe, but KNOW would be inflammatory on this board; and I don't post those articles or editorials.
I guess Chumpdumper is a fitting name for you!
So what exactly is the point of the thread?
Be American?
I'm already there.
BTW, why be a coward and fear posting things others may not like?
That's unamerican.
Maybe you should.I read lots of stuff that I personally believe, but KNOW would be inflammatory on this board; and I don't post those articles or editorials.
this is from the clown who is in an uproar because Rep-elect Keith Ellison wants to use the Koran in a private swearing in ceremony. Now it has come out the Koran Ellison will be using was donated to the Library of Congress. It's original owner? Thomas Jefferson.
So our nation was founded by terrorists.It's original owner? Thomas Jefferson.
I think the first sentence sums it up pretty good. Rather than taking history and discussing it and why it was relevant at that particular time; our ins utions of higher learning are doing their best to re-write history to reflect their views.So what exactly is the point of the thread?
So elect neocon college professors.
That was easy.
Damn, this is one ing stupid, confused bunch words.
"Are we a Judeo-Christian country'
Jews founded the USA? Jews wrote the Dec of Indep? Federalist Papers? the Cons ution?
Jewish sacred texts are "central" to the USA?
Figures that Crooky would drag such hare-brained junk thinking it was "very well written"
"we are all in big trouble" Whoa, I'm so scared.
"Just ask the Jews of secular Europe"
... playing the "secular" US-becoming-Nazi card, huh? What a stinking pile of .
It was Crooky's Christian Germany/Austria/France/Italy that persecuted and exterminated the Jews, and a Christian Pope who looked the other way.
Last edited by boutons_; 01-03-2007 at 06:52 PM.
"re-writing history" is a more apt description for those who contend that any Founding Father who used the word "God" in any spoken or written political rhetoric is automatically ordained a "deeply religious and devout Christian".
True.
False (see 1st Admendment to the Cons ution)
"religious country,"
This is really unfair asking you people to be precise and define your terms, but WTF is a "religious country" ?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
