Dirtbag Scumbags of the Right

[Dis]

Re: Dirtbag Scumbags of the Right

Originally posted by Tripledoc
Ok. I'm reading Al Franken (Jewish BTW) and I think he makes a pretty strong case that many famous media personalities who where until this moment totally unbeknownst to me, are in fact "greedy, evil, warmongering bigots.

And the funny thing is that they all support the Republican Party.

So:

For instance when Richard Mellon Scaife, a giver of 35$ million to the Heritage foundation, funded numerous other institutions like the Cato institute, the Hoover institution,the American enterprise Institute, and many more, called a journalist, and I quote:

"You ****ing commuist cvnt" and said, she was ugly and her teeth terrible, and when he bid her good-bye said to her "Don't look behind you!".

, well then i would just have to ask whether the socallled liberal segment of the American society is going to stand to accept this bvllsheet.

And what about push polls. Those who know are in the "know".

Well. As a European I would just have to say that the Republican Perty now stands for me as the most ultimate form of evil the world has ever seen. More evil than the Nazi party because it has more power, and it is much more dishonest. You just don't treat a woman that way.

you don't ever treat a woman that way?

some women deserve to be treated like that. Are you one of those people who think women are special and should be put on a pedestal and can do no wrong?

[JohnT]

Blackice? What are you doing posting under Dissidents... oh, wait.

Busted!

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by JohnT
Yes, and we know those "other" people just aren't smart enough to enact their own laws ala the West. Good thing they have people like you to patronize them, dontcha think?

It seems like you haven't got anything more to say, but I'll reply anyway.

I take it that those people are "Third World" countries citizens?

I mean, why was Saddam elected? Oh wait, he ruled BY FORCE. What about Pinochet? Oh wait, his military junta mass-murdered all of his opposants. I guess he was unable to achieve superiority over guerillas because the US didn't support him?

And Hitler then? Good thing you ask. People massively voted against him when he murdered the deputies of the communist party and claimed there would be no more elections.

I'm not patronizing anyone. I'm fullfillig my duty as an human being trying to defend fundamental rights, however naive that may sound. It seems like peaceful debates is a good way to go, don't you think?
Yet again, if the entire planet ever manages to get out of misery, we have another problem on hand: if everyone lived as an average American citizen, we would need 11-times the natural ressources the Earth is providing right now. But I guess Greenpeace is a bunch of retarded free-market hindering dickheads.

[Dis]

this thread is hilarious. Why are there posters posting in this thread, and I haven't seen them elsewhere on off-topic?

DL alert! DL alert!

And I still don't understand what homosexuals have to do with republicans. The opposite is true for the most part (not in all cases of course). That just makes no sense at all.

Pathetic troll. .00000000000000000000001/10

[Dis]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Ashcroft are all socalled 'butch' homosexual.

Bush very much worry about his physical appearance.

Cheney is married to an ugly woman.

Rumsfeld is married to whom?

Ashcroft is very shy, and treats women badly, by not allowing them to have abortion.

do you need more proof than this?

Don't think you're "getting" me because I'm posting in this thread. I find this troll hilarious, and sometimes it's more fun to play along with the trolls.

[Fake Boris]

No, and neither does the Organization of American States' Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

http://www.cidh.oas.org/countryrep/H...ng/chap.3a.htm

At last this seems to be a somewhat valid point. My own information comes from Le monde Diplomatique, though the article is not online (they only keep it for two years).
Le Monde Diplomatique enjoys an excellent reputation for professionalism and journalistic ethics. They are a very serious publication.

Still your point warrants some investigation.

On an interesting sidenote, the IACHR has not been ratified by neither USA or Canada. Care to know the reason? I guess this should warrant some investigation too...

Also: Remember the US supported deposition of Cedras in 1994? Although USA claimed to be "helping" Haiti, they decided not to cancel Haitian debts contracted during former dictatorships. (Reminds you of Iraq?) Since Haiti had counted on cancellation of such debts to rebuild their medical infrastructure, its children are still dying from tuberculosis.
We're not talking billions here; not even 100 millions. Is it safe to assume the American disinterest was due to their lack of economic incentives?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
They are not stereotyopes. They are totally accepted in social and historical studies. So free me from your political correctness, which is in my opinion totally misguided.

The idea that disrespect of women and ethnic minorities should not spring from an especially virulent form of male masculine homosexuaity, springs from the same PC school which seeks to lower any ethnic minority to an hyphenated -American.

Whose idea? Right-wing apologists seeking to exculpate their heterosexual brethren from the atrocitiies of Nazism my blaming it on a homosexual conspiracy? Show me these social and historical studies that pin the evils of racism and sexism on homosexuals. I can't wait to see where they come from.

Everyone knows that there is a connection between 'butch' homosexuality and Fascism, so it would be idiotic to hide the fact.

Yeah, just like everyone "knows" your stupid claim that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/etc. are homosexuals. Where's your proof? Yeah, some German author lamely tried to paint Hitler as a homosexual based on precisely 0 evidence, which is funny because "everyone" also knows Hitler had a thing for his neice. Sure, Roehm was gay, but he and his circle were exterminated pretty early on in the Nazi rise to power.

The only people who "know" this are those mentioned above. People like you want to distance yourself from Nazism by blaming it on another group, so you target homosexuals. Pathetic.

[Agathon]

Great thread title.

[Az]

I think it will take literally HOURS for Tripledoc to backtrack from this mess.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


They are not stereotyopes. They are totally accepted in social and historical studies. So free me from your political correctness, which is in my opinion totally misguided.

The idea that disrespect of women and ethnic minorities should not spring from an especially virulent form of male masculine homosexuaity, springs from the same PC school which seeks to lower any ethnic minority to an hyphenated -American.

And quite frankly, If the right is what turns gays on and vice versa, then so be it.

But that this should hurt the repute of ethic minorities and women I find simply disgusting.

Everyone knows that there is a connection between 'butch' homosexuality and Fascism, so it would be idiotic to hide the fact.
Especially since it is the 'normal' homosexuals which are being put into camps.

That's funny -- I wager that the majority of homosexuals are liberal, not right-wing.

You are way out in the seventh dimension of bullsh*t.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by MrFun


That's funny -- I wager that the majority of homosexuals are liberal, not right-wing.

Maybe the open ones who like to parade on Castro street. Naturally the rightwings are safely in the closet.

Well in some cases liberals are even more rightwing than conservatives. the American concept of 'liberal' is utterly perverted.

However I doubt that any meaningfull investigation has been made to find out what the political afiliation of gay voters are. And BTW does it not strike you as equally bigoted to claim that all gays are 'liberal'.

[DinoDoc]

Just when I think this thread can not get more amusing, Tripledoc posts again.

[Q Classic]

I checked the Czech Budweiser and Anheuser-Busch Budweiser thing out... my professor was half-wrong on that as though they are seperate companies, they've been fighting over having the same name for over a century and it was not the result of a clever Adolphus Busch II stealing a German beer company's name after the first world war.

the same thing happened with stolichnaya vodka, iirc.

i'm straight and ned says i should be republican. how does that affect your allegation that all rightists are gay?

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
i'm straight and ned says i should be republican. how does that affect your allegation that all rightists are gay?

You are not a politician.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
Maybe the open ones who like to parade on Castro street. Naturally the rightwings are safely in the closet.

Well in some cases liberals are even more rightwing than conservatives. the American concept of 'liberal' is utterly perverted.

So...your argument boils down to this:

"All right-wingers are closeted homosexuals lashing out against women and minorities. Now, I can't prove this claim, conveniently, since they're closeted, but I can state that men who exercise, or marry women I consider ugly, or who are shy, must ipso facto be homosexuals if I happen to disagree with their politics. And while I repeat there are studies backing me up, I can't produce a single one."

Yes, there's a sound argument if ever I've heard one. I'm amazed they haven't asked you to sit in on the McLaughlin group, considering your astonishing insight.

And BTW does it not strike you as equally bigoted to claim that all gays are 'liberal'.

MrFun didn't say all gays were liberal, he said he'd wager a majority of them were. If you can't see the difference between those two statements, I'm afraid your spot on the McLaughlin Group will have to be revoked in favor of someone with coherent brain wave patterns.