ROFLMAO of the Day
Democrats are running around with a petition calling for Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) to read the Obama socialized medicine bill dubbed "Obama-care" (which Dummy-crats themselves who plan to pass it haven't read) before voting against it. Suddenly reading a bill that Democrats themselves haven't read is important? Too funny.
Perhaps the Demonrats don't realize that they don't need Senator Inhofe's vote... or any Republican vote for that matter.
In fact, as we know the Democrats have enough Democrat(ic) votes to pass the bill without a single Republican vote.... so what's the holdup?
It's certainly not Jim Inhofe.
Ahhhh, I love the smell of liberal hypocrisy in the morning.
posted by RD at 9:31 PM
AOL Sports Hottest Athlete
19 Comments:
Here is something really funny.
You know that I have never been a big fan of Mr. Inhofe. I have called him some pretty colorful names on my own blog.
However........
I recently did some reading about him (I am not sure why I was reading about him)...
Anyway...
I chose 32 different political issues (me and my random numbers) and just guess what I found out?
Out of 32 political issues, I disagreed with him on.........
.........wait for it............
..........wait for it...........
..........ready?...........
3!
Out of 32 positions I disagree with him on 3!
I guess I owe him an apology.
Based on the kind of man he is, I'll betcha' two pepsi's that if you met him and told him the above, he would shake your hand and tell you that he should be thanking you, not accepting any apology.
I know you remember Reagan's 80% rule, so if you only disagree on a couple or three points with a politician, then depending on how high of a priority those few points are, you are in the camp... under the tent... over the rainbow... okay that one was too far. sorry.
-red
Yeah, just a little too far.
But do you remember when rainbows used to be a good thing?
Yes I do... in fact it was a gift from God and had nothing to do with two guys playing hide the salami.
I would think that any member of Congress should read each and every bill prior to voting on it. It is equally idiotic for the Democrats to vote for this bill as it is for the Republicans to vote against it without reading it.
One other thing, and I know that you two were making jokes and all but I’ve still got to say something.
Steve said: “But do you remember when rainbows used to be a good thing?”
Again I know that this was an off handed joke, but I must say that I am really disappointed that you would make this kind of comment Steve. I expect something like this from Red, but not from you.
Ohhh boy, here we go again.
Dave, I can't believe you endorse the outright theft of a perfectly innocent word and (according to the Bible) a sign from God Himself to be used as some kind of kid friendly commercialized advertisement promoting homosexuality.
Why didn't they just use a cross with a guy nailed to it or an ark full of animals or a dove with a fig branch or maybe stone tablets with the 10 gay commandments for the official homosexual pride symbol...
I could see maybe a piece of carpet some snap-on tools and various fruits and vegetables but...
...why the rainbow?
Please enlighten me as to what a rainbow has to do with a couple of guys and sodomy.
I'm all ears.
-red
Sweet Jesus Red. Do you even realize how ignorant and bigoted that sounds? No offense man, I’m just honestly taken aback.
In answer to your question, I don’t know why they picked the rainbow.
I thought you were going to enlighten me... instead you just attack me.
I am not aware of heterosexual human beings promoting normal sexual behavior with a pony or unicorn or purple dinosaur or... rainbow.
However, I am aware of sodomy and what I consider to be perverted sexual behavior being packaged in an innocent rainbow as normal and natural.
Okay... enlighten me or attack me as you prefer.
Here's an idea. Since apparently we can change the meaning of words to anything we want....
I think we should start a new movement to change the meaning of the word "liberal" to simply mean 'communist' and make the Red Star the official Democrat party logo.
At least that makes sense.
Homosexuality and rainbows?
Not so much.
-red
I didn't attack you. I was honestly shocked by your words. Also, I asked if you realized that your words sounded bigoted. I never said that you were bigoted. I know that you aren't, that is why I asked the question. But after this bit of anti-homosexual rhetoric maybe my opinion was wrong, because your words sure come off as bigoted against homosexuals. Why you are jumping my shit though is a mystery to me.
You said I sounded ignorant and bigoted... but that's not an attack.
Okay... do you realize how patronizing, ignorant and gay you sound?
(not an attack, just a question)
C'mon dude... there is such a thing as right and wrong.
A dude having anal sex with another dude (or oral sex) isn't what I consider to be in the natural course of things and nothing you say is gonna change that fact... I don't hate homosexuals... I just don't buy into the belief that it is the natural way of things.
That doesn't make me a bigot it makes me honest.
Fine, mock me if you wish but I wasn't attacking. I'm sorry that it sounded like I was. As far as homosexual behavior goes, the fact is that such acts do occur in nature in the animal kingdom. So maybe you are just an honest bigot? (That last part was tongue in cheek)
Sorry to be so graphic here but a dog licking his balls is not the same thing as two (or more) male humans engaging in anal sex.
The dog's balls probably need cleaning and is NOT a sexual act. The anus (medically speaking) is designed for exiting fecal matter not as an entrance to an amusement park.
Two male penguins raising a young penguin has nothing to do with homosexuality either... unless those penguins also subscribe to Buttboy magazine or something.
So please... enlighten me as to exactly how homosexuality is just as natural and normal as sex between a male and female.
Us "ignorant bigots" are all about higher learning.
-red
And note... it's the "act" I find 'unnatural', not the individuals.
They are merely inferior human sinners just like all of us.
I am a sinner for many other things... none of which I try to normalize or rationalize or make others think isn't a sin.
But an ignorant bigot I am most certainly not and am offended by your assertion of such.
Steve makes an innocent harmless comment and YOU (as usual) are the first to act offended, judge, condemn and claim to be above.
Lighten up dude, it was a harmless statement that I defend and gladly take the heat over.
The point I was making in that comment is that rainbow used to mean something spiritual. They used to be a symbol of God's promise to humankind.
The symbol has been taken over and is now a symbol of gay and lesbian rights.
I know very well that you and I disagree on the gay rights issues and the whole "gay" issue in general.
As I have mentioned before on this blog, I believe homosexuality is a sin. I do not judge the homosexuals based on their sin though. I too am a sinner and I try to love them just as I would another sinner.
I do not, however, approve of the rainbow being used as a way to say that homosexuality is okay.
This is the way I feel about the rainbow issue.
I am sorry that you are disappointed with me but I can not apologize for the way I feel about it.
Steve - Fair enough.
Red - I don't have it in me to argue with you. Believe what you want, I don't care.
Fair enough.
-red
Post a Comment
<< Home