Citizen: United States Politics: Conservative Republican Religion: Roman Catholic I’d Rather Be: In New Zealand
Subscribe to Amy Proctor's RSS Feed
SEARCH THIS SITE
My Point Radio - April 2, 2007
-Amy interviewed by Dave and Jenn
P.V.Radio -March 28, 2007
-Amy interviewed by Frank and Shane
MONTEL WILLIAMS - October 12, 2006
With CNN’s Lou Dobbs, “Rev” Jesse Jackson, Tony Goldwyn, Amy Holmes, Asra Nomani and Iman Feisal Abdul Rauf
…………………….
W.A.R RADIO - July 4, 2006
…………………….
Message to Greenlawn Baptist Church - July 2, 2006
…………………….
CBS RADIO 550 KTSA - June 13, 2006
…………………….
CINDY SHEEHAN RALLY - Sept. 15, 2005
Video: (Amy interviewed)
News Articles: (Amy interviewed)
Tuesday, October 28, 2008 at 04:49AM Unfortunately, this is par for the course.
At an Obama rally in Denver, Colorado over the weekend:
And there’s more. Much more, compliments of Looking at the Left.
So maybe it isn’t a matter of who Obama associates with as much as the type of people who like to associate themselves with him.
Trackback URL: http://amyproctor.squarespace.com/blog/trackback/2477355
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (59)
Wow Amy, you're right, they all look like weirdos and perverts! Amazing that people like that are allowed on the streets. And a child wearing a make love not war t- shirt - must be a pervert.
This is why I'd be a big fan if anyone decided to implement compulsory post-secondary education.
Ever notice how political shirts encourage hate? All agents of hate believe their hate is an exceptional and justified aberration, distinguishable as a method of education for the less-intelligent masses, a favor to the greater, broader good -- the good of the country, for example. And yet, hate is hate.
Good Grief, now we are stereotyping Obama supporters.
erasmus, first we have to implement mandatory voter tests to qualify people to cast a ballot.
Tell me under what circumstances a parent with any common sense would have/let his girl where a shirt like that. It's vulgar, but of course, that is lost on Obama supporters, which is by the way the point.
Yes, I am stereotyping Obama suppporters. Stereotypes can be useful to categorize people.
The other people at the rally are weird, too. A puppet float with a decapitated Bush? Oh, maybe you guys think that's mainstreamed! Give me a break.
How about: Make an STD, not War. Or Make an Unwanted Pregnancy, Not War.
Better?
Really, at least 13 Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazi and other racist groups support John McCain and are registered republicans, guilt by association?
Get a sense of humor. Suggestive? Yes. Vulgar? Close.
Silly, absolutely.
Ed, do you have a link to back that up? If so, point taken, but I would still suggest that the 'derrangement syndrome" is far larger in the DNC than the RNC. Look at ACORN as an example...
It is vulgar and distrubring for a 12 year old girl to have a picture of the mascots of political parties having sex. Note that the dem is ******* the republican. Cute, huh?
As I said, there's nothing funny or humorous about using animal sex to make a political statement. You obviously have no children. The parents of that girl obvsiously have no common sense.
I knew a 'swinger' like shawm would find humor in something like that; deviant and depraved as it were.
Ed, I’m wearing a political tee shirt today, and guess what. It doesn't inspire hate, it merely says ‘defeat defeat in 2008’ referring to Harry Reid’s previous comment that we had 'lost the war.'
It isn't intended to be hateful and can be easily understood.
The point is Liberalism is the politics of adolescents in an amoral society, and Barack Obama is their poster child.
Yes, Amy I have links to back it up...There is not one link that declares it all, well there is a video that encompassed all the KKK, they actually voted as a collection of klans to be one group of support, unity. The vote was close with the KKK, because the Aryan Nation recently reversed their position to support Obama. The Aryan Nation reversal was claimed to be genuine, but their slogan is “ The Aryan Nation + an Obama Assassination = War with Iran”. The KKK thought is was a cool idea and almost followed suit.
"Note that the dem is ******* the republican. Cute, huh?"
LOL, I did not notice, funny in away, but not funny in another. Depending if you still have kids that are not grown... Sensationalism.
Gary, If I am not defending something here, I am a totally different person.
My responses have let me down the path of being boring...I have fun too. How many rugby players you know that are boring.
I had only stumbled on this site and I do not participate on others, it has taken up time...the wife is starting to demand equal time, haha.
A bit tired, but not working today for back surgery to remove a cyst, they think, so if I disappear that was the reason...surgery at 1300.
~ peace
PS - If something goes wrong I will see you when you follow, none of us get out of here alive anyways :-)
Gary - I hate to disturb your twisted fantasy, but I am not a swinger. I'm a middle-aged monogamous married lady. But I'm just not uptight about references to sex.
HA!
That isn't what you publically admitted on Jenn's site. What did you say??? You are a bisexual female who is married to a man living in the L.A. area?
I think one of the commentors even put a link up to your bio page on some site or another that also confirmed your prowess.
OH! And I just remembered there is now a definition for Mudkitty ROTFLMBO!!!
Now, after annoying so many bloggers to the point that they banned you like Doug, Jenn, Rob and me, [yet you continue to beat their bans {not mine or Rob's}], I really wouldn't expect you to be truthful on any issue.
Amy: "... Yes, I am stereotyping Obama suppporters. Stereotypes can be useful to categorize people. "
SG: Now that's very funny ... ! "W" couldn't have said it funnier ...
Snerd
So ******* is what they call making love in your neck of the woods? That's sad. And even more sad is that you're under the impression that sexual intimacy always/only results in STDs and unwanted pregnancy.
Good luck to you and yours if this is your reality.
I think the message on the t-shirt is deeper than just your coarse and superficial view of the graphics. It's perhaps about an innate hope that differences can someday be overcome, and two sides in opposition might some day come together and work it out, in a constuctive,creative (procreative bearing fruit?) manner.
Amy, liberals have no morals. You're wasting breath trying to teach them something their parents should have pounded in their heads growing up. Any parent that would give their daughter a t-shirt like that to wear should be charged with child neglect. Sickening.
Amy, that t-shirt on the little girl was funny but entirely inappropriate for a girl to wear, I agree. Gee though, I think you forgot to mention that Obama had >100,000 people at his Denver rally AND at his St. Louis rally--both in battleground states. Despite all those crazed hockey moms out there, Obama attracts far larger crowds than Palin/McCain combined. Everyone's got quirks , some more than others. It's so nice to see you have such virtuous qualities like judging others by their appearance. Perhaps you've forgotten what Jesus and other Biblical figures have said about judging others, Amy. Frankly, though I may not relate to everyone pictured at the campaign rally, I don't care if people are weirdos or not. Every American who's not a felon has a right to vote, and you can't stop them from voting Obama.
Gary said: "The point is Liberalism is the politics of adolescents in an amoral society, and Barack Obama is their poster child."
Come again, Gary? Who's amoral here? Obama's not the one with the pregnant daughter having irresponsible, premarital sex with her redneck, high school drop out boyfriend. But if the tables were turned and this were Obama's daughter, oooh weee, wouldn't the far right have a field day! Hippocrites to the core.
And Obama never cheated on or divorced his wife, like his Republican opponent. He seems to have a wonderful, >20 year relationship with his wife and well adjusted, intelligent, sweet girls. Don't lecture us about who the candidate of family values is here.
Jo-the-Jo: ",,, Amy, liberals have no morals. You're wasting breath trying to teach them something their parents should have pounded in their heads growing up. Any parent that would give their daughter a t-shirt like that to wear should be charged with child neglect. Sickening."
SG: AGREED!
This is an example of VERY POOR sex education and proper reproduction. After all, the parents should know that Mules are sterile.
Snerd
These sanctimonious trolls are like the comedian who tells a double- entendre joke, then exclaims, "your the one with the dirty mind." Of course, the T-shirt is risque, except to the hardened Left.
MD,
Palin's daughter is keeping her child. Obama said his precious daughters shouldn't be "burdened" with his grandchildren. Remember Eichman and Mengele?
erasmus: "... I think the message on the t-shirt is deeper than just your coarse and superficial view of the graphics. It's perhaps about an innate hope that differences can someday be overcome, and two sides in opposition might some day come together and work it out, in a constuctive,creative (procreative bearing fruit?) manner."
SG: Yes, there are many creative options here. For example, the (R)z are finally on the bottom ...
Snerd
"...Obama's not the one with the pregnant daughter having irresponsible, premarital sex with her redneck, high school drop out boyfriend. But if the tables were turned and this were Obama's daughter, oooh weee, wouldn't the far right have a field day!"
Bristol's soon to be husband quit high school to get a job on the north slope to prepare for the arrival of their son. What I see is a lad who didn't exercise self control; but rather than run away or destroy his son, he has made a deliberate decision to accept responsibility for his less than prudent choices and make the best life he can for his wife and child.
That is honorable, and beyond the ability of liberals to grasp.
And aside from calling you an elitiest, I'll remind you that Obama would rather have his daughter kill her baby rather than "be punished for her mistake."
"...And Obama never cheated on or divorced his wife, like his Republican opponent..."
YET.
Funny thing about McCain; when asked if the PTSD from being a POW caused his divorce, he said "No, it was because I behaved like an ass toward his wife."
In his book, he acknowledged the worst failure in his life was his first marriage.
Glass house, MD.
"erasmus, first we have to implement mandatory voter tests to qualify people to cast a ballot. "
The left will never allow that to happen.
'Despite all those crazed hockey moms out there'. --MD in Ohio
So women that like Soccer are crazy? Is that medically defined by law or is that another attempt by the left to delve into the grotesque bottom-side of politics and demonfy their opponents to make them appear not human but sub-human ( 'crazed')?
As I said in another thread, these smears against Palin will not be forgotten. They will come back and haunt the left. She is a human being but not treated as such by many on the left. NYTimes on their bloggs are allowing posts ( they must approve them before posting, in house) allowing sickening and despicably derogatory comments focused on Sarah Palin. This will long be remembered as the most vicious attack not only on a women running for politics, but in a political campaign as well. Attacking someone's association to Socialism, capitalists or political ideas is par the course, but the left turned this into a personal attack with nonsensical and dirty smears against the female gender ( just because she was on the wrong side of the political line) -- it will never be a valid excuse, Nor forgiven.
Gold, You read the NYTs? Congratulations. Could you please give me an example of a "sick and despically derogatory post" on the NYTs blog regarding Palin?
And you're taking the "crazed hockey moms" statement way too seriously. It was not meant to be anything other than a statement of Palin's loyal followers, just as I'm a "crazed Chicago Cubs fan". It's another word for fanatic. And by the way, I am also a soccer mom and played soccer in high school and college. You don't have to be a stay-at-home, ultra Christian woman who supports Sarah Palin to be a diehard soccer or hockey mom.
Yet when you ask a lot of these women who adore Palin WHY they would vote for her, they say "because she's like me, because I think she's real and she decided to keep her Down's syndrome baby." While I agree that Palin is has extraordinary gifts as a politician, is charismatic, takes her family seriously and will focus on special needs children, and has accomplished a few good things in her state, the qualities mentioned above by many of her female supporters are not things that qualify to be in the 2nd most powerful position, and perhaps one day, THE most powerful and dangerous position in the world, the POTUS. Most people in this country overwhelmingly agree with me, including many in her own party and even some McCain insiders. But this notion that all liberals have trashed Palin and been dispicable towards her is ridiculous. Yes, there are those out there who think she's a complete idiot, but it's not entirely underserved. Most of us were really impressed by her after her RNC debut, but America's current opinion of her was formed after her disastrous, MULTIPLE interviews and her blaming the media instead of herself or her handlers for her God-awful performances, for the way she was sequestered by the McCain camp and demonstrated utter disdain for reporters or voters who asked her questions, for her ultra-negative, often untruthful attacks of Obama, for her ethics violations as Governor, for her not really being an advocate for most women's issues., and for her completely limited knowledge base and critical thinking skills on the most important issues of our day. That's why I'm not a soccer mom who roots for Palin.
Gary, I understand your point on the first issue (Bristol Palin) but you're missing mine. You brought up Obama as being the amoral one in this presidential race. I'm pointing out how that is a baseless accusation. Well, one can only look at the families of Obama and Biden versus McCain and Palin to see this not true. The point about Obama not cheating YET is a lame and immature argument, I've come to expect much better than that from you, Gary. We live in the now, and can only judge what has happened up to this point. Step out of your cynical little cave for once and give deserving people the benefit of the doubt.
Obama and Biden: excellent students and moral law makers, loyal husbands, wonderful fathers who put their families first, neither has any crazy, unpresidential hobbies or history of amoral behaviors.
McCain: whether he admitted it or not, he was a cheater, treated his first wife badly, has always been known to be an erratic hothead, practically flunked out of the Naval Academy and was a screw off who dranked, gambled and womanized until he became a POW, now dedicated family man, but he has a gambling addiction, often blowing thousands of $ at a time and often Cindy bails him out, Cindy had a drug addiction for several years, now clean and admirable woman.
Palin: mother to a pregnant teen.
You brought up the amoral thread, and I'm responding to it. But as you can see, the glass houses argument is one you should heed as well as anyone. Thanks.
And by the way, Gary, I think all 4 candidates are good, hard working people. I bring up these issues in response to your hippocritical cry that Obama is the "poster child of adolescent liberalism". This is a great example of the pot calling the kettle black-why can't you simply move on from these silly and baseless claims when there is clear evidence (ie nothing smacks of adolescent amoralism than a teen pregnancy requiring someone to drop out of high school) to the contrary. In other words, that your candidates embody (or have in the past) questionable behaviors or have had things occur in their families that although understandable, are still examples of what you blame Obama for. I'm just using the right's criteria of family values here, nothing more, nothing less.
Mack, Although admirable that Bristol is keeping her baby, the point brought up on this blog was "adolescent amoralism" and a shout out to Obama as the "poster boy" for this. I merely pointed out the irony of this statement, as the only adolescent acting amorally during this presidential campaign was the daughter of the Republican VP candidate from the party of family values. I know that teen pregnancy happens to good people-I was a gynecologist for many years before becoming a surgeon and took care of these young ladies. But the point here is that the act of teen sex out of wedlock is thought of as "amoral" per the Catholic and other churches. And it just makes me think that although Palin is probably a good woman, she is also a bit of an opportunist who might not have been entirely in touch with her eldest daughter. Now, she is traipsing around the country in her $5000 suits and beautiful makeup to throngs of loving fans, parading her little adorable Trig around and carrying the mantle of all special needs children but where is poor Bristol Palin in all of this? Why has she been sequestered away from everything while Willow, Piper and Trig bask in the limelight and Track is off in Iraq, a possible war hero in the making. Where was Bristol the night of the VP debates while the rest of her family stood proudly by Mommy's side? Perhaps because McCain's handlers did not want the constant reminder to voters that their VP candidate would soon be grandmother to a baby born out of wedlock.
I know from taking care of hundreds of girls who chose life as teens that most of their boyfriends ended up being dead beat dads and ultimately abandoned them. Of those who got married, the majority were divorced by the time they were in their mid-twenties. It is not glamorous and many of these girls end up resenting their situation and sometimes their children for robbing them of THEIR childhood, and most don't end up pursuing a career even though they have dreamed of doing so. Teen pregnancy is never a desirable situation, even though rarely, there are good outcomes.
MD, the NYT posted an expose' on Cindy McCain on the front page last week. Those are the sorts of biased articles Gold is referring to.
Look, people create stereotypes and generalities for a reason. I would love nothing more than the NYT be balanced and objective to appeal to a broarder audience. It's clear they don't feel they need to appeal to all of America and have chosen to editorialize their political preferences in their lead stories.
That's a disgrace.
I am a parent of 4 children, 2 of whom are teenagers and one who is almost a teen. I have almost 3 teenagers in my house, including two girls. I cna tell you as a matter of fact that parents lose control at a particular point in their children's life as they venture out to test limits and pave their own lives.
I don't think any of us know the whole situation, but the Bristol sitution is vastly different than what Obama advocates, which is sexual freedom for girls. He discusses this in his 2007 speech to Planned Parenthood, which I posted on this blog months ago.
Bristol and her boyfriend were evidentally planning to marry anyway, which doesn't excuse sex outside marriage, but they are not considering abortion, which is what Obama adovcates. This isn't single motherhood, promisciuty, it is a couple having sex before they were married and getting pregnant, then stepping up and taking responsibility. They are an example of what to do in a situation like this.
Liberals like to say kids will do it anyway.....so the Palins have given an alternative to the abortion or single motherhood option.
I would also suggest that the public scrutiny and ridicule is part of the Bristol's punishment.
MD,
Where to start?
• I believe Catholics regard sex outside of marriage as immoral, not amoral.
• I have seen links showing your repeated rants about Palin's wardrobe to be at least partly false.
• At least McCain regrets his mistakes. And his children still support him. Obama regrets nothing, not Odinga, Ayres, Phleger,Wright, Farakhan, Rezco, ACORN...........
• You may think a girl's career is her highest calling, and the pop culture agrees. But, I submit otherwise.
• Your unbalanced comparison of candidate qualifications leaves out: the"sequestered" academic record of Obama,
his"sequestered" thesis,
his "sequestered" medical records,
his "sequestered" birth certificate,
the "sequestered" videotape of him introducing a rabid anti Jewish character ( LA Times).
Then you cry "foul" when he is called a "Manchurian Candidate."
"...The point is Liberalism is the politics of adolescents in an amoral society, and Barack Obama is their poster child..."
MD, I have made this statement before without "in an amoral society". I threw that adder in last minute and it was directed more at the Obomunists than Barack himself.
As far as the 'YET' part, I imagine that's an example of being misunderstood because we're writing behind a wall of obscurity, and are frequently misunderstood when tongue in cheek is attempted.
You make good points, Amy, and as a mother of two children, I do understand that we can't be there for every decision our children make but entrust them with the values and (hopefully) good judgment to make the right decisions.
However, I'd like to offer one correction: Obama was not advocating for "sexual freedom" for young girls or teens and you guys are seriously misquoting him as saying he would not his daughters to "kill their babies" if they became pregnant. That is a heinous and incorrect statement. Please read what he ACTUALLY meant below when he spoke of keeping teens "from a lifetime of struggle". It is not an endorsement that teens should all get abortions; on the contrary he is arguing that parents and kids have to think about and discuss these issues to PREVENT teen pregnancy through abstinence education and science to prevent a lifetime of struggle as a teen mom or a teen with a horrible STD like gonorrhea or syphillis. If folks are going to consider sexual activity, then continue to promote abstinence but don't play dumb! We need to make sure as parents that girls like Bristol Palin are educated about STDs and have access to birth control and know how to use it responsibly. The "prevention of a lifetime of struggle" that Obama describes is not abortion, it's preventing the unwanted or teen pregnancy from the get go. I know Obama'a speech very well, and these are issues dear to my heart.
Obama said: "There’s a moral component to prevention. And we shouldn’t be shy about acknowledging it. As parents, as family members, we need to encourage young people to show reverence toward sexuality and intimacy. We need to teach that not just to the young girls, we need to teach it to those young boys. But even as we are teaching those lessons, we should never be willing to consign a teenage girl to a lifetime of struggle because of a lack of access to birth control or a lifetime of illness because she doesn’t understand how to protect herself. We know that a woman’s right to make a decision about how many children she wants to have and when—without government interference—is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have in this country.It is time to turn the page on policies that fail to deal with tragedy of ten thousand American teenagers getting an STD everyday. Of fifty-five contracting HIV and another twenty-four hundred becoming pregnant. It’s time to turn the page on a stance that refuses compassionate support of victims of rape and sexual assault.
"We need, we need to make choices about what happens before pregnancy. It’s a false argument to say that the only way to prevent disease and unintended pregnancy is abstinence education. Just as it is a false argument to say that the only way is through contraception. As Martin Luther King used to say, “It’s not either/or it’s both/and.”
Mack, you note I put "amoral" in quotes, as it's Gary's term. Obama has nothing to regret and nothing to hide. All the points you make about his birth certificate, thesis etc are paranoid and ignorant ranting done out of desperation as you see your candidate remain behind in the race. Go to factcheck.org, fightthesmears.org, and look at the 2:1 number of endorsements for Obama:McCain from American periodicals and government officials including several folks in Bush's administration and former inner circle advisors to McCain. Give it up, Mackey Mack, the gig is up. :)
MD,
So, all his deception and secrecy is due to my paranoia?And all the endorsements by government workers and Democratic periodicals trumps freedom of information? Well, don't get tangled up in your leash.
It may be over, and Obama will get the same "support" from the Right that Bush got from the Left. It's never over.
MD all the way!
Oh really, Mack? You think papers like the Chicago Tribune, Forth-Worth Star, Salt Lake Tribune, Denver Post, Kansas City Star, MN Las Cruces, Providence Journal, Reno Gazette Journal, Billings, MT Gazette, Anchorage Daily are all liberal papers? Dream on buddy. Many of these conservative periodicals had NEVER endorsed a Democrat before now. You should read some of these editorials, they're quite good. And none of these well-informed professionals believe in this "secrecy and deception" crap that you promote because it's not true. If any paper was going to criticize Obama, especially on his Chicago political history, it would have been the Conservative Chicago Tribune, a paper who has never, ever endorsed a Democrat in its 150 year history. But no, it endorsed Barack Obama.
I don't know if it's paranoia or denial with you, Mack, but you need to come back to earth and face reality.
Thanks, Erasmus!
"fanatic" is another word for radical.
"Could you please give me an example of a "sick and despically derogatory post" on the NYTs blog regarding Palin?" -- No I cannot. I can give you the link where you can view to your hearts content pages upon pages on anything related to Palin on the New York Times 'caucus' blogs. Just go to their front page and click blogs, and then click 'caucus.' I'm sure reposting private posts from there to here is a tad bit un net Etiquette or even illegal. Nor am I going to cut and paste web links.
Go see trudy's post ( in NYTimes blogs, heading below), if that is not hate speech in general against the GOP, and NYTimes approves trolls -- anything against the GOP is fair game for the NYTimes. Posts are always reviewed before NYTimes puts them up on the web. NYTimes is a virtual hate speech site against the GOP.
October 28, 2008, 12:00 pm
Palin to Deliver Policy Speech on Energy
By Julie Bosman
October 28, 2008 12:29 pm Link
— trudy
Find in the archives if they had not deleted it yet, about the wardrobe and Palin, they did tons of posts of that which depicted her as non human.
lol.
New York times, the payback will be sweet.
The Cindy McCain and Palin wardrobe articles were front page news in the NYT. Unless someone collected the links already it might be hard to find all the articles/links, but I'll try later.
MD,
"secrecy and deception crap" - If it's not secret, where is it? What part of "secret" don't you understand?
It's nice that you are so comfortable and satisfied with the MSM. If it makes your life easier to have information gatekeepers, fine and good. Many have a higher threshold for truth and have dumped the "old media." As a result, newspapers and network news are an "endangered species."
The word is a sickening word to use, it denotes a derogatory nature of humans.
Example of its use in the general media.
As if soccer fans were not already crazed lunitics” Jim Roam
www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyrkEVt4rRE
You claim it is equivalent to fanatic and that I must be stupid not to have known this. But you may want to listen why he is using this term ‘crazed.’ It is not how you justified it. Here is my explanation.
The phrase fanatical succor moms is not equivalent to crazed soccer moms – and you were referring to Palin in this case – so your association was with intent – it means unstable mental attitudes, maybe akin to irrationalism. It was a sickening transparency. I had no idea you would try to justify your position, morally? Fanatic is fanatic and crazed is crazed ( past tense for crazy). Exmpl: crazed soccer fans brought a live grenade to hit a bus of fans from a rival team.” (Jim Roam, sport broadcaster, commentator ( see link)). The association is with violence. Are you saying he is stupid like you accused me? Obviously I’m not smart enough to know Jim should have used the word fanatical? A fanatical fan does not pick up weapons to harm or kill people. Those people are crazy.
You will also notice that ‘ crazed soccer moms ‘ brings up left wing sites of google searches, which was my point in the first place – they try to frame these women who try to get their children to get involved into sports associated to irrational violence that usually demarks the term ‘crazed.’ Also, most are GOPs, thus the connection. Then you try to frame me as stupid because I do not associate with left wing derogatory-sick blogs, apparently not knowing now that crazed’s meaning had change to mean fanatic you profess. I do not believe you. It is a framing and changing of diction that paints a derogatory picture onto a group of women that the left has adopted as their politics low class rhetoric. Your use of the term is just a part of a long line of them that use these words often.
“It's another word for fanatic. And by the way, I am also a soccer mom and played soccer in high school and college.” First, no, fanatic is not the meaning of ‘crazed,’ and second, justification because of your participation is no excuse in my book to use the word. But I believe in free speech so use it all you like. The main point for me is you called me stupid by claiming I had no idea how the word is rationally used. I just pointed out with one case, you used it incorrectly, unless you are associating violent illegal acts against Sarah Palin – which is why derogator and sick phrases are used. You were addressing the GOP women soccer moms and no one else in your post.
win
"Obama and Biden: excellent students and moral law makers, loyal husbands, wonderful fathers who put their families first, neither has any crazy, unpresidential hobbies or history of amoral behaviors."
So Biden and Obama do not posses "crazy."
You are comparing candidates, so obviously Palin has a crazed soccer mom behavior which means she cannot be the vice or president. But you mean 'fanatical' hobbies don't you?
But what about those "crazed soccer [GOP] moms?" that you claim are not crazed but only fanatical because somehow the word 'crazed,' means fanatical.
I find word crazed referring to members of the GOP on the low-class left-wing bias blogs which use this word in a derogatory sense often. Funny you use it so often to frame your low-class arguments.
"McCain: whether he admitted it or not, he was a cheater, treated his first wife badly, has always been known to be an erratic hothead, practically flunked out of the Naval Academy and was a screw off who dranked, gambled and womanized until he became a POW, now dedicated family man, but he has a gambling addiction, often blowing thousands of $ at a time and often Cindy bails him out, Cindy had a drug addiction..."
What I thought, total bias. This looked like Clinton's resume, absent the military service, in which he ran-off to Canada and then to England then to Russia to escape military duty -- otherwise the USA voted for him twice. They thought nothing wrong and voted him into office twice. Flowers had already been public, etc... all the same resume. Many people said he turned out to be an ok to good pres. Notice that Obama has a sparkling record. That to many seems dangerous -- or he is hiding something -- which is probably more along the lines toward the truth.
Oh my goodness, Gold. You are reading way too much into my post. Please don't waste time on figuring it out because there really is no hidden meaning. If it makes you happy, I'll change "crazed" to "fanatic", and agree that crazed was not necessarily the correct term there. I wrote something in 5 seconds while making dinner. I by no means meant to conjure images of violence or emotional instability when referring to soccer moms; I'm one myself. And I never called you stupid, I would never do that, so I'm sorry if you interpreted my words as such. Good night.
Gold, I cannot argue that Clinton was indeed a womanizer. My point here is to demonstrate how foolish it is to focus on some of these issues. Remember, the Republicans are the party of family values, and I'm only using your own party's criteria and prioritization of family values here to make a point. This thread started when Gary referred to Obama as the poster child of "amoral (immoral) adolescents", complete malarkey, of course. I, using criteria that many right wing conservatives have used in the past to put down "those immoral liberals", like divorce, teen pregnancy, gambling, drug addiction, excessive drinking, ethics violaters, and adultery, were more accurate descriptions of the Republican ticket this year than of the Democratic ticket. Is it McCain's adultery years ago that makes me not want to vote for him? Absolutely not, I judge candidates on their judgment, intellect, experience, vision, policy proposals and overall character while in office. My point was made to demonstrate the hippocracy of Gary's statement, when it is in fact Obama and Biden who appear embody the less sketchy, more traditional family values in this particular election year.
“Republicans are the party of family values”
Actually Obama just came out with a speech on the most importance is the family unit.
Therefore, you have no point of comparison. But intend the family is of an importance.
“I'm only using your own party's criteria and prioritization of family values”
Actually that post about Obama focusing on how important the family is, I had found it on one of the links on Amy’s links area. I do not spend much time on the internet, so I cannot go digging for it again. If you intend that family is not important to Dems as it is to Republicans than clarify. Obama intends family is soo very important he gave heavy commentary on it on the campaign trail.
“Is it McCain's adultery years ago that makes me not want to vote for him?” As I said, Clinton’s womanizing was well known in 1992, and people did not care. However, you seem to make it an issue. This country has both dem and repub presidents that go to church ( just like Clinton) but do not live according to the Sacrament of marriage, for example ( cheating, divorce). That does not disqualify them as you intend here. Also, as I said, Obama’s presents a messiah complex, a sparkling persona that I feel is dangerous. As an example, Bush Jr’s gambling and drinking were well known prior to his first election. He also goes to church. Yet about half of the population voted for him, meaning they did not care. Obama appears to be too perfect of a human. What I intend is is that Obama’s character has a major flaw. He should had never thrown his friends under a buss. He did this to Jeremiah Wright and many others. We know for a fact, because Obama said it, he considered Wright his good friend. Not after the speech on Race, given by Obama, but the press conference a few weeks later Obama denounced his friendship to Wright – once and for all. That to me was unforgivable. It also defined Obama as no one loyal to anyone. You never stab your friends in the back like that on National TV ( it had heavy news air play for over a week). That tells me Obama could turn on anyone at anytime, including me – if we happened to be friends. He could turn on any statesmen, and that would be dangerous to world security. That is a serious character flaw in a human being. He could have told the public, like he had done many times prior , that Wright was his friend, and still is, but that he doesn’t agree with his political views or will have him as a cabinet member of his administration, if he happens to win the election. When he denounced the former reverend, this told me Obama is not loyal to his closest family or extended family.
How is that fact and observation for comparisons on the family unit (extended family)?
win
Say ... Was there toilet paper under that elephant's foot ...!?
Snerd
“I, using criteria that many right wing conservatives have used in the past to put down "those immoral liberals"
That is because they use the father of leftism himself, against the Liberal party of the USA, Karl Marx. He stated this ad nausea. He wrote for over 40 years. Liberals are individualists, who put themselves first before the group. They are not a part of his proletariat government solution. These people are in fact more concerned about the group than individualism. Marx does not support institutions: no institutions for gay marriage, no institutions for abortion, and no institutions at all. Institutions are a part of the Superstructure that Marx banned in his ideology for a world one class system. We know Obama uses a prime Marx argument. Amy posted a thread recently, as well as his own statements that 'of the distribution of wealth.' That is classic Marxism. To Marx, merchants, businessmen and as bourgeoisies are all liberals and illmoral. So why blame the right-wing for stating the founding father of leftism's senior thesis?
There seems to be a conflict in the Democratic Party against Marxism’s ideas of a world proletariat government and liberalism's individuality. Both ideologies form a paradox, and one cannot exist with the other. Hollywood liberals are in fact corporate businessmen who are now scared of Obama’s plans to cap extreme wealth. They see Obama as a potential Marxist and fear he will damage their booming industry. You frame the argument as if the GOP is immoral to suggest that liberals are immoral when Marx intended this was true -- and as for the case in point, of why he had despised liberals in the first place.
"gambling, drug addiction, excessive drinking, ethics violaters, and adultery"
Marx does not allow any of this to go on for his society. So obviously, the Dems have a lot of right-wing policies in their candidates and belief systems. Is that not Ironic? Or are you just confused? If Obama is truly against all of this, then he may be a true Marxist.
Golden-g(R)uel: ",,, Liberals are individualists, who put themselves first before the group. "
SG: Actually, many liberals are able to see differences AND see inclusion in the group, simultaneously ... They don't require homogeneity to have a group ...
Consequently, liberals tending to explore differences, different group configuration and tend to be outward looking,. NeoCons are defensive about their demarcations, fearful of difference and threatened by change and so inward looking.
Liberals are not afraid to be a member of a group, and an individual, both, and they are not afraid of the contradictions this creates ... This is more sane I would argue since it more realistically engages Life ... Life as it presents itself to the human experience ...
Snerd
Amy, I agree that child shouldn't be wearing that shirt, but it's pretty much tame when you compare it to San Freakco Bay area.
I wish I brought a friend with me when my son and I ran the Bay to Breakers in 2004. We both wore a army workout shirt and I had the American flag and PJ had the Army flag. We didn't wear anything political, other than our support for the troops and America. Our family was raising money to send care packages to troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Well, judging by the reaction from crowd you'd think we we're mass murderers covered in blood. There was this one mother of this family that cussed me up and down in front of her 6 year old daughter. Told me that I should be charged with child abuse for exposing my son to the Army culture. Guess what it took for her to stop verbally abusing us? A gay naked guy who probably took 10 viagras before the race, she wanted her family to take a picture with him.
snerd gronk: that was Karl Marx, don't quote me out of context. Ok? Marx never addressed the concept of conservatives as we use it today in USA political parties. Conservative is use by the Democratic Party to indicate an ideology that Democratic FDR helped form, inadvertently, and Truman crystallized – both democrats: that of economic imperialism and state interventionism. Bush who went into Iraq was then termed a neocon by the Democratic party that advocates to end much of military spending and focus upon domestic issues and no longer to seek capitalistic ventures. Conservativism as opposed to liberalism ( meaning in this case progressive politics away from USA traditions) was an ideology formed by the Democratic Party in the 1950s. It expressed the USA’s new role on global dominance and its ideology to spread freedom and democracy – now seen by Obama and the radical anti-westerners as immoral, evil and needs to be stopped.
“Consequently, liberals tending to explore differences” that was republicanism ideas during the Italian Renaissance, in which the elite families that had money and took over the control of government with oligarchies, and ended public rule by the republicans were in fact the rebirth of liberalism and anything goes was the base core of their values. This included imperialism, which you frame as conservatism, or neoconism. That is all well and good but you are twisting words around like so many other leftists to suit your political ideas to try to break that paradox which exists in idealism of the very core of Marxist ideology ( not what Karl Marx said, but those who tried to interpret him after he was gone said). Now that you have a clearer idea, than “Consequently, liberals tending to explore differences” is a correct statement – that include murder, divorce, subjugation of indigenous tribes etc.. this is exactly how Karl Marx framed it. Later in history, these things were changed around by the leftists who only liked some of the ideas and not the others. Still they could not disassociate themselves from individualist ideas as opposed to the necessity of the group.
"Liberals are not afraid to be a member of a group, and an individual, both"
yes, that is the paradox. At least you understand it. But now scientifically prove that it can exist within a moralist broad spectrum of society. Karl Marx, as intelligent as he was, could not break the paradox.
Hey ... Given that the elephant on the T-Shirt is a (R), are they having straight or gay sex!?
Snerd