i wasnt using my civil liberties

[artandrevolution]

however, it seems that you are the only one hating here. Go spew your bullshit on a different forum or post a god damn picture. This is my thread, so at least respect it. I could give a rats ass who you voted for and why.

[erichmangl]

PS, I hate I hate I hate I hate ...

what an exciting life

[artandrevolution]

feel the love

[arachnophilia]

So you love the constitution, but you wanna retro-revolution back to pre-9/11 and just wanna make other socialist-majority blowhards in europe shut their whining about an america-first president.

no, i WANT an america-first president. like i said, i was without power for a week while they were building power stations in iraq. how is that america first?

So you love the nation but hate the people who voted for Bush.

no, all the hate seems to be coming from your side of the argument. i was just correcting some definitions. it's not my fault that you're just wrong.

So you have a photo-promo of some feral douche bag protesters.

actually, no i don't. but i have been a "feral douche bag protestor" before. i've personally talked to one of my congressmen, and from our discussion feel that he has never read the constitution either.

and, like i said, you're the one expressing hatred for people who disagree. disagreement is the fundamental principle of democracy. it's why we have free speech and elections.

So you don't agree with their ideology, but you feel threatened and intellectually uncomfortable under the Homeland Security measures.

"those who would trade an essential liberty for a little temporary security deserve neither" -- benjamin franklin.

if the administration is going to tell us that the terrorists are attacking us because of our freedom, and that we have to spread this freedom all over the world -- don't take away our freedoms and rights. it's just inconsistant. and kerry was the flip-flopper, ha!

on top of that, it's just plain wrong.

So what is your position on US sovereignty and such topics as Kyoto and the ICC? Would you fight for your country wearing a blue helmet?

i would fight for my country wearing no helmet, if it was under attack. but then again, the un isn't attacking my rights, the government is.

So what do think of the UN-american class like Ted Turner and Soros and their hobby-horse, the UN, and its fatal weaknesses, based as it is on a corrupt gerrymander?

what on earth are you talking about? i'm sure network execs have this great conspiracy with the un. and how exactly is the un gerrymandering? do you even know what that word means?

Anyone promoting those ferals and anarchists better have good reason to do it. If you had photos of the protests of the Swiftboat Veterans against Kerry, I would be way less hostile.

i don't have photos of ANY protest, buddy. i've been known to GO to protests, but i've never photographed one and published it.

but, let me get this straight. protests you agree with are ok, but protests you don't are wrong? do you understand what the first amendment is and what it means? so what if people disagree with you? get over it, and think for yourself.

What ticked me off was that Kerry & co would not reveal that the Carter admin covered up his UN-american episode and his Less than Honorable Discharge.

it's no unamerican to protest a war -- especially if you've been there and were awarded a purple heart for being injured while serving your country. if protest were not the foundation of democracy than we would not protect it with the very first article of the bill of rights. we do not live in a totalitarion police-state.

Bush had to present his service papers - but Kerry refused to... and he got a free pass from the MSM and the hacks at cBS etc. No MSM like the NYT was motivated to do the story, it was possibly a negative, and the gatekeepers played defense for him. (Some corrupt and shameful 4th Estate you got there). Objectively, any time a dishonorably discharged ex-serviceman makes it onto a presidential ticket, it is big news. Kerry, an outright traitor, should never made it to the primaries let alone the ticket.

first of all, they practically advertised his military record. bush HID his. kerry was awarded a purple heart, bush went awol. these are the FACTS. even if kerry was dishonorably discharged, he is no more guilty than bush for treason. and at least he WENT.

Kerry is reviled by most other Viet Vets for slandering them as war criminals like Fonda did. Do you stand by Kerry? Was he your type of leader? Who would you have in the Whitehouse, Nader perhaps?

no, i don't like nader.

and i find it hard to believe that kerry -- a vietnam veteran -- was slandering vietnam veterans for being war criminals. he's a member of that group. think about it honestly for a second. and i think if he said "we committed war crimes" it's more likely an acurate portrayal of the truth seeing as how he experienced it first hand.

but then again, what was bush doing at the time?

Me -a nationalist? No, a patriot is all. I'm in the service to defend you if need be. And you?

what was the last war where any armed forces were use to protect the american people?

PS, I hate the feral brownshirts in your pics.

they're still not my pictures.

I hate their ignorance.

you're the one who can't even keep straight who you're talking to, nor seem to be able to use a dictionary.

I hate that they are being used by socialist fronts as cannon fodder. I hate that good men are dying to defend them and that they don't gives thanks.

disagreeing with the chief executive of the armed forces does not equate to hating the troops. if you are a member of the armed forces as you implied above then i have no problems with you. i just think your ultimate commanding officer is wrong and putting your life in danger for no important reason. i think you are being asked to die for something other than what you should be fighting for.

Sadly, its par for the course when they have had their buttons pushed by demagoguery and american-hating foreigners (and NGO's like Greenpeace)... its very sad. And its a stain-to-the-bone that never washes off -- just ask Kerry. Look how his anti-establishment days lost him friends forever.

what would you prefer, fearmongering? fearmongering is a nicer word for terrorism, by the way. look at the roots: both create fear and use it to control populations.

the world does not hate america. the world pities and looks down on america. they think we're stupid. we elected a c student, someone who bad with finances and public speaking, someone who allowed the most massive terrorist attack ever on american soil to happen during his term and then used it as a reason to vote for him, a draft dodger when the election was won on the issue of war, and someone who has lied in order to convince people to fight a war costing 100,000 plus lives and god knows how much money.

they don't hate america. the terrorists hate america, and disagreeing does not equate to terrorism. you would do best not to mix the two up.

you would also do very well to study some more history. when a leader convinces people that there is a constant outside threat that can sneak its way into the population, and uses it to unite the population under his rule, uses it to gain more power than his office should hold, starts invading other countries, and the people are willing to do away with things like the right to dissent because it threatens them... what happens then?

people have done it before. bush is doing it now. it's not me being paranoid, these things are happening to this country and you are the prime evidence that it is happening.

[ukexpat]

Maybe you should continue this "discussion" in the Politics forum so that those of us who have no wish to see it can avoid it?

[dubbellu]

Maybe you should continue this "discussion" in the Politics forum so that those of us who have no wish to see it can avoid it?

Ssssst, you're waking him again

[lord_of_the_badgers]

Maybe you should continue this "discussion" in the Politics forum so that those of us who have no wish to see it can avoid it?

ditto what Nigel said.