The Liberals will ban the bible!

[Guest SP-1]

Why would liberals want to ban a book of fables?

That's debatable. But in another folder.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I've just gotten incredibly bored with this place. Every day it's the same shit, over, and over, and over, and over, and over again.

I hear ya. Sometimes I just want to pull my hair out when I read "OMG Kerry is beating Bush in the latest Bob Smith poll," or "How can any Bush supporter vote for this NAZI?"

 

That's why the good lord created other folders. Expand your horizons here -- don't read some hippie book...

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0925bible25.html

 

GOP admits anti-liberal mailing

 

David D. Kirkpatrick

New York Times

Sept. 25, 2004 12:00 AM

 

The Republican Party on Thursday acknowledged sending mass mailings to residents of two states warning that liberals seek to ban the Bible.

 

The mailings include images of the Bible labeled "banned" and of a gay marriage proposal labeled "allowed." A mailing to Arkansas residents warns: "This will be Arkansas . . . if you don't vote." A similar mailing was sent recently to residents of West Virginia.

 

On Thursday, a liberal religious group, the Interfaith Alliance, circulated a copy of the Arkansas mailing to reporters in order to publicize it. "What they are doing is despicable," said Don Parker, a spokesman for the group. "They are playing on people's fears and emotions."

 

Christine Iverson, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, confirmed that the mailings had been sent out by the party.

 

"When the Massachusetts Supreme Court sanctioned same-sex marriage and people in other states realized they could be compelled to recognize those laws, same-sex marriage became an issue," Iverson said. "These same activist judges also want to remove the words 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance."

 

The mailing is the latest evidence of the emphasis Republicans are placing on motivating conservative Christian voters to go to the polls this fall.

 

But as the appeals become public, they also risk alienating more moderate and potential swing voters.

 

In statement, Sen. John Edwards, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, said President Bush "should condemn the practice immediately and tell everyone associated with the campaign to never use tactics like this again."

 

Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, called the mailings an ugly contrast to Bush's public statements.

 

"The president takes more or less the high road and his henchman and allies on the right have been let loose to conduct these ugly, divisive smear campaigns," Foreman said. "It is wedge politics at its worst."

 

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Message works without the "Bible banning" part -- they shouldn't have added that...

[Guest GreatOne]

I live in Texas, but in a city that is solidly Democratic. So, we get BUTT-fucked by Austin on just about everything. It took us ten years to get a medical college expansion, while other cities get them every day.

AUSTIN, AUSTIN, BY GAWD THE TEXAS RATTLESNAKE..............

 

Oops sorry, wrong folder

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Message works without the "Bible banning" part -- they shouldn't have added that...

No US politician except Howard Dean and Gavin Newsom (and that New York mayor who tried to ride his coattails) will touch the marriage thing, though. Everybody else wants unions, which was conveniently left out, because a large chunk of people (could I say *gasp* a majority?) who are non-hicks don't have a problem with unions.

 

I don't know who leaked the Bible banning plans, though. Wouldn't have been me. That mission was far too important to me to give it away this early.

[2GOLD 0]

Well if the democrats are going to do everything listed in that add, I might vote for them.

 

Cept the abortion part. The rest, hey rocking.

[SuperJerk 0]

So....did we ever figure out which Arkansas Democrats want to remove "under God" from the pledge?

[Guest Cerebus]

I didn't see "Banning the Bible" under the part where it says "the Liberal Agenda includes."

 

Now that I've seen the ad, this is obviously some hysteria. Liberals REALLY DO want everything in that list so what's the big deal?

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Did you see the part where it said "THE BIBLE" with "banned' written over it?

[Guest Cerebus]

Please.

 

If you buy that then you buy the fact that MoveOn.org wants our soldiers to lose in Iraq based on their latest ad.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

And now, in our latest episode of Distorting The Issue, official party correspondence is compared to 527 advertising.

[Guest Brian]

What's the MoveOn ad like? Does it include a picture of the soldiers with the word "DIE" printed over?

[Guest Cerebus]

  And now, in our latest episode of Distorting The Issue™, official party correspondence is compared to 527 advertising.

 

Right because official party communication works on an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT rhetorical plane than 527 communication. Uh huh.

[Guest MikeSC]

And now, in our latest episode of Distorting The Issue, official party correspondence is compared to 527 advertising.

You mean like Bush going AWOL?

 

How about the claims that Bush disenfranchised 1 million voters in 2000?

-=Mike

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Only 1 million?...

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Ban the bible? How about just the ones the "Gideons"(sp?) put in hotel rooms?

[Special K 0]

Didn't the push to remove 'under God' come from a citizen, not a politician?

 

I'm sick and tired of the political trick of taking a small minority of political views and tying it to one side or another. All Republicans are in the KKK! Liberals want our troops to die!

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

If you take up the history of the organization, I'd wager more Democrats have been a part of the KKK than Republicans.

 

At least in the U.S. Senate, anyway...

[Special K 0]

Yeah, the Democrats used to be the conservatives. I was talking about people saying that since most outspoken bigots are Republican, all Republicans are bigots. Since asshole Ted Rall basically laughed at Pat Tillman's death, all liberals want our soldiers to die.

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

yes.. probably.. Byrd was one for a little bit. Theodore Bilbo claimed he was one. Hugo Black was one for a short time. Harry Truman had a short stint in the Klan (before quitting and getting his money back)

 

there weren't many Republicans in the South from 1900 to about 1964.

 

I'd say most Klansmen are probably not fans of the two party system anyways.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Yeah, the Democrats used to be the conservatives.

I knew what you were getting at -- I just felt like being an asshole.

 

It's amazing to learn what the two major political parties used to be like and how they are now. 60 years ago I might have been a Democrat. I'm not too sure what would have become of Tyler/Jobber/Jigg/etc.

 

Although INXS would still be INXS, though...

[Special K 0]

The thing is, the people that give sides bad names, like Coulter and Rall, probably don't really believe what they're saying. But they get rich just because they write obnoxious outlandish shit.

People read their crap, get ALL pissed off, and that's why both sides think the other side is full of Nazis/anarchists/cannibals etc.

[Styles 0]

Yeah, the Democrats used to be the conservatives.

I knew what you were getting at -- I just felt like being an asshole.

 

It's amazing to learn what the two major political parties used to be like and how they are now. 60 years ago I might have been a Democrat. I'm not too sure what would have become of Tyler/Jobber/Jigg/etc.

 

Although INXS would still be INXS, though...

I like the irony in after clarifying that the KKK used to be predominently Democrats, our own kkk, mentiones he probably would have been a Dem at the time.