(08-07-2013 08:35 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 08:24 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 07:58 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Obama's full throated condemnation of a violent, LETHAL, pogrom by Russia against its LGBT minority is one of the reasons why I'm glad I voted for him twice.

exactly: even if a GOPer could come up with a sensible economic plan, at the end of the day taking the correct stance on social issues is just as important

So when the Soviet Union was under communist rule, killed 50+ million of their own citizens, and plotted world domination, the American left was largely silent.

But now that Russia is mean to gays, its the evil empire.

Okay .....

Communist Russia was awful for our people. We condemned them then.

By the way, where were all the pro-Communist Gay persons? I think you're confusing the American Left (what ever you determine that to be) and the Gay rights movement.

From 1917 to 1989, the American left did not criticize the Soviet Union. In fact, they were often apologists for the USSR. This went on while the USSR killed scores of millions of their own people and had their evil tentacles all over the world, trying to spread their totalitarian nightmare.

But now, Russia isn't treating gays nicely and the American left is apoplectic with rage.

It just seems a little odd. It's amazing what upsets the left and what doesn't bother them at all.

i totally call BS on that.

maybe all that conservative slander from the right that liberals hate america is starting to alter your perception of reality?

i mean hell its not like.....

democrats such as Truman, kennedy, & LBJ never took hardline stances against communists.....or fought wars against them

its not like we have nixon (who visited china), and threw in the towel during vietnam

or eisenhower's making peace with korea, "atoms for peace" trying to cool cold war tensions, and getting embarrassed by the soviets during the U-2 incident

i mean sure your boy ronald sure had fun taking credit for the fall of the soviet union......but lets not forget a person named charlie wilson who actually figure out a way to kill soviets while the president traded guns for hostages

i think its safe to say the democrats > the republicans when it comes to "who was more aggressive towards the soviets"

(08-07-2013 10:22 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i totally call BS on that.

maybe all that conservative slander from the right that liberals hate america is starting to alter your perception of reality?

I'm old. I lived through it.

Read some old newspapers and magazines. Talk to some old timers like me. The left never criticized the USSR. Instead, they went after conservatives for being "paranoid" about the USSR and exaggerating the threat.

(08-07-2013 10:32 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i mean hell its not like.....

democrats such as Truman, kennedy, & LBJ never took hardline stances against communists.....or fought wars against them

its not like we have nixon (who visited china), and threw in the towel during vietnam

or eisenhower's making peace with korea, "atoms for peace" trying to cool cold war tensions, and getting embarrassed by the soviets during the U-2 incident

i mean sure your boy ronald sure had fun taking credit for the fall of the soviet union......but lets not forget a person named charlie wilson who actually figure out a way to kill soviets while the president traded guns for hostages

i think its safe to say the democrats > the republicans when it comes to "who was more aggressive towards the soviets"

You have got to be kidding me. There is so much wrong with that post it makes my head hurt trying to sift through it all.

(08-07-2013 10:36 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:22 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i totally call BS on that.

maybe all that conservative slander from the right that liberals hate america is starting to alter your perception of reality?

I'm old. I lived through it.

Read some old papers and magazines. Talk to some old timers like me. The left never criticized the USSR. Instead, they went after conservatives for being "paranoid" about the USSR and exaggerating the threat.

oh so libs resisted mccarthyism......looking back I think they made the right call

(08-07-2013 10:37 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:32 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i mean hell its not like.....

democrats such as Truman, kennedy, & LBJ never took hardline stances against communists.....or fought wars against them

its not like we have nixon (who visited china), and threw in the towel during vietnam

or eisenhower's making peace with korea, "atoms for peace" trying to cool cold war tensions, and getting embarrassed by the soviets during the U-2 incident

i mean sure your boy ronald sure had fun taking credit for the fall of the soviet union......but lets not forget a person named charlie wilson who actually figure out a way to kill soviets while the president traded guns for hostages

i think its safe to say the democrats > the republicans when it comes to "who was more aggressive towards the soviets"

You have got to be kidding me. There is so much wrong with that post it makes my head hurt trying to sift through it all.

now you know how i feel when i have to listen to you

(08-07-2013 10:39 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:37 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:32 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i mean hell its not like.....

democrats such as Truman, kennedy, & LBJ never took hardline stances against communists.....or fought wars against them

its not like we have nixon (who visited china), and threw in the towel during vietnam

or eisenhower's making peace with korea, "atoms for peace" trying to cool cold war tensions, and getting embarrassed by the soviets during the U-2 incident

i mean sure your boy ronald sure had fun taking credit for the fall of the soviet union......but lets not forget a person named charlie wilson who actually figure out a way to kill soviets while the president traded guns for hostages

i think its safe to say the democrats > the republicans when it comes to "who was more aggressive towards the soviets"

You have got to be kidding me. There is so much wrong with that post it makes my head hurt trying to sift through it all.

now you know how i feel when i have to listen to you

What's the point of making a post if you can't even believe in what you are saying?

(08-07-2013 09:37 PM)blah Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 08:19 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 08:04 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 07:52 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 07:35 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  But nary a word about how Muslim countries treat homosexuals. (Hint, it's a lot worse than Russia.)

Actually, he went to Senegal (a MUSLIM country) two months ago and condemned their anti-Gay laws right there.

Russia is very close to be worst country in the world right now for Gay persons, including the Muslim ones.

In the last week, a Gay child was brutally raped and then murdered in a filmed attack (he was killed by having an air hose stuck up his rear end and then having his intestines exploded from the inside). Although the crime was FILMED and the perpetrators are CLEARLY visible, Russia will not arrest them. A lone protester simply holding a sign opposing a Russian law was assaulted by Russian paratroopers in full view of the world's media (Again, no arrests). A libertarian woman (not Gay) was assaulted in Central Moscow last week simply for 'looking Gay'. Again no arrests. That's just this week. Who knows what new atrocities next week will bring.

Meanwhile, the Russian Orthodox Church openly advocates violence against Gay persons (not spiritual violence, but actual violence). The Russian government (with the support of some extremists from the US, such as Scott Lively) just enacted a Nuremburg Law that effectively strips Gay Russians of citizenship.

Obama's full throated condemnation of a violent, LETHAL, pogrom by Russia against its LGBT minority is one of the reasons why I'm glad I voted for him twice.

Nice try. Seven Muslim countries have the death penalty for homsexuals. Russia doesnt.

Here's a hint, Mr. Parrothead. You might want to educate yourself before you go out on a limb about Russia. Its every bit as bad as I'm representing. Probably worse.

While Saudi Arabia has the death penalty (as well as Iran and Christian Guyana), more people are getting killed for being Gay in Russia than in any of those nations.

More Gay persons have been jailed in Christian areas of NIGERIA and in Christian Camaroon than in Iran this year.

Saudi Arabia and Iran are the worst offenders to be sure. But, Russia, Camaroon, and Nigeria aren't far behind. Neither is Nigeria. Morocco and are really bad too.

But Russia is hosting the Olympics and the World Cup. If Saudi Arabia were hosting, we'd be doing the same to them. And don't worry, we'll be holding Qatar to the same standard we are holding Russia to now (We've got a special sports celebrity to lead the calls of outrage against Qatar - he's not gay, but he's also banned from Qatar). But that can wait until after we ruin Putin's Pogrom Olympics. And make no mistake, we are going to make sure that the entire games is one long, LOUD, condemnation of Putin's abuse of our community. We're just getting started.

Who's "We"? Are you in the gay police corps?

P.S. That intimidation only works in the U.S. Other countries don't give a crap about you....

Either Russia will change or they will be a cautionary tale. We can't invade, but we can make sure that their abuse is thrown in their faces at every opportunity.

We = Gay community.

(08-07-2013 10:40 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:39 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:37 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:32 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i mean hell its not like.....

democrats such as Truman, kennedy, & LBJ never took hardline stances against communists.....or fought wars against them

its not like we have nixon (who visited china), and threw in the towel during vietnam

or eisenhower's making peace with korea, "atoms for peace" trying to cool cold war tensions, and getting embarrassed by the soviets during the U-2 incident

i mean sure your boy ronald sure had fun taking credit for the fall of the soviet union......but lets not forget a person named charlie wilson who actually figure out a way to kill soviets while the president traded guns for hostages

i think its safe to say the democrats > the republicans when it comes to "who was more aggressive towards the soviets"

You have got to be kidding me. There is so much wrong with that post it makes my head hurt trying to sift through it all.

now you know how i feel when i have to listen to you

What's the point of making a post if you can't even believe in what you are saying?

considering the ridiculousness of your postings over the years......should you really be talking about this?

(08-07-2013 10:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:40 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:39 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:37 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:32 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i mean hell its not like.....

democrats such as Truman, kennedy, & LBJ never took hardline stances against communists.....or fought wars against them

its not like we have nixon (who visited china), and threw in the towel during vietnam

or eisenhower's making peace with korea, "atoms for peace" trying to cool cold war tensions, and getting embarrassed by the soviets during the U-2 incident

i mean sure your boy ronald sure had fun taking credit for the fall of the soviet union......but lets not forget a person named charlie wilson who actually figure out a way to kill soviets while the president traded guns for hostages

i think its safe to say the democrats > the republicans when it comes to "who was more aggressive towards the soviets"

You have got to be kidding me. There is so much wrong with that post it makes my head hurt trying to sift through it all.

now you know how i feel when i have to listen to you

What's the point of making a post if you can't even believe in what you are saying?

considering the ridiculousness of your postings over the years......should you really be talking about this?

A statement and a question:

1. My posts are valid. They are not always mainstream, but they are valid.

2. Were you Leland?

leland? seriously?

when have i ever come off as someone who would play the role of "ex army, internet millionaire, whose parents died (insert random death story)"

(08-07-2013 10:50 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:40 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:39 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:37 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  You have got to be kidding me. There is so much wrong with that post it makes my head hurt trying to sift through it all.

now you know how i feel when i have to listen to you

What's the point of making a post if you can't even believe in what you are saying?

considering the ridiculousness of your postings over the years......should you really be talking about this?

A statement and a question:

1. My posts are vile. They are not always cognitive, but they are vile.

FIFY

(08-07-2013 10:32 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i mean hell its not like.....

democrats such as Truman, kennedy, & LBJ never took hardline stances against communists.....or fought wars against them

its not like we have nixon (who visited china), and threw in the towel during vietnam

or eisenhower's making peace with korea, "atoms for peace" trying to cool cold war tensions, and getting embarrassed by the soviets during the U-2 incident

i mean sure your boy ronald sure had fun taking credit for the fall of the soviet union......but lets not forget a person named charlie wilson who actually figure out a way to kill soviets while the president traded guns for hostages

i think its safe to say the democrats > the republicans when it comes to "who was more aggressive towards the soviets"

You may know how to do your job very well. You may be a very good father. You may be generous and kind to old ladies.

But you're clueless on politics.

(08-08-2013 06:14 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 10:32 PM)john01992 Wrote:  i mean hell its not like.....

democrats such as Truman, kennedy, & LBJ never took hardline stances against communists.....or fought wars against them

its not like we have nixon (who visited china), and threw in the towel during vietnam

or eisenhower's making peace with korea, "atoms for peace" trying to cool cold war tensions, and getting embarrassed by the soviets during the U-2 incident

i mean sure your boy ronald sure had fun taking credit for the fall of the soviet union......but lets not forget a person named charlie wilson who actually figure out a way to kill soviets while the president traded guns for hostages

i think its safe to say the democrats > the republicans when it comes to "who was more aggressive towards the soviets"

You may know how to do your job very well. You may be a very good father. You may be generous and kind to old ladies.

But you're clueless on politics.

Sounds like a great guy

Obama isn't even going to meet with Putin.
What does either of them care about the other?
Not too much.

(08-07-2013 07:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  sometimes you gotta pick the battles you can win.

the middle east has a long list of minority groups that suffer the wrath of their ultra conservative religious society. as much as their culture sickens most americans. picking a fight on what they view as their religious custom and a group of people who already feel there is too much western interference in their lives is just not worth it.

russia on the other hand should know better. they are a developed european society thats a security council member and host of the next olympics

I'm just going to sit here and bask it the racism of the left...

(08-07-2013 08:03 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-07-2013 07:54 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I'm sure Putin has now scheduled a meeting with the Human Rights Campaign.

Nah, the Human Rights Campaign is too busy being useful once by leading the campaign to ruin the Sochi Pogrom (oops I mean Olympic Games).

The best way to deal with Russia is to humiliate them (Neither reason, nor economic considerations worked). Make them get visas to go anywhere. Let them spend 60 Billion bucks on the Winter (!) Olympics and then have them reap nothing but scorn from the civilized world.

By the way, I don't know why you're upset with the Human Rights Campaign. They're usually really ineffective. Equality Texas? That's a group that punches above its weight class.

But we can all be happy that the IOC is going to have a real problem with their sponsors now. And the IOC is filled with America-haters (no American sits on their board, even though we pay most of their bills, and they've been trying to demote all sports that we do well in). They, and Russia, are going to get a nice big PR black eye. And its all both their doing. Comcast/NBC is going to lose their rear ends on the games. They won't be paying the IOC as much next time.

And FIFA is next.

Putin really does look humiliated. I'm sure he didn't sleep last night in worried of getting a stern condemnation letter from Obama and the Eurocrats.

I would prefer that our President focus on domestic affairs and keep his pie hole closed in reference to the affairs of other nations. This does not put a single American back to work.

(08-08-2013 08:02 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I would prefer that our President focus on domestic affairs and keep his pie hole closed in reference to the affairs of other nations. This does not put a single American back to work.

That would require actual executive and legislative work, not just campaigning. We don't have a president capable of that.