Party Tonight! Honor the Fallen!
- Thread starter Pure
- Start date
G
Guest
Guest
I'll have a few celebratory drinks with you, Pure.
And then I'll do a happy dance.
And then I'll do a happy dance.
Huckleman2000
It was something I ate.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Posts
- 4,400
Blue skies
Smiling at me
Nothing but blue skies
Do I see
Bluebirds
Singing a song
Nothing but bluebirds
All day long
Smiling at me
Nothing but blue skies
Do I see
Bluebirds
Singing a song
Nothing but bluebirds
All day long
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
Here's a neat list
from the Huffington Post, Geiger's column
It's the rightwingers who are most 'pure' in their voting, on the moral issues of the 'religious right.'
I make it that 5 of the 6 went down, correct? Howard Dean. Kudos.
[start excerpt]
FRC [Family Researach Council]and FOF [Focus on Family] recently took a break from pushing intolerance and bigotry long enough to publish their 2006 Vote Scorecard in which they have monitored the votes made in the second half of the 109th Congress and rated all Representatives and Senators on
"significant votes representing a cross section of issues affecting the family."
"We have singled out for inclusion the most clear-cut, pro-family votes that came before Congress," they say in their introduction to the ratings. "The votes recorded here are only part of our effort to protect the family. Only through your help as informed and active constituents, working with us in contacting your Members of Congress on pro-family issues, can we truly make headway with the increased pro-family majority in Washington."
The gist, of course, is to tell us which people in Congress most conform to the Religious Right's view of how our society should operate and, using that as a guide, help us decide how to vote in this critical midterm election.
And help us they did because, I've got to tell you, their conclusions make a lot of sense to me.
To evaluate what they consider to be the "pro-family issues" and associated votes made by U.S. Senators in 2006, the two organizations looked at eight items considered by the Senate:
Cloture motion on the nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., to the Supreme Court
Confirmation of Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., to the Supreme Court
Confirmation of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the U.S. Court of Appeals
Cloture motion on Marriage Protection Amendment
Embryonic Stem Cell Research Act
Lautenberg Sex-Ed Amendment
Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act
Sponsorship of Marriage Protection Amendment
So, you've got your basic anti-choice, anti-gay, right-wing judge agenda there -- man, and they say we liberals have a litmus tests for government officials.
For the record, the Lautenberg amendment would have modified the Child Custody Protection Act -- synonymous with the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act -- by funding sex education and condom-distribution programs for at-risk teens which, according to the Religious Right, would have "... undermined abstinence-until-marriage education programs."
After all, you don't want hormone-driven teens educated on how to avoid pregnancy, do you?
They then scored each of the Senators on the percentage of times they agreed with the agenda of FOF and FRC and it certainly does provide a helpful guide for us.
There were 23 Republican Senators scoring 100 percent for compliance with these groups and among those was the following Rogues Gallery of guys who happen to be up for reelection on Tuesday:
Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
Jim Talent (R-MO)
Conrad Burns (R-MT)
Mike DeWine (R-OH)
Rick Santorum (R-PA)
George Allen (R-VA) [end excerpt]
from the Huffington Post, Geiger's column
It's the rightwingers who are most 'pure' in their voting, on the moral issues of the 'religious right.'
I make it that 5 of the 6 went down, correct? Howard Dean. Kudos.
[start excerpt]
FRC [Family Researach Council]and FOF [Focus on Family] recently took a break from pushing intolerance and bigotry long enough to publish their 2006 Vote Scorecard in which they have monitored the votes made in the second half of the 109th Congress and rated all Representatives and Senators on
"significant votes representing a cross section of issues affecting the family."
"We have singled out for inclusion the most clear-cut, pro-family votes that came before Congress," they say in their introduction to the ratings. "The votes recorded here are only part of our effort to protect the family. Only through your help as informed and active constituents, working with us in contacting your Members of Congress on pro-family issues, can we truly make headway with the increased pro-family majority in Washington."
The gist, of course, is to tell us which people in Congress most conform to the Religious Right's view of how our society should operate and, using that as a guide, help us decide how to vote in this critical midterm election.
And help us they did because, I've got to tell you, their conclusions make a lot of sense to me.
To evaluate what they consider to be the "pro-family issues" and associated votes made by U.S. Senators in 2006, the two organizations looked at eight items considered by the Senate:
Cloture motion on the nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., to the Supreme Court
Confirmation of Judge Samuel A. Alito, Jr., to the Supreme Court
Confirmation of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the U.S. Court of Appeals
Cloture motion on Marriage Protection Amendment
Embryonic Stem Cell Research Act
Lautenberg Sex-Ed Amendment
Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act
Sponsorship of Marriage Protection Amendment
So, you've got your basic anti-choice, anti-gay, right-wing judge agenda there -- man, and they say we liberals have a litmus tests for government officials.
For the record, the Lautenberg amendment would have modified the Child Custody Protection Act -- synonymous with the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act -- by funding sex education and condom-distribution programs for at-risk teens which, according to the Religious Right, would have "... undermined abstinence-until-marriage education programs."
After all, you don't want hormone-driven teens educated on how to avoid pregnancy, do you?
They then scored each of the Senators on the percentage of times they agreed with the agenda of FOF and FRC and it certainly does provide a helpful guide for us.
There were 23 Republican Senators scoring 100 percent for compliance with these groups and among those was the following Rogues Gallery of guys who happen to be up for reelection on Tuesday:
Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
Jim Talent (R-MO)
Conrad Burns (R-MT)
Mike DeWine (R-OH)
Rick Santorum (R-PA)
George Allen (R-VA) [end excerpt]
Last edited:
Rumple Foreskin
The AH Patriarch
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2002
- Posts
- 11,109
Pure said:
Donald Rumsfeld (Texas inside insult) - Even a Texas Aggie should be an improvement as Sec. of Defense.
(soon to be former US Senator's)
Rick Santorum (R-PA)
George Allen (R-VA)
Jim Talent (R-MO)
Conrad Burns (R-MT)
Mike DeWine (R-OH)
To that list of inchoate GOP has-beens, may I add:
Denny Hastert (as Speaker of the House)
Tom DeLay (as House Majority leader, as a US Rep., as a Texan)
And a tip-of-the-hat and a double-shot of single-malt scotch to Tammy Duckworth and Harold Ford who fought the good fight but came up short.
Rumple Foreskin
Last edited:
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
nice ta see ya cloudy--- belly up to bar.
margaritas on around.!
---
here's a famous Santorum quote, typifying the Bushies hypocrisy:
note the combination of confused thinking and blatant attempt to 'push buttons'..... a kind of Rovian flavor:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-04-23-santorum-excerpt_x.htm
SANTORUM: We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose. Because, again, I would argue, they undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything.
Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold — Griswold was the contraceptive case — and abortion.
And now we're just extending it out. And the further you extend it out, the more you — this freedom actually intervenes and affects the family. You say, well, it's my individual freedom. Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that's antithetical to strong healthy families. Whether it's polygamy, whether it's adultery, where it's sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family.
---
The bolded part is a reference to Griswold, which upheld a woman's right to purchase contraception because of her 'privacy' rights to her own body! S found that a stretch!
margaritas on around.!
---
here's a famous Santorum quote, typifying the Bushies hypocrisy:
note the combination of confused thinking and blatant attempt to 'push buttons'..... a kind of Rovian flavor:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-04-23-santorum-excerpt_x.htm
SANTORUM: We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose. Because, again, I would argue, they undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything.
Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold — Griswold was the contraceptive case — and abortion.
And now we're just extending it out. And the further you extend it out, the more you — this freedom actually intervenes and affects the family. You say, well, it's my individual freedom. Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that's antithetical to strong healthy families. Whether it's polygamy, whether it's adultery, where it's sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family.
---
The bolded part is a reference to Griswold, which upheld a woman's right to purchase contraception because of her 'privacy' rights to her own body! S found that a stretch!
G
Guest
Guest
Pure said:
I'll take margaritas as well, Pure, many thanks.
Oh! And I know the Santorum thing! Pick me! Pick me!
Senator Rick Santorum: the frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.
See link - http://www.spreadingsantorum.com/index2.html
G
Guest
Guest
Pure said:
Stop that!
Back door is an entirely different matter, altogether.
(It's an entirely different matter.)
G
Guest
Guest
Pure said:
Oh, too funny.
I hate Dobson, the dweeb.
More margaritas, Pure!
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
a toast to ann! hoist a sweaty jockstrap!
she's a bit out of sorts; but, to give her credit she did NOT share Rove's or Amicus' optimism about the election.
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi
So the left won the House and also Nicaragua. They've had a good week. At least they don't have their finger on the atom bomb yet.
Democrats support surrender in Iraq, higher taxes and the impeachment of President Bush. They just won an election by pretending to be against all three.
she's a bit out of sorts; but, to give her credit she did NOT share Rove's or Amicus' optimism about the election.
http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi
So the left won the House and also Nicaragua. They've had a good week. At least they don't have their finger on the atom bomb yet.
Democrats support surrender in Iraq, higher taxes and the impeachment of President Bush. They just won an election by pretending to be against all three.
G
Guest
Guest
Pure said:
Jesus.
She really needs to get laid.
3113
Hello Summer!
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2005
- Posts
- 13,823
A Pina Colada for me....
http://www.dianasdesserts.com/assets/managed/recipes/Pina_Colada_2A.jpg
And a restful, resort vacation on a tropical island to go with it. I feel like I can finally leave the country...and maybe come back to it
http://www.dianasdesserts.com/assets/managed/recipes/Pina_Colada_2A.jpg
And a restful, resort vacation on a tropical island to go with it. I feel like I can finally leave the country...and maybe come back to it
Last edited:
Belegon
Still Kicking Around
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2003
- Posts
- 17,033
sweetsubsarahh said:
Just for fun, I went to her "Picture Gallery".
http://www.anncoulter.com/thumbs/silver-dress.jpg
What in the fucking blessed holy name of Kate Moss and Lindsey Lohan was that?
Bitch has got some toothpicky arms...she don't need to get laid. She needs somebody to throw her a guldarn sandwich. Or some Pizza or a steak or something. Jeez Ann, EAT SOMETHING!!!!! You can't live on W's thrown kisses, baby...
G
Guest
Guest
Belegon said:
Don't call her baby, Will. She's - creepy.
Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
there are some 'right' comments on the election at the National Review (which had become very critical of the present Republicans)
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDgxNTZiOGM3OTQzODUxM2FlNGY3NGM1YTA2YzFhNDU=
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDgxNTZiOGM3OTQzODUxM2FlNGY3NGM1YTA2YzFhNDU=
Similar threads
