no i posted an article about a nutjob dentist who lives near me wanting everyone to write mel gibson in as their vote for president. as far as i know mel gibson has nothing whatsoever to do with this.

and as i said before, you have the right to disagree with anyone you want. i pointed out that you saw "mel gibson, president" in the same sentence and immediately jumped upon the "oh shit, he's a catholic or christian and therefore he MUST want to take away my right to choose." it just illustrates your reactionary nature that you brought to the table in other threads.


yep, and as i have said before some are just to effing funny not to post. they highlight the caricature nature of some of the people involved. if you take the time to notice, the serious articles that i post are generally pulled from fairly balanced sources. most recently i have been pulling a bit from the economist. how right leaning is that?

i seriously cannot believe that this article turned into a freaking abortion debate. FWIW - i believe abortion is murder. i also believe you should retain the right to murder your unborn child until the strong majority of americans decide it must be stopped. since that will never happen, enjoy your right to choose. i find this to be consistant with my support of assisted suicide and the death penalty.

HUH? the article wasn't about the dentist--it was about Mel Gibson! Not one single person has commented on the dentist--you knew exactly where this thread would end up when you posted it. You weren't looking for comments on the "nutjob" dentist. Get real.

Because most of the religious nuts in office immediately want to outlaw abortion. Yup, that's the first conclusion I came to because THAT'S WHAT THESE PEOPLE USUALLY DO. As someone who is concerned about losing the right to choose because of our current administration, I think it is natural to come to that conclusion.

Ahhh, so were back to personal insults. How refreshing.


I guess I have no sense of humor, but I don't get how the article you posted is so outrageously funny. The same goes for your Alice Cooper thread, which was pulled from exactly the same right-wing website. These threads ALWAYS turn into political debates, and you know it. So 'fess up--you post this stuff to get a rise out of people--you don't do it just to get a laugh. If you're just looking to make us all chuckle, perhaps you should post some JOKES instead.

You may have pulled "a bit" from the Economist, but most of the stuff you post is from WorldNetDaily (one of the most extreme right-wing websites out there), and Fox. Every political article you post is pro-Republican and pro-Bush--including the stuff you posted from the Economist.

Good for you. Isn't it great we live in a country where we can disagree about this stuff?

Strangely, the reverse also seems to be true. Go figure.

no, the article was about a dentist in arizona who doesn't like the current candidates and thinks that mel gibson's characters in movies like Braveheart and The Patriot qualify him for the office. again, the dentist is nucking futs.

and let's refer back to my original comment with the link

religious nuts? how very fair and objective of you.

i still think the former king of shock rock talking about rockers being treasonous to rock and roll, by siding with mainstream politicians is pretty funny.

if you get all riled up by it, then that is your issue. in a way if it sparked conversation here then that is good. and BTW look in the humor thread, i DO post a lot of jokes.

ok, here are the number of sources i've linked to in threads i've started in the last month or so.
Fox 3 (2 being AP stories)
Economist 2
CNN 2
WND 2 (1 about alice cooper, 1 about a crazy dentist)
suntimes 1
editor and publisher 1
techcentralstation 1
reuters 1

i am not a bush fan but i do support him over kerry so it kind of makes sense that i would post articles about him doesn't it? i think there are very few people in the cellar who are fans of either candidate. you wouldn't expect happy monkey to post links to pro-bush articles would you? as far as being pro-Republican, get off the effing bus sister, i am not an R.

what else would you call your comments at the beginning of this thread? you see an article about nutjob dentist. it mentions mel gibson and president you flip out and take us down the path of mel gibson wanting to take away your right to choose. is that what you consider calm and rational?

you're right Patrick, i should have been more detailed with that thought. let me rephrase that. i am absolutely amazed at the ability of people to become obsessed with one issue to the exclusion of rational thought on the others. that goes for people of all political outlook.

Fairly. However it's rational which is more than you can say for most republicans.

"Nutjob" dentist? How fair and objective of you.

Easy tiger. You flipped out as soon as I brought up abortion--I've remained perfectly calm. You've gone back to the the old routine of "lets personally insult garnet" because she disagrees ZZZZZZZZZZZZ. B-O-R-I-N-G. I've heard it all before, honey.

BTW, it's TOTALLY obvious that your indeed are a right-winger and just don't want to admit it. Everything you say leans that way, and you know it. Hey, it's OK to admit your beliefs--it's a free country. Just don't be dishonest about and hide behind supposedly posting something because it's "funny" or whatever. It's really, really obvious what you're doing.

where did i insult you? if you go back and reread this thread you will see that there may have been some misunderstanding - i didn't get upset at all. i simply pointed out that it was pretty silly for you to go from point A) a story about a dentist, to point B) mel gibson wants to take away your right to choose.

and i think i have made it perfectly clear that i do lean to the right. I believe the 2 party system is BS but i am not into the LP so i remain independent and vote for the individuals that i think will do the best job. get this - once that was even bill clinton OMG! but please, if it is obvious that i am a right-winger, point out to me exactly which of my beliefs makes me a right-winger and while we're at it let's pick apart my beliefs and educate me as to why they are wrong.

i don't hide behind anything garnet, never have, never will. i've got nothing to lose, so why bother hiding? when i think something is funny i say so. if you don't find it funny that's ok. but don't pretend to know what i think or what i find funny.

Jag, we've already had this discussion. it is all a matter of perspective. to you the economist is right leaning. to the majority of americans it is either centrist or left leaning. this is the publication that declared GWB wasn't president about a year after the election.

and i think rather than saying most republicans are irrational it would be more fair to say that most people who hold strongly to any party line are pretty irrational.

Going back a month or two, here are some of the threads you've started:

"Kerry's Three-Faced Foreign Policy"
"Planned Parenthood's Fashion Line"
"Economist Says Bush in a Landslide"
"Pelosi Discards a Little More Credibility"
"DNC News, or Lack Thereof"
"Kerry Changes Mind!!!"
"Questions About [Michael] Moore's Facts"
"John Kerry Flips the Bird"

I'd say that's a little more than "leaning" right. And funny, I don't see any pro-Kerry or pro-Democrat threads there for someone who's so "unbiased". Hmmmm.

and no, I have no interest in picking apart your beliefs. Believe whatever you want--I could care less.

Call me crazy, but somebody sounds a liiiiiittle bit touchy to me there....

Then could not the banning of state-sanctioned (murder) of a fetus be considered "good common sense" as well? Common sense can be defined so many ways...

BTW, I am not a rabid Catholic or anti-abortionist, but I *am* a troublemaker ;)

Brian

was a very well written article about the 3 phases of Kerry's political evolution.

was a link to PP's page where they were selling a very tacky tshirt

was an article talking about the major investment players and who they are looking to win.
read the thread, you may be a little surprised at the outcome.
i posted all types of articles about the goings on of the DNC to that thread during the week. there wasn't much news going on at the time as may be noted in the thread title.
was talking about THK's evolution since being the wife of an R politician.
michael moore is an asshat. i think HM did a very good job answering the questions. i don't necessarily agree with it all, but HM as usual did a great job.
Kerry flipped a guy off. i pointed out the lack of thinking in the action. just like i thought GWB was stupid for getting caught calling a guy and asshole on a live mike four years ago. when you are running the most important election of your life you should be able to think about the consequences of your actions under a microscope.


so there we go. as i said i support bush over kerry. kerry was in the news a lot during that time frame so there was plenty of fodder publications to pick from. i post and comment on what i see. just like hm and most of the cellarites favor kerry over bush, i wouldn't expect to see them posting a lot of pro-bush articles. but exactly how does my preference for bush over kerry make me a big bad right-winger? (obvious negative connotation) very few people are really far right or far left unless they are running for office and trying to get the support of a large activist base. most of us are pretty close to the middle because we go in different directions on different issues.

do you want to talk issues or do you want to throw around subjective names like right-winger vs liberal? if you just want to throw around names, that is fine, but it does get old after awhile and it doesn't really help us to understand where the other person is coming from, which i think is the point of having the discussions we do around here. i think that most of us, while we don't have our minds changed from what we see in the cellar too often; we do learn by seeing how other cellarites respond to certain issues and questions.

Lookout, Garnet...if you guys want to flame each other, there's a private message feature you can use to keep your cock-measuring and destruction of an otherwise interesting discussion to a minimum.

As far as the abrotion debate goes, I will be pro-choice until I see common-sense, logical evidence to support the other side. Every argument I've seen from pro-life folk has boiled down to a religious issue, and therefore is invalid until the neocons actually establish the theocracy they are pushing oh-so-hard for. Abortion may be a sin, it may be immoral, it may be genuinely wrong, and there may be other options. Take that into account when you make YOUR decision as to whether your fetus (not baby, fetus, non-viable clump of cells that only differs from a tumor with regards to potential) should be brought into this world or not.

EDIT: I feel I have to add that another reason I'm pro-choice is that it is *not my decision*. As a male, I think I'm already over-stepping my bounds in having an opinion at all, because I'm not the one with the little bundle of DNA in my belly. In a functioning relationship, should the father be consulted as to the fate of his child? Of course he should. But the final decision rests on the mother. That being said, I could not justify to myself the idea that I might take away this woman's right to make a decision on an issue that doesn't actually concern me or my body.

"Protestors at abortion clinics are suing for the right to block entrances and harrass women as they enter the clinic. It's rather ironic, they want the right to do what they want with their bodies."
---Paraphrased from Dennis Miller

So Kerry was the only one who did anything negative in the past couple months? Everything about Bush is positive? Nope, doesn't fly.


Again, I don't really care what your beliefs are, and I never said being right-leaning makes you a "bad" person. I just don't think you're being honest about your motives in posting the things you do.