The sad thing is this isn't even hyperbole:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
QuoteRepublicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to "forcible rape." This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion. [snip]
Other types of rapes that would no longer be covered by the exemption include rapes in which the woman was drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol, rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date rapes.
And:
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2011/01/military-michele-bachmann-veterans-budget-cuts-012811w/
QuoteTea party favorite Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., has unveiled a plan for cutting $400 billion in federal spending that includes freezing Veterans Affairs Department health care spending and cutting veterans' disability benefits.
Her proposed VA budget cuts would account for $4.5 billion of the savings included in the plan, posted on her official House of Representatives website.
Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, said cutting veterans' health care spending is an ill-advised move at a time when the number of veterans continues to grow as troops return from Iraq and Afghanistan. Sullivan said he finds it difficult to see how VA could freeze health care costs without hurting veterans.
I eagerly await the Kitten Disembowlment and Puppy Evisceration Act of 2011.
I had seen the first, but not the second. I think I'm going to be sick.
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:18:23 PM
The sad thing is this isn't even hyperbole:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/republican-plan-redefine-rape-abortion
QuoteRepublicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to "forcible rape." This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion. [snip]
Other types of rapes that would no longer be covered by the exemption include rapes in which the woman was drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol, rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date rapes.
And:
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2011/01/military-michele-bachmann-veterans-budget-cuts-012811w/
QuoteTea party favorite Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., has unveiled a plan for cutting $400 billion in federal spending that includes freezing Veterans Affairs Department health care spending and cutting veterans' disability benefits.
Her proposed VA budget cuts would account for $4.5 billion of the savings included in the plan, posted on her official House of Representatives website.
Paul Sullivan, executive director of Veterans for Common Sense, said cutting veterans' health care spending is an ill-advised move at a time when the number of veterans continues to grow as troops return from Iraq and Afghanistan. Sullivan said he finds it difficult to see how VA could freeze health care costs without hurting veterans.
I eagerly await the Kitten Disembowlment and Puppy Evisceration Act of 2011.
Nope, that's it. :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Fuck it. GO MICHELLE! Kick the veterans while there down! Woo! Seriously, if those fuckers would let me in, I'd go enlist right this second, because I haven't been fucked that hard in a good long time.
Thanks, Cain. I've been having fun with the VA one at CG. :lulz:
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
They're ignoring it, so I'm gonna rub their faces in it a bit.
I am unable to understand how anyone could possibly support this.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 28, 2011, 11:58:36 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
They're ignoring it, so I'm gonna rub their faces in it a bit.
:mittens:
:horrormirth:
Quote from: Charley Brown on January 29, 2011, 12:18:36 AM
I am unable to understand how anyone could possibly support this.
This. FFS I know people who are still dealing with Vietnam injuries, this isn't optional.
Quote from: Charley Brown on January 29, 2011, 12:18:36 AM
I am unable to understand how anyone could possibly support this.
USA = Batshit Insane
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
Teapartiers have but ONE goal--slash funding none of them can see as THEIRS. It's all about what THEY personally see as THEIR slice of the pie. IF enough of them were Vets, this wouldn't even be on the table.
This is so extreme it MIGHT NOT go through...though I hesitate to put qualifiers on something like this--this is America, after all.
We really need an Unlimited Republican Evil thread.
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
And don't forget, "liking" the facebook Support the Troops page.
Remember, for every 30 people that like that page, one (1) soldier gets his legs back.
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmsOIjzQ1V8
Quote from: Jenne on January 31, 2011, 08:48:51 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmsOIjzQ1V8
:facepalm: (at the people the song is talking about).
...why do you haet America, Phox?
Quote from: Jenne on February 01, 2011, 01:26:32 AM
...why do you haet America, Phox?
'Cause 'Murrica hates me and everything I stand for. :lulz:
I don't understand this, at all, from a party that supposedly believes in national defense. Even if you ignore the ethical monstrosity of abandoning our wounded, from a purely practical standpoint this is going to dry up recruitment like crazy once people become aware of it. And even though the news will never say a freaking word, wounded vets aren't exactly rare in this country, people will figure it out.
Quote from: Jenne on January 31, 2011, 08:48:51 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmsOIjzQ1V8
:fuckmittens:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 28, 2011, 11:58:36 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
They're ignoring it, so I'm gonna rub their faces in it a bit.
IIRC, the first stage is "Denial".
Quote from: Requia ☣ on February 01, 2011, 02:22:35 AM
I don't understand this, at all, from a party that supposedly believes in national defense. Even if you ignore the ethical monstrosity of abandoning our wounded, from a purely practical standpoint this is going to dry up recruitment like crazy once people become aware of it. And even though the news will never say a freaking word, wounded vets aren't exactly rare in this country, people will figure it out.
On the other hand, the Army is one of the few routes of social mobility left for the lower classes in America, and there have been problems for years with recruitment with combat roles, with non-combat being vastly more popular. This is why aerial bombing, robots, "training locals to stand up when we stand down" etc. have become more popular.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 31, 2011, 08:46:22 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
And don't forget, "liking" the facebook Support the Troops page.
Remember, for every 30 people that like that page, one (1) soldier gets his legs back.
Fuck, Roger, that's horrible. Why did I laugh so hard at that?
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on February 02, 2011, 12:41:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 31, 2011, 08:46:22 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
And don't forget, "liking" the facebook Support the Troops page.
Remember, for every 30 people that like that page, one (1) soldier gets his legs back.
Fuck, Roger, that's horrible. Why did I laugh so hard at that?
Because the very notion of supporting the troops has become a bitter parody?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 01:49:21 AM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on February 02, 2011, 12:41:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 31, 2011, 08:46:22 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
And don't forget, "liking" the facebook Support the Troops page.
Remember, for every 30 people that like that page, one (1) soldier gets his legs back.
Fuck, Roger, that's horrible. Why did I laugh so hard at that?
Because the very notion of supporting the troops has become a bitter parody?
Pretty much. What can you do but laugh 'til it hurts? Doesn't take long....
Quote from: Doktor Phox on February 02, 2011, 01:57:40 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 01:49:21 AM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on February 02, 2011, 12:41:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 31, 2011, 08:46:22 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
And don't forget, "liking" the facebook Support the Troops page.
Remember, for every 30 people that like that page, one (1) soldier gets his legs back.
Fuck, Roger, that's horrible. Why did I laugh so hard at that?
Because the very notion of supporting the troops has become a bitter parody?
Pretty much. What can you do but laugh 'til it hurts? Doesn't take long....
FOREVER
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 01:49:21 AM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on February 02, 2011, 12:41:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 31, 2011, 08:46:22 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
And don't forget, "liking" the facebook Support the Troops page.
Remember, for every 30 people that like that page, one (1) soldier gets his legs back.
Fuck, Roger, that's horrible. Why did I laugh so hard at that?
Because the very notion of supporting the troops has become a bitter parody?
Yeah, that's it.
Also, if you see a soldier in a bar, you can support the troops by everybody buying him 40 different drinks all at once.
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on February 02, 2011, 03:59:03 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 01:49:21 AM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on February 02, 2011, 12:41:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 31, 2011, 08:46:22 PM
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on January 31, 2011, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: Pastor Miskatonic Zappathruster on January 29, 2011, 03:35:23 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 28, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
The GOP pet trolls must be confused. On the one hand, vaguely attractive if crazy-eyed Teabagger Lady approves. On the other hand, SUPPORT THE TROOPS.
The cognitive dissonance will probably cause one of them to blow, soon enough.
Apparently to the tea party, supporting the troops means being gung ho about sending them to die for pointless shit, and fuck the ones that return home.
And putting bumper stickers on their cars that say "Support The Troops". Don't forget that!
And don't forget, "liking" the facebook Support the Troops page.
Remember, for every 30 people that like that page, one (1) soldier gets his legs back.
Fuck, Roger, that's horrible. Why did I laugh so hard at that?
Because the very notion of supporting the troops has become a bitter parody?
Yeah, that's it.
Also, if you see a soldier in a bar, you can support the troops by everybody buying him 40 different drinks all at once.
I HAVE NEVER ONCE BEEN BOUGHT DRINKS AT A BAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FROTHING RAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote from: Canis latrans eques on February 02, 2011, 04:08:34 AM
I HAVE NEVER ONCE BEEN BOUGHT DRINKS AT A BAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FROTHING RAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rest assured, Coyote, if by some cruel twist of fate we end up in a bar together, I will continue the tradition of not buying you drinks. Not because you're a soldier, but because you're a shithead. :D
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on February 02, 2011, 04:54:32 AM
Quote from: Canis latrans eques on February 02, 2011, 04:08:34 AM
I HAVE NEVER ONCE BEEN BOUGHT DRINKS AT A BAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FROTHING RAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Rest assured, Coyote, if by some cruel twist of fate we end up in a bar together, I will continue the tradition of not buying you drinks. Not because you're a soldier, but because you're a shithead. :D
:|
:argh!:
:argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!: :argh!:
:lulz: touche
I'd buy you a drink, Coyote. But you'd have to bring your own roofies. I'm not made of money.
Quote from: Doktor Phox on February 02, 2011, 05:16:23 AM
I'd buy you a drink, Coyote. But you'd have to bring your own roofies. I'm not made of money.
Are suggesting I rufie myself or you?
Quote from: Canis latrans eques on February 02, 2011, 05:17:37 AM
Quote from: Doktor Phox on February 02, 2011, 05:16:23 AM
I'd buy you a drink, Coyote. But you'd have to bring your own roofies. I'm not made of money.
Are suggesting I rufie myself or you?
Yourself.
I did that once.
It was....interesting.
I'll buy you a drink too.
However, you must in turn buy me a drink. It's the courteous thing to do.
Support the Troops.
Heh, was a time to many this meant something. At one time we were involved in making sure the families of soldiers were taken care of. That is support.
Putting a ribbon shaped magnet on your car isn't, unless you bought it from a soldiers spouse, where the money goes back to their support group.
When we owned the bar we would have Welcome Home nights when they returned, the soldiers money was no good.
When did this all turn into just another damned empty slogan? So many of these kids are coming home permanently fucked up and now they just want to dump them? This makes me consider them traitors. Some of us still work for Wounded Warrior rights, now we just have a bigger target.
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 03:09:10 PM
When did this all turn into just another damned empty slogan?
April 2003.
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 03:09:10 PM
Support the Troops.
Heh, was a time to many this meant something. At one time we were involved in making sure the families of soldiers were taken care of. That is support.
Putting a ribbon shaped magnet on your car isn't, unless you bought it from a soldiers spouse, where the money goes back to their support group.
When we owned the bar we would have Welcome Home nights when they returned, the soldiers money was no good.
When did this all turn into just another damned empty slogan? So many of these kids are coming home permanently fucked up and now they just want to dump them? This makes me consider them traitors. Some of us still work for Wounded Warrior rights, now we just have a bigger target.
I had a rant all typed up... and then I deleted it. I'm bitter, I'm jaded, and I'm not even a veteran. Fuck this country. Whatever horrible end it gets is better than it deserves.
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 03:20:38 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 03:15:50 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 03:09:10 PM
When did this all turn into just another damned empty slogan?
April 2003.
:cry:
Do you remember during the "Gulf Conflict" when you would drive around and people had yellow ribbons tied to everything in sight? :cry:
We've discovered another GOP virtue today: ethnic cleansing
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/huckabee-says-no-palestinian-823467.html
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=206134
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 04:42:20 PM
We've discovered another GOP virtue today: ethnic cleansing
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/huckabee-says-no-palestinian-823467.html
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=206134
Somehow I am not surprised.
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 04:48:27 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 04:42:20 PM
We've discovered another GOP virtue today: ethnic cleansing
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/huckabee-says-no-palestinian-823467.html
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=206134
Somehow I am not surprised.
Some group of people should come forward claiming to be Canaanites and take over Israel. If anyone gives them any shit they can just say that they "indigenous rights to the land in which they occupy and live and it goes back not 60 years or 80 years but it goes back 3,500 years."
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on February 02, 2011, 05:10:38 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 04:48:27 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 04:42:20 PM
We've discovered another GOP virtue today: ethnic cleansing
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/huckabee-says-no-palestinian-823467.html
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=206134
Somehow I am not surprised.
Some group of people should come forward claiming to be Canaanites and take over Israel. If anyone gives them any shit they can just say that they "indigenous rights to the land in which they occupy and live and it goes back not 60 years or 80 years but it goes back 3,500 years."
Read your bible, the Isrealites were commanded by God to kill every man, woman and child in Canaan.
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 05:24:02 PM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on February 02, 2011, 05:10:38 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 04:48:27 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 04:42:20 PM
We've discovered another GOP virtue today: ethnic cleansing
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/huckabee-says-no-palestinian-823467.html
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=206134
Somehow I am not surprised.
Some group of people should come forward claiming to be Canaanites and take over Israel. If anyone gives them any shit they can just say that they "indigenous rights to the land in which they occupy and live and it goes back not 60 years or 80 years but it goes back 3,500 years."
Read your bible, the Isrealites were commanded by God to kill every man, woman and child in Canaan.
Ancient Israelis didnt do many nice things.
QuoteAmos 1:13 This is what the LORD says: "The people of Ammon have sinned again and again, and I will not let them go unpunished! When they attacked Gilead to extend their borders, they ripped open pregnant women with their swords.
Quote from: Niamh on February 02, 2011, 03:59:27 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 03:20:38 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 03:15:50 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 03:09:10 PM
When did this all turn into just another damned empty slogan?
April 2003.
:cry:
Do you remember during the "Gulf Conflict" when you would drive around and people had yellow ribbons tied to everything in sight? :cry:
That didn't do much, either. We were far more impressed by "any soldier" letters, and by nice care packages. Nothing says "we love you" like a few packs of smokes and some cookies. Not being facetious, here.
But it turned out that we weren't actually at a war. We were at a
trade show.
So despite the awfully nice things people did for us, it all slid back into the river of shit, again.
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 04:42:20 PM
We've discovered another GOP virtue today: ethnic cleansing
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/huckabee-says-no-palestinian-823467.html
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=206134
Sure, let's not let the lack of evidence that they ever held the territory get in the way of fundie policy.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:35:55 PM
Quote from: Niamh on February 02, 2011, 03:59:27 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 03:20:38 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 03:15:50 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 03:09:10 PM
When did this all turn into just another damned empty slogan?
April 2003.
:cry:
Do you remember during the "Gulf Conflict" when you would drive around and people had yellow ribbons tied to everything in sight? :cry:
That didn't do much, either. We were far more impressed by "any soldier" letters, and by nice care packages. Nothing says "we love you" like a few packs of smokes and some cookies. Not being facetious, here.
But it turned out that we weren't actually at a war. We were at a trade show.
So despite the awfully nice things people did for us, it all slid back into the river of shit, again.
No I just meant that was the last time I remember the people actually giving a shit. Or giving a good impression of giving a shit.
Quote from: Niamh on February 02, 2011, 05:39:14 PM
No I just meant that was the last time I remember the people actually giving a shit. Or giving a good impression of giving a shit.
They gave a shit. The American public had been quite skillfully sold a pack of lies that we wanted to believe...ie, that poor little Kuwait was:
1. Our ally, and
2. Being attacked for no reason, and
3. The equivalent of France being invaded by Hitler.
The we won in the most lopsided victory I can think of off the top of my head, so people went BATSHIT, nationalist-wise.
Then one day they woke up and everyone was still broke.
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 05:38:23 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 04:42:20 PM
We've discovered another GOP virtue today: ethnic cleansing
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/huckabee-says-no-palestinian-823467.html
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=206134
Sure, let's not let the lack of evidence that they ever held the territory get in the way of fundie policy.
Wait. Are you suggesting that there was no nation of Israel in antiquity? Jospehus and Titus would beg to disagree.
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 05:38:23 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 04:42:20 PM
We've discovered another GOP virtue today: ethnic cleansing
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/huckabee-says-no-palestinian-823467.html
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=206134
Sure, let's not let the lack of evidence that they ever held the territory get in the way of fundie policy.
Maybe we should suggest to him that the United States should be carved out of European land.
Wait. Who built Masada? :?
Quote from: Charley Brown on February 02, 2011, 06:02:21 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:58:28 PM
Wait. Who built Masada? :?
:lulz:
You and your facts!
I find it a little odd when Discordians pick one faction of humans over another to a degree that causes them to ignore reality in favor of a political stance.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 05:43:50 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 05:38:23 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 02, 2011, 04:42:20 PM
We've discovered another GOP virtue today: ethnic cleansing
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/huckabee-says-no-palestinian-823467.html
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=206134
Sure, let's not let the lack of evidence that they ever held the territory get in the way of fundie policy.
Wait. Are you suggesting that there was no nation of Israel in antiquity? Jospehus and Titus would beg to disagree.
No I'm suggesting that the evidence for a 'nation of Israel' only dates back to the time period post-Babylonian rule. That would be post-Solomon and thus after the 10 tribe/2 tribe split (assuming any of that part of their history is true). That would place well over half of the land in the hands of the "northern tribes" which were lost in the 700's BC. "Israel" is the Jews ie the people living there now are descended from the Southern nation which held only the areas Judah and Benjamin. Much of the West Bank is the territory held by Manasseh.
So if the Bible is accurate, Israel/Judah gave up on those lands 2700+ years ago.
Even if the Bible is inaccurate, the nation of Israel in the first century didn't include much of the west bank, as it was considered Samaria and the Samaritans were not considered Jews.
So basically a large chunk of the West Bank has been full of people that the Jews considered 'gentiles' or at the very least no longer part of their nation for 2700 years.
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:03:59 PM
No I'm suggesting that the evidence for a 'nation of Israel' only dates back to the time period post-Babylonian rule. That would be post-Solomon and thus after the 10 tribe/2 tribe split (assuming any of that part of their history is true). That would place well over half of the land in the hands of the "northern tribes" which were lost in the 700's BC. "Israel" is the Jews ie the people living there now are descended from the Southern nation which held only the areas Judah and Benjamin. Much of the West Bank is the territory held by Manasseh.
By that definition, of course, African Americans aren't actually Black.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 06:05:48 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:03:59 PM
No I'm suggesting that the evidence for a 'nation of Israel' only dates back to the time period post-Babylonian rule. That would be post-Solomon and thus after the 10 tribe/2 tribe split (assuming any of that part of their history is true). That would place well over half of the land in the hands of the "northern tribes" which were lost in the 700's BC. "Israel" is the Jews ie the people living there now are descended from the Southern nation which held only the areas Judah and Benjamin. Much of the West Bank is the territory held by Manasseh.
By that definition, of course, African Americans aren't actually Black.
Uh... huh?
All I'm saying is that much of the West Bank territory hasn't been held by Israel in any recorded history we have to date. Even in biblical history (which is pretty sketchy as evidence) they ceded most of that area to the breakaway tribes (which then disappeared) and the place was later inhabited by Samaritans, which the Jews did not consider to be Jews. (Though they claim to be the Jews that were not exiled to Babylon).
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 06:05:48 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:03:59 PM
No I'm suggesting that the evidence for a 'nation of Israel' only dates back to the time period post-Babylonian rule. That would be post-Solomon and thus after the 10 tribe/2 tribe split (assuming any of that part of their history is true). That would place well over half of the land in the hands of the "northern tribes" which were lost in the 700's BC. "Israel" is the Jews ie the people living there now are descended from the Southern nation which held only the areas Judah and Benjamin. Much of the West Bank is the territory held by Manasseh.
By that definition, of course, African Americans aren't actually Black.
Jewish as an ethnicity is a post diaspora idea. Religion and nationality would have dictated who was part of the group back then.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on February 02, 2011, 06:14:19 PM
Jewish as an ethnicity is a post diaspora idea.
Post link. Thanks.
TGRR,
Has read Josephus.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 06:17:12 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on February 02, 2011, 06:14:19 PM
Jewish as an ethnicity is a post diaspora idea.
Post link. Thanks.
TGRR,
Has read Josephus.
Depends on which diaspora....
There is currently no evidence outside the Bible to support a Jewish Nation until after Babylon had conquered the region and taken most of the tribal groups that lived in the area captive.
Ratatosk,
Has read Josephus as well :)
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:19:51 PM
Depends on which diaspora....
Okay, I'm leaving this conversation. If I wanted to debate semantics with zealots, I'd go over to capitol grilling.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 02, 2011, 06:41:28 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on February 02, 2011, 06:19:51 PM
Depends on which diaspora....
Okay, I'm leaving this conversation. If I wanted to debate semantics with zealots, I'd go over to capitol grilling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_diaspora
QuoteThe Jewish diaspora (or simply the Diaspora), is the English term used to describe the Galut גלות (Yiddish: 'Galus'), or 'exile' that encompassed several forced expulsions of Israelites from what is now the states of Israel, Jordan and parts of Lebanon. The modern Hebrew term of Tefutzot תפוצות, "scattered", was introduced by the American academic Simon Rawidowicz in the 1930s[1] who to some degree argued for the acceptance of the Jewish presence outside of the Land of Israel as a modern reality and an inevitability.
The diaspora is commonly accepted to have begun with the 8th–6th century BCE conquests of the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah, destruction of the First Temple (c.586 BCE), and expulsion of the population, and is also associated with the destruction of the Second Temple and aftermath of the Bar Kokhba revolt during the Roman occupation of Judea in the 1st and 2nd centuries CE.
Which would be what I am talking about. There is no factual evidence from history or from archeology that supports the claim that a nation of Israel existed before the 6th century, not even archeological evidence of the First Temple.
However, there is plenty of evidence to support the Jews as a people before the second diaspora (ie the Rome 70 CE and later).
I'm not sure why that makes me a zealot. :?