MC Just Posted August 28, 2003 Posted August 28, 2003 40 Million Innocent Lives per year... All the baby boomers can thank the democrooks for their social security problem. -ironmonk I'm with Monk on this. As Usual.
ironmonk Posted August 28, 2003 Author Posted August 28, 2003 (edited) Here here! Are you that clueless? They are related. First, there are more jobs now. Second, Bush is fixing what clinton screwed up. Just like Reagan had to fix screw ups by the worst president this country has seen; carter. So what if I misread the chart, I was wrong about that woopiedido... The unemployement rate has been rising since clinton; The unemployment is NOT Bush's fault, only someone who did not look at the facts would think so. Oh, but look... many more jobs have been created... Hmmmm... http://answers.google.com/answers/main?cmd...dview&id=231563 Anyways, how can you call yourself Catholic, if jobs are more important than innocent babies lives?! When will you people (democrooks) learn, ignorance is not bliss. I'm anti-buffet Catholic. -ironmonk Edited August 28, 2003 by ironmonk
ironmonk Posted August 28, 2003 Author Posted August 28, 2003 (edited) The more I think about it, the more I realize, that in order to be a good Catholic, you must distance yourself from political parties. Sorry bro, but I have to disagree... many people in the rep. party are coming closer to Catholic teachings... many reps are beginning to be against the dealth penalty. And the democrooks lie about Rep. economic plans... For example; tax breaks to big corps for donating to charities is considered wrong in the democrooks eyes... Reforming walfare is wrong in the democrooks eyes.... etc... When carter was in office, I actually went to school with people that wanted to grow up to be on walfare because their grandmother, mother, and older sisters were already on it, and they didn't even have to look for a job. Democrooks spout how evil republican's policies are, but can never show any proof. Where as, look at what happened the last time we had a democrook in the Whitehouse, they stole, and trashed the place... Rep. want God in the Country... democrooks want God out.... Someone who wants God in, is closer to Catholicism than people who want God out. God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary ironmonk Edited August 28, 2003 by ironmonk
mp15 Posted August 28, 2003 Posted August 28, 2003 I don't think there's any need to take it so personally. I called George Bush an idiot, not you. It is a "big friggin deal" for the President of the United States not to know how to speak properly and not to know where the countries of the world are. What's okay for you is not necessarily okay for the man entrusted with the leadership of our country. He needs to be more intelligent than other people, or at least as intelligent as most people. Speech, I do not see where it need's to be a pre requisite that a President needs to be some great orator. As long as they can speak clearly and with reasonable proficiency then I don't see the problem. I think I would rather have someone who looks human, and makes human mistakes as President than some stiff robot (and yes I'm referring to Al Gore) who's message sounds canned. Clinton was far from a great speaker also but that doesn’t mean he should have stepped down as President because of that. Look, I think we all agree that GW is not a great public speaker. But to call him an idiot and say that he has no business being President because of that seems awfully petty to me.
Dave Posted August 28, 2003 Posted August 28, 2003 Sorry, but calling someone stupid just because their grammar isn't 100% perfect is a cop-out. We can't gauge the level of a person's intelligence solely by what comes out of their mouth. I think we ought to look at the real issues and stop making personal attacks on our president. He's doing the best he can, and that's all we can hope for. BTW, I've noticed that liberals enjoy making personal attacks on people about little things. I remember when Linda Tripp came forward about Monica Lewinsky's affair, the liberals talked about how ugly she supposedly was! Oh, please!
Azriel Posted August 28, 2003 Posted August 28, 2003 Sorry, but calling someone stupid just because their grammar isn't 100% perfect is a cop-out. And yet calling someone clueless, or foolish, or lazy who is your brother in Christ seems perfectly acceptable.
ironmonk Posted August 28, 2003 Author Posted August 28, 2003 (edited) It was a question. Those who are ignorant of the facts, are clueless about the facts. Unemployement rates from 1970-2003. It takes 4-8 years for economic plans to take effect... Clinton left Bush with an economy going downhill... Everyone said before Bush took office that people wouldn't remember that the way the economy is going, they will blame him when it's not his fault... it's clintons. The economy does not change overnight... it takes time, and a lot of work. The point of this thread is that the innocent lives of babies are more important that all the other stuff... Those who say otherwise have put prices on hundreds of millions of babies heads. God Bless, ironmonk Edited August 28, 2003 by ironmonk
Good Friday Posted August 28, 2003 Posted August 28, 2003 Ironmonk, I will say to you what you've said to others many times: I hope you're not receiving the Eucharist while you're in a state of mortal sin. I'm finished with this thread. Someone has to be the bigger man, and I suppose it's going to have to be the younger one. I will not participate in this thread or any others you're involved in until you start to treat me more like your brother and less like your dog. At this point, you're treating me like a dog in true republican spirit.
PedroX Posted August 28, 2003 Posted August 28, 2003 Iron Monk, Please quote to me where I said that jobs were more important than babies. Please quote to me where I have stood against the Church's teachings. Please demonstrate how I have been a "buffet" Catholic. Your charges are un-Christlike, arrogant and just plain mean. You claim to have our best interest at heart, and yet you do nothing but belittle us and question our state of Grace. I had hoped that you able to engage in civilized debate, but apparently you either have no respect for Good Friday and I, or you are unable to debate with manners. These accusations are a blemish to church unity, and I hope that you are able to give them grounds, or retract them.
cmotherofpirl Posted August 28, 2003 Posted August 28, 2003 Iron I always agree with WHAT you say, but never HOW you say it. knowledge without love is nothing !!!!!!
PedroX Posted August 29, 2003 Posted August 29, 2003 Iron Monk, I see that you have still failed to come up with evidence of me "putting jobs before abortion" or any of the other slanderous charges that you leveled. I assume therefore, that I was right and they were baseless. peace...
ironmonk Posted August 29, 2003 Author Posted August 29, 2003 Iron Monk, Please quote to me where I said that jobs were more important than babies. Please quote to me where I have stood against the Church's teachings. Please demonstrate how I have been a "buffet" Catholic. Your charges are un-Christlike, arrogant and just plain mean. You claim to have our best interest at heart, and yet you do nothing but belittle us and question our state of Grace. I had hoped that you able to engage in civilized debate, but apparently you either have no respect for Good Friday and I, or you are unable to debate with manners. These accusations are a blemish to church unity, and I hope that you are able to give them grounds, or retract them. I was not calling you a buffet Catholic. I am not in mortal sin. The fool statment applied to "for your basis of calling someone an idiot" - in and of that rhelm alone. Another way to say it... "Your basis for calling someone an idiot is foolish". CONTEXT man... context. the 'anti-buffet Catholic' was in ref to those who would vote anti-life or put jobs and money before the lives of innocent children. It refers to anyone who goes against the Church teachings and calls themselves Catholic... if you are not a buffet catholic - the statment does not apply to you. cmom, sugar coating does not mean love. no sugar coating does not mean lack of love. ***multi line spacing means it's a general statment not directed at anyone. (this is not to you cmom, please don't take it that way) There are to many sugar coaters - I will not sugar coat unless I think it's necessary... When it comes to babies lives - it is a time to be blunt. Call it like it is. If the definition fits. People sugar coating is what has lead to so many buffet Catholics... If more parents laid down the law years ago, then we wouldn't have so many ignorant Catholics... Sugar coat something enough, then a child will think it's not that serious and drift toward it. Many things are very serious... serious issues call for serious talk... Serious issues are black and white... no sugar coating needed. Now, venting--- everyone ignores when I appologize for something... then they keep ranting and raving... So as long as we sugar coat something we can judge others who are not on the board to defend themselves... Also, a little insight to some of my posts... many times I might post something that I think will help another person on the board, or I'll say something about an issue I saw on the board (i.e. the sugar coat/judge comment) and it's directed to those who the subject applies to... but I don't say who it is because I don't want to point fingers.... if someone is on a thread debating a subject; I will call them like I see them. Then there are those that come in like gang busters (pinch your nose and say the next line) "you need to be more charitable you are such a jerk, yadda yadda yadda" - Got a little news flash for those, DITTO! Practice what ya preach.... telling someone they 'need to have charity' implying that they have none on a board - IS NOT CHARITY! If you got an issue about the way someone is coming across in the "tone" which you can't hear anyway, then email them... -ironmonk
Chastisement Posted August 29, 2003 Posted August 29, 2003 Sorry bro, but I have to disagree... many people in the rep. party are coming closer to Catholic teachings... many reps are beginning to be against the dealth penalty. It's actually quite interesting, the leader of the opposition party in NZ, [National], is a Catholic who has seven children. The whole reason I voted for National is because of Hon. Bill English. He's Pro-Life and he's Pro-Family, he has the biggest loud mouth when it comes to the defence of the unborn, elderly, infirm and is vocal against prosititution and other dispicable scourges, he's one fine man.
cmotherofpirl Posted August 29, 2003 Posted August 29, 2003 Blunt is fine, telling somebody they are clueless or stupid only increases their temperature, not their understanding!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now