Liberals stoop to new lows...

[MachZer0]

Please, enlighten me with these two sources because I want to hold dear the idea that we sent soldiers to die for a valid rational. You can PM me if you wish.

The first is the book by Iraqi general Georges Sada and the second is the Saddam tapes currently being translated.

 

[notto]

2% lie taints

What lie? Please be specific. I must have missed the lies in any of the speakers remarks. They spoke the truth - perhaps that is why there is such outrage from those who defend those that were implicated by these truths.

 

[Yusuf Evans]

And who she was as a person was intimately tied to her political work.

If, at my funeral, nothing the slightest bit political was said, then I'd think that the people there didn't know me very well.

So it's justifiable for them to take potshots at the President? Run off at the mouth with their own statements? I love how you guys live to lubricate the issues.

 

[notto]

Run off at the mouth with their own statements?

That is usually how eulogies at funerals work. Not sure what you would recommend. Administration approval? It seems like those who are so outraged at this just can't seem to handle the fact that you can't control private speech and a private event by invited speakers. Why is that?

 

[k]

So it's justifiable for them to take potshots at the President? Run off at the mouth with their own statements? I love how you guys live to lubricate the issues.

Please name some of those potshots?

 

[loriersea]

So it's justifiable for them to take potshots at the President? Run off at the mouth with their own statements? I love how you guys live to lubricate the issues.

So the speech of people at funeral's should be regulated lest anyone get offended?

When Pat Robertson dies, I fully expect there to be much talk about his conservative politics. I wouldn't expect his funeral to be kept politically-neutral lest anyone get offended. His views in life offend people; so did Coretta Scott King's views. A funeral is not a time to keep silent about the things that mattered most to someone during their life.

 

[DieHappy]

So the speech of people at funeral's should be regulated lest anyone get offended?

When Pat Robertson dies, I fully expect there to be much talk about his conservative politics. I wouldn't expect his funeral to be kept politically-neutral lest anyone get offended. His views in life offend people; so did Coretta Scott King's views. A funeral is not a time to keep silent about the things that mattered most to someone during their life.

Do you honestly believe that these guys, Carter and the Rev, at least, were simply reiterating her views? They sure sounded like the views of the speaker, not of the dead. I'll give you Clinton, I missed most of his, but it sounded rather tame compared to the self-aggrandizement I had expected from him.

 

[PastorMikeJ]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/378fmxyz.asp

"

n October 10, 1963, U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy committed what is widely viewed as one of the most ignominious acts in modern American history: he authorized the Federal Bureau of Investigation to begin wiretapping the telephones of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr."

and Nixon??? He had all of Civil Rights and anti war organizations tapped...A person's shrink wasn't even safe....LOL

 

[notto]

D They sure sounded like the views of the speaker, not of the dead.

What part of what they said do you think she would not agree with or hadn't voiced her self in protest over the war or government actions related to civil rights? Please be specific.

The applause would certainly seem to indicate that the speakers were received as representing the viewpoint of those they were eulogizing. If you think otherwise, please point out specific reasons why instead of simply claiming it so.

Why were these speakers applauded for over 2 minutes? Why would they say these things in a eulogy if they were not the views of the deceased?

 

[UberLutheran]

Every single one of us?

Including all the liberals who post on CF?

Care to put in a qualifier or a modifier before the first word?

 

[AirPo]

So the speech of people at funeral's should be regulated lest anyone get offended?

Not until they regulate what types of political cartoons papers can print.

 

[k]

So the speech of people at funeral's should be regulated lest anyone get offended?

When Pat Robertson dies, I fully expect there to be much talk about his conservative politics. I wouldn't expect his funeral to be kept politically-neutral lest anyone get offended. His views in life offend people; so did Coretta Scott King's views. A funeral is not a time to keep silent about the things that mattered most to someone during their life.

Speech regulation would not be necessary if everyone would just get on the same page, support the President, and jump on in with the American Team to bring in a win for the good guys!

 

[Yusuf Evans]

So the speech of people at funeral's should be regulated lest anyone get offended?

When Pat Robertson dies, I fully expect there to be much talk about his conservative politics. I wouldn't expect his funeral to be kept politically-neutral lest anyone get offended. His views in life offend people; so did Coretta Scott King's views. A funeral is not a time to keep silent about the things that mattered most to someone during their life.

That's right, I forget. Anybody who say's something negative about the current administration gets a green light and a free pass. Say something positive, and their not fit to hold office. (Joe Lieberman ring a bell Democrats?)

 

[Alarum]

That's right, I forget. Anybody who say's something negative about the current administration gets a green light and a free pass. Say something positive, and their not fit to hold office. (Joe Lieberman ring a bell Democrats?)

Really? I've seen it reversed usually. Any point critical of Bush from anybody seems to be attacked, while the wildest things get defended - creationism, his energy policy, his corporate giveaways - simply because, well, he's doing them.

 

[momalle1]

Really? I've seen it reversed usually. Any point critical of Bush from anybody seems to be attacked, while the wildest things get defended - creationism, his energy policy, his corporate giveaways - simply because, well, he's doing them.

yep, Bush is a uniter, not a divider, he said so hisself.

 

[PastorMikeJ]

and Bush is a dreamer and a loser in the business world...0 for 23 in business....

 

[Yusuf Evans]

Really? I've seen it reversed usually. Any point critical of Bush from anybody seems to be attacked, while the wildest things get defended - creationism, his energy policy, his corporate giveaways - simply because, well, he's doing them.

Yep. How about when Lieberman said there were good things happening in Iraq. What's happening now? The Democrats are trying to kick him out of office. Yeah, that's team unity there. Looks like if a Democrat or Republican try to agree with the other side, the are automatically ostrocized. Great teamwork Dems and Repubs

 

[burrow_owl]

That's silly. More ideological Dems want Lieberman out - not because he agrees with Bush, but because they don't think he's right. This is a good faith policy difference.

Still, it's absurd to say Dems want Lieberman out. Only the less pragmatic members of the party want him defeated.

Remember: wild overgeneralizations lower the tone of civic discourse.

 

[Doctrine1st]

The first is the book by Iraqi general Georges Sada and the second is the Saddam tapes currently being translated.

56 flights and ground convoys of trucks, should be pretty darn easy to support.

 

[Alarum]

Yep. How about when Lieberman said there were good things happening in Iraq. What's happening now? The Democrats are trying to kick him out of office. Yeah, that's team unity there. Looks like if a Democrat or Republican try to agree with the other side, the are automatically ostrocized. Great teamwork Dems and Repubs

Well honestly the Democrats aren't trying very hard to kick him out of office, because the Democrats haven't been trying very hard to do anything for the past 6 years. I mean if you can't even mount a sucessful campaign against Bush, you know you've failed in some fundimental, sick, stupid way.