Blogs 4 Brownback

February 1, 2008

Question for the Liberals…

You people would vote for an Atheist President, right?  Well, how about a Scientologist candidate, if you otherwise agreed with him on the issues?

 I want to know exactly what level of stupid I’m dealing with, here.  I think Scientology is even worse than Atheism, but I’m curious if you degenerate agree or not. 

106 Comments »

  1. An atheist would be fine. A Scientologist would be fine. I like them both a lot. All I really want is someone with a secret agenda to round up all the Christians and subject them to unspeakable cruelties (including the forced abortions of all Christian and Republican fetuses) as we institute a One-World Government.

    Comment by Angus J. Tupper — February 1, 2008 @ 1:37 pm | Reply

  2. You must be writing in Tom Cruise Sisypiss.

    Comment by KKKorKKKer Loves The Chocolate Starfish — February 1, 2008 @ 1:42 pm | Reply

  3. If he can prove his religion will not affect his presidency in any way, then I would have no problem. However, one favor to the cult, and he’s gone.

    P.S. I’m still waiting for that apology.

    Comment by TrogdortheEnlightened — February 1, 2008 @ 1:43 pm | Reply

  4. Methinks it would be easier to swear in an atheist, than a cult member. If anything, you should ask yourselves that. If it came down to an Atheist, a Scientologist, and a Black guy, who would you vote for, B4B?

    Comment by Dio Brando — February 1, 2008 @ 1:51 pm | Reply

  5. I would vote for the black man, as long as he was a Christian.

    Comment by Sisyphus — February 1, 2008 @ 1:56 pm | Reply

  6. Hell no, I wouldn’t vote for a scientologist. They’re a brainwashing, oppressive cult that does nothing but scam their members out of their money.

    “subject them to unspeakable cruelties”
    They’re very good at that.

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 1, 2008 @ 2:01 pm | Reply

  7. I would vote for the black man, as long as he was a Christian.

    Comment by Sisyphus — February 1, 2008 @ 1:56 p

    You mean like Obama.

    Comment by Arn — February 1, 2008 @ 2:09 pm | Reply

  8. He could be a Pastafarian for all I care… as long as it doesn’t affect his position.

    Comment by Adam Nelson — February 1, 2008 @ 3:42 pm | Reply

  9. You must be writing in Tom Cruise Sisypiss.

    Comment by KKKorKKKer Loves The Chocolate Starfish

    yeah, Sissypiss met Tom Cruise in the same closet as PsyKKKeout is usually staying in.

    Comment by Jim — February 1, 2008 @ 3:46 pm | Reply

  10. Religion has no place in the whitehouse. We need to stop focusing on god and focus on things that actually matter.

    Comment by The Nobody — February 1, 2008 @ 4:56 pm | Reply

  11. “as long as it doesn’t affect his position.”
    That’s always the question, though.

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 1, 2008 @ 5:29 pm | Reply

  12. It is a well known fact that Barack Hussein Obama attended a Muslim school so we all know what his brain was filled with growing up. This so called church of his is part of the United Church of Christ little more than a glorified liberalized watering hole for hippies, homosexuals, and leftieloons.

    Obama is not a Christian. End of discussion.

    Comment by Mrs. T.D. Gaines-Crockett — February 1, 2008 @ 5:35 pm | Reply

  13. I too would like want to know exactly what level of stupid I’m dealing with here.

    I assume, based on overwhelming evidence, that you would vote for a Christian president. Would you vote for an atheist with whom you agreed on all political issues?

    I also assume you would.

    But why do you present the fallacy of false choice, and give the reader a decision between two groups of people that have nothing whatsoever to do with one another (atheists and scientologists)? It is inane.

    And as long as you allow yourself to insult atheists in general, please do so using proper spelling. It will help you appear superior.

    Love and kittens.

    Comment by danielmacklin — February 1, 2008 @ 5:40 pm | Reply

  14. Neither are you, miss Crotchrott….you are a sexual disease!

    Comment by Jim — February 1, 2008 @ 5:55 pm | Reply

  15. Since when does religion have anything to do with modern politics in a supposedly secular western government? What type of religion a person belongs to (or doesn’t belong to) doesn’t actually tell you anything about the person in question nor his/her opinions on politics. As an example: a Christian might be pro-choice as much as any other atheist, and any atheist might be pro-life like any other Christian, Muslim or even Jehovas Witness.

    What is there to say about any certain religion that it would create a better leader/politician/parent? I don’t think a discussion like this is relevant at all to the case, unless it’s directed at how much a candidate might be influenced by a cult (bear in mind that many Christian practices are considered to be cults by various standards too).

    Comment by Peetah — February 1, 2008 @ 5:57 pm | Reply

  16. I think the level of stupid you are dealing with here is upon introspection. Adam Nelson said it right, religion has no place in the White House. It is you who thinks that religion should have some bearing on who will follow and uphold the Rule of Law, which both Romney and Huckabee already made clear they would not.

    Comment by Eco Warrior — February 1, 2008 @ 7:16 pm | Reply

  17. I, myself, don’t care about a presidential hopeful’s religion.

    I’m hoping that it’s not some gun-blazing rawhide-eating sadist who’d allow homosexual pedophiles, wifebeaters, Caucasian wetbacks, and money addicts into office.

    Also, I’m voting for someone who DOESN’T shove one’s religion down people’s throats.

    Comment by Tyrenol — February 1, 2008 @ 7:37 pm | Reply

  18. just don’t give me anyone God talks to, we have seen what almost 8 years of conversation between Bush and God and our world has never been in worse shape!

    Comment by A.j. — February 1, 2008 @ 8:04 pm | Reply

  19. i’m not concerned about the candidate’s religious beliefs, as long as they in no way try to impose them on me. i would prefer an atheist: somehow whose view of the world is based on reality and not there imaginary friend in the sky. i don’t want anyone with some crazy superstitious bull[crud] “faith” (christians! christians! christians!) telling me that I have to live my life according to their make believe crap.

    Comment by kat — February 1, 2008 @ 8:17 pm | Reply

  20. “Obama is not a Christian. End of discussion.”

    comment by VD Grainycrotch

    End the discussion with a lie, why would we want to do that?

    Comment by Arn — February 1, 2008 @ 8:38 pm | Reply

  21. “You mean like Obama.”

    No, he’s a Muslim and a Secularist.

    “But why do you present the fallacy of false choice, and give the reader a decision between two groups of people that have nothing whatsoever to do with one another (atheists and scientologists)? It is inane.”

    It wasn’t an either/or question. The question is, if you agree with the nominee on the other issues but he happens to be a Scientologist, would you vote for him? It’s a yes/no question. I wasn’t offering a choice between a Scientologist and an Atheist. Sorry if that was unclear. Heaven help America on the day that’s our decision!

    “Also, I’m voting for someone who DOESN’T shove one’s religion down people’s throats.”

    If we’re talking about a phony occult like Mormonism or Scientology or Islam or Copernicanism, I agree 100%.

    Comment by Sisyphus — February 1, 2008 @ 8:52 pm | Reply

  22. “No, he’s a Muslim and a Secularist.”

    And you’re an idiot, proof or you’re lying, oh that’s right, you are lying. That old thing has been run into the ground already. He is not and never has been muslim or attended any muslim school, that’s a lie that’s been shot down too many times already, get over it jerk.

    Comment by Arn — February 1, 2008 @ 9:01 pm | Reply

  23. “I want to know exactly what level of stupid I’m dealing with, here.”

    Don’t worry, you’re not dealing with anyone that matches your level of stupid.

    Comment by Arn — February 1, 2008 @ 9:13 pm | Reply

  24. “No, he’s a Muslim and a Secularist.”

    Only if you’re a college grad with a Ph.D in Horsecaulkology..

    “If we’re talking about a phony occult like Mormonism or Scientology or Islam or Copernicanism, I agree 100%.”

    Copernicanism? Occult? You treat it as a belief system, as opposed to STRAIGHT FACT.

    Comment by Dio Brando — February 1, 2008 @ 9:42 pm | Reply

  25. how did a mental midget make WordPress’s front page?

    Comment by baldwino — February 1, 2008 @ 9:53 pm | Reply

  26. Brother Sisyphus:

    Obama is “a Muslim and a Secularist.” Right on, brother! You tell ’em!

    Private note to Brother Sisyphus (everybody else look away): I’m a bit confused. Since Webster defines a Muslim as one who is “an adherent of Islam” (a religion), and a secularist as one who “rejects religion and religious considerations”, could you explain to me how Obama is a religious follower who rejects religion?

    Okay everybody, you can look again.

    As always, God Hats Crabs!

    Comment by GodisOne — February 1, 2008 @ 10:29 pm | Reply

  27. Why is this post addressed to Liberals? Most Liberals are Christian and not Atheists. To answer the question a Scientologist has no chance and the American people would vote for a incompetent, lying, and uneducated Christian (say like George W.) before a educated, experienced, and powerful leader who happened to be a Atheist.

    This post is of a certain level of stupidity. Why is there a Blogs 4 Brownback? Did he even make it to Iowa?

    Comment by MJ "revoltingpawn" — February 1, 2008 @ 10:34 pm | Reply

  28. Why not Tom Cruise? He’s prettier than Hillary? If I strapped on beer goggles one night at a bar…I’m just sayin’.

    Comment by relee — February 1, 2008 @ 11:59 pm | Reply

  29. What a dumb blog topic.

    Comment by spacebrother — February 2, 2008 @ 2:49 am | Reply

  30. Turn from the darkness and towards the light. WWJD? The answer is not hate brother. Anyone who accepts Jesus Christ as his lord and savior is a Christian. I don’t know much about scientology but I don’t care about the religion of a president beyond how it informs his values and decision making in his capacity as President. And believe it or not, we do not have a monopoly on morality. People from all over the world share many of the same values. I suggest you live somewhere else for a while if you can. I think that you’ll actually have a new appreciation for America and what it stands for. One day this country may become predominantly Catholic, but I know that I will be able to practice the way I believe because as I have no dominion over anyone, no one has dominion over me.

    Comment by jackangler — February 2, 2008 @ 4:43 am | Reply

  31. “Private note to Brother Sisyphus (everybody else look away): I’m a bit confused. Since Webster defines a Muslim as one who is “an adherent of Islam” (a religion), and a secularist as one who “rejects religion and religious considerations”, could you explain to me how Obama is a religious follower who rejects religion?”

    Webster is written by degenerate moonbats who hate America and everything that makes this country great. Muslims and Secularists are pretty much one and the same. They share allegiance to Satan, and they share a strategic alliance against America, but the superficial window-dressing of their belief systems tends to differ somewhat.

    I hope that helps!

    Comment by Sisyphus — February 2, 2008 @ 6:39 am | Reply

  32. `They share allegiance to Satan, and they share a strategic alliance against America, but the superficial window-dressing of their belief systems tends to differ somewhat.

    I hope that helps!

    Comment by Sisyphus — February 2, 2008 @ 6:39 am

    Well, it helps to confirm your stupidity/insanity.
    Neither Muslims nor secularists are connected to Satan. Satan worshipers are connected to satan, athiests aren’t connected to anything they don’t believe in God, and therefore don’t believe in satan either. Secularists are basically just athiests, they don’t adhere to any religion.
    You are doing the work of satan yourself by trying to force your religious beliefs on others, religious beliefs that totally contradict the teaching of the bible.
    You are nothing more than a perfect example of homegrown terrorists. You try to force people to see things your way, both politically and religiously, and constantly call for the deaths and or torture of those that think differently from you (like 99.999% of the population). You and your cohorts here threaten people with violence, death and slavery to try and force your stupid beliefs on us. Oddly enough that is exactly what the governments description of homegrown terrorists is. According to the homegrown terroist act of 2007, which has passed in the Senate and is in the implementation stage now (that means they are now actively looking for homegrown terrorists) gives a description that sounds like they had you in mind when they wrote it, and they list sites such as this one as one of their main targets for locating terrorists. Just in case you missed it on the open political thread (no one has come back to that one so I figure you either didn’t see it or hoped it would go away if you ignored it) here again is the governments description according to the homegrown terrorist act of 2007. It does sound a lot like you. Maybe next I’ll post their plans for implementation and enforcement of the new law. They don’t plan on being nice about it.

    ”(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION- The term `violent radicalization’ means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.

    `(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

    `(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence’ means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual’s political, religious, or social beliefs.”

    All three of those are very good descriptions of b4b wouldn’t you say? But being a parody site you shouldn’t have to worry about it, I’m sure that by now the commission on homegrown terrorism has seen your site and declared it a joke. Although it wouldn’t surprise me if they put a few of you on their watch list to monitor your other online activities just to make sure you really are a joke and not a real threat to the lives of innocent people.

    Comment by Arn — February 2, 2008 @ 9:09 am | Reply

  33. P.S. And perhaps you should read the whole thing, what they call “thought crimes” is very interesting, watch what you think, not just what you say.😀

    Comment by Arn — February 2, 2008 @ 9:25 am | Reply

  34. Sounds like Sisyphus is going to get a visit from the 4chan Party Van

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 2, 2008 @ 9:28 am | Reply

  35. He could always get out of it just by posting that little disclaimer on here stating that this is a parody site and all posts are for entertainment only. Then, rather than being terrorists, they would just be comedians with a sick sense of humor.

    Comment by Arn — February 2, 2008 @ 9:50 am | Reply

  36. “Webster is written by degenerate moonbats who hate America and everything that makes this country great.”
    I literally fell off of my chair laughing at that. It’s a dictionary! Why would it matter what their political belief is?
    About the question, I wouldn’t care, so long as s/he doesn’t let their beliefs interfere with their job.

    Comment by Bob — February 2, 2008 @ 10:30 am | Reply

  37. I wouldn’t say that this brand of humor is sick. It’s the type of thing that GlaDOS would say if she was a bible-humper. Which reminds me, Valve is developing another Portal game. Does anyone know any further information to defaggotize this thread?

    Comment by Anonymous — February 2, 2008 @ 10:31 am | Reply

  38. Sadly, no, but GlaDOS is relevant to my interests

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 2, 2008 @ 1:36 pm | Reply

  39. It’s a parody, but the point of it is that you can’t tell if it is or not. We naturally assume that people like Sisyphus and Bob Corker (as if their names didn’t give away their positions) may actually believe in this baloney, which goes to show how crazy Freepers and the like are. The fact that most of the freepers agreed with abolishing the 19th Amendment (the board which Sisyphus linked to on his “Study: Women Are Harlots”) (and trust me, those posts are not truth stretches, they are 100% real) should be all anyone needs to desperately start pushing the “Democrat” button at the polls.

    The science stuff also has a purpose to make sure that you know your science rather than blindly acknowledge it, as they are ‘doing’. This way, you won’t be suckered in to actual geocentrists.

    The funniest thing about this is that the people that hang out on Metapedia and Stormfront, who are for real, are 100% crazier than what these people are trying to pretend to be, flat earth material not withstanding.

    So, I do have a question, for my fellow liberals: Why do you take B4B so seriously? Why do you spend so much time attempting to argue with a bunch of parodists who are only trying to prove the insanity of the Right, much like STR?

    Comment by DeadlyScythe — February 2, 2008 @ 5:16 pm | Reply

  40. Portal, as a whole, is extremely relevent to my interest as well. I wonder if the scenario is going to be about a new person in the rebuilt Aperture science lab or it is going to follow the woman with semi-bionic legs. The latter would be pretty cool, but if the first were to happen, it would be okay.

    Comment by Anonymous — February 2, 2008 @ 5:47 pm | Reply

  41. I know that there will be delicious cake at the end. Maybe even two cakes!

    “Webster is written by degenerate moonbats who hate America and everything that makes this country great.”

    So ummm, how do you know what words mean, if you reject all dictionaries? Also, considering Noah Webster was one of the leading voices for altering English just for America, why don’t you say “colour” instead of “color”?

    Don’t you realize that you’re playing into the hands of Noah “DAMN STRAIGHT I LUUUUUURV SATAN” Webster?

    Comment by Dio Brando — February 2, 2008 @ 5:56 pm | Reply

  42. A commmon non-evil/non-fanatic Musilim isn’t a servant of Satan,everyone evil is is somewhat one,including christian people.Satan in their religion is called “Shaitan Iblis” and his otherwise identical to our Lucifer. Allah is not a pagan idol,his name comes from El’Ilah, El means in hebrew “God” and Ilah means the same and is the root of the word Elohim.Both “El” and “elohim” are names of god in the bible.

    Comment by Melchisedek — February 3, 2008 @ 6:19 am | Reply

  43. Sorry the last part should be “Both “El” and “Elohim” are names of God in the bible.”

    Comment by Melchisedek — February 3, 2008 @ 6:31 am | Reply

  44. The God I mean is Yahweh, A.K.A. the Judeo-Christan God.

    Comment by Melchisedek — February 3, 2008 @ 6:33 am | Reply

  45. A new Portal would be great, but I would REALLY like to see more “meet the…” videos, like maybe one for the sniper or scout. (“not so tough now, are ya? ARE YA!?”) And yeah, Sisyphus kinda does speak like GLaDOS on crack; would the KJV Bible be his companion cube? Also, the cake isn’t the lie, everything that didn’t come from Sisyphus’ mouth is.

    By the way, EB, that’s a great pic! “Look, buddy, I’m an engineer…” Classic!

    Comment by Adam Nelson — February 3, 2008 @ 8:56 am | Reply

  46. The cake is a LIE!

    Comment by Bob — February 3, 2008 @ 10:44 am | Reply

  47. Maybe Black Mesa? That was a joke, haha! Fat chance!

    Comment by Adam Nelson — February 3, 2008 @ 11:29 am | Reply

  48. hmmm…Is our Sisyphus the same as this Sisyphus?

    Comment by ChenZhen — February 3, 2008 @ 11:07 pm | Reply

  49. This was a triumph

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:34 am | Reply

  50. I’m making a note here: HUGE SUCCESS

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:35 am | Reply

  51. It’s hard to overstate my satisfaction

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:35 am | Reply

  52. Aperture Science

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:35 am | Reply

  53. We do what we must because we can

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:35 am | Reply

  54. For the good of all of us

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:35 am | Reply

  55. Except the ones who are dead

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:36 am | Reply

  56. But there’s no sense crying over every mistake

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:36 am | Reply

  57. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:36 am | Reply

  58. And the science gets done

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:36 am | Reply

  59. And you make a neat gun

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:36 am | Reply

  60. For the people who are still alive

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:37 am | Reply

  61. I’m not even angry

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:37 am | Reply

  62. I’m being so sincere right now

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:37 am | Reply

  63. Even though you broke my heart and killed me

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:37 am | Reply

  64. And tore me to pieces

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:37 am | Reply

  65. And threw every piece into a fire

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:37 am | Reply

  66. As they burned it hurt because

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:38 am | Reply

  67. I was so happy for you

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:38 am | Reply

  68. Now these points of data make a beautiful line

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:38 am | Reply

  69. And we’re out of beta

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:38 am | Reply

  70. We’re releasing on time

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:38 am | Reply

  71. So I’m GlaD

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:39 am | Reply

  72. I got burned

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:39 am | Reply

  73. Think of all the things we learned

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:39 am | Reply

  74. For the people who are still alive.

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:40 am | Reply

  75. Go ahead and leave me

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:40 am | Reply

  76. I think I prefer to stay inside

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:40 am | Reply

  77. Maybe you’ll find someone else to help you

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:40 am | Reply

  78. Maybe Black Mesa

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:41 am | Reply

  79. That was a joke

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:41 am | Reply

  80. Haha

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:41 am | Reply

  81. Fat chance

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:41 am | Reply

  82. Anyways this cake is great

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:42 am | Reply

  83. It’s so delicious and moist

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:42 am | Reply

  84. Look at me still talking when there’s science to do

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:42 am | Reply

  85. When I look out there it makes me glad I’m not you

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:42 am | Reply

  86. I’ve experiments to run

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:43 am | Reply

  87. There is research to be done

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:43 am | Reply

  88. On the people who are still alive

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:43 am | Reply

  89. And believe me, I am still alive

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:44 am | Reply

  90. I’m doing science and I’m still alive

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:44 am | Reply

  91. I feel fantastic and I’m still alive

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:44 am | Reply

  92. While you’re dying I’ll be still alive

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:44 am | Reply

  93. And when you’re dead I will be still alive

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:45 am | Reply

  94. still alive

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:45 am | Reply

  95. STILL ALIVE ^_^b

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 1:45 am | Reply

  96. Very cool, EB.

    Comment by Jim — February 4, 2008 @ 3:33 am | Reply

  97. hmmm…Is our Sisyphus the same as this Sisyphus?

    Comment by ChenZhen — February 3, 2008 @ 11:07 pm

    Well, the two are like total magnetic opposites, yet they do both seem to have the same writing style, my guess is, it’s the same person, a parody on one site and a tad bit more real on the other. But if you look at the number of comments that one gets, the parody thing gets the most attention. People always respond when you piss them off with stupidity.

    Comment by Arn — February 4, 2008 @ 6:09 am | Reply

  98. No, Chen Zhen. That Sisyphus is not me. Never saw that website before. It looks dumb.

    Comment by Sisyphus — February 4, 2008 @ 1:02 pm | Reply

  99. BTW, Deadly Scythe, this blog is NOT a parody. I’m very tired of reiterating that point. Why do the liberals insist on trotting out the same accusations?

    Comment by Sisyphus — February 4, 2008 @ 1:11 pm | Reply

  100. “BTW, Deadly Scythe, this blog is NOT a parody.”
    ————-

    So therefore you are “homegrown terrorists”.

    Comment by Arn — February 4, 2008 @ 2:40 pm | Reply

  101. DeadlyScythe seems like an utter moron. I have no idea why we would cover campaign trails if we were parodists. The sheer stupidity of that statement is still making my wife and me furious. Sisyphus, Psycheout, Jeremiah, AMarriedLady, Mrs. TD Gaines-Crockett, and I will continue to reveal the LORD’s wishes to keep Him in the public square and stop the lies intended to destroy Him. We work as a team, while your phony friend at Scrutator worked alone.

    Comment by bobcorker — February 4, 2008 @ 5:51 pm | Reply

  102. “We work as a team”
    Your team sucks; I never see any indication of noteworthy progress. Your beloved candidates lose support, the religious right will be all but powerless come next election, and thanks to Bush, nobody’s going to trust the GOP for a couple terms.

    Comment by Elephant Bones — February 4, 2008 @ 7:25 pm | Reply

  103. “The sheer stupidity of that statement is still making my wife and me furious”

    AHAHAHA, Corksmoker having a wife. LULZ.

    This is impossible, because in reality, Corklover would only own a slave woman. And then kill her within a month.

    Comment by Dio Brando — February 4, 2008 @ 8:01 pm | Reply

  104. “Your team sucks; I never see any indication of noteworthy progress. Your beloved candidates lose support, the religious right will be all but powerless come next election, and thanks to Bush, nobody’s going to trust the GOP for a couple terms.”

    Since you liberals are always whining about election frauds, maybe we should actually steal one from you morons just so that you learn what it’s like to have no voice?

    The Democrat Party has losing language. Their refusal to acknowledge, much less promote, religion, coupled with the church growth of America, makes them highly suspect. The Republican Party will easily win the Culture War, because that is the most significant war going on in Americans’ minds. Why is it that the most conservative candidates actually get votes, as compared to the most liberal candidates? It’s because your cultural elitist mentality pisses on a good 30% of Americans. Add the people who would be severly crushed by Socialism and the number climbs to about 50%. Democrat voters often seem unhappy with their party, while I as a whole am happy with mine.

    Oh and Bill Frist will be the nominee of 2012, if Brownback miraculously loses. You can count on that.

    Comment by bobcorker — February 4, 2008 @ 8:05 pm | Reply

  105. A Scientologist wouldn’t even make it onto the ballots for the primaries. Nobody is stupid enough to vote for someone whose “religion” was created by a science fiction author (the late L. Ron Hubbard) who said himself that the best way to scam people out of money is to start your own religion. Scientology is a sham, and only fools believe in it.

    An atheist–perhaps. But only if he agrees with me on the majority of issues, and votes according to his conscience.

    Comment by L — February 6, 2008 @ 11:50 am | Reply

  106. Oh and Bill Frist will be the nominee of 2012, if Brownback miraculously loses. You can count on that.

    Brownback isn’t even in the race now, you gigantic sodomizing tool.

    And 2012? He still won’t be. You, however, will still be a gigantic sodomizing tool.

    Comment by Dio Brando — February 10, 2008 @ 4:50 am | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: