doublegunshop.com - home Forums Is this where we're headed ?

I can't resist translating Comrade King's preposterously subjective, statist, religious clap-trap and mumbo-jumbo. It's especially relevant today with the caf� murders in Australia and the Pakistani school massacre.

The subjective term "botched". To Comrade King, that means that the war on terror was immoral within the context of sociopathic statist religious morality. It never should have happened and is an example of America's evilness, as it's obviously America's fault that Muslim religious fundamentalists hate us and they have every right to sociopathically and psychopathically inflict their religious beliefs on all they consider infidels. This is also Obama's belief, and is responsible for what is actually happening, a "surrendering" of the War on Terror. Much like when the democrats blocked aid to prevent South Vietnam from being overrun, (the same way they blocked aid to Nationalist China, enabling it to be overrun by King's buddy Mao) an action authorized in the Paris accords, yet prevented politically by the democrat controlled congress. Afterwards, like what happened in Iraq, the statists claim that the entire action was immoral and botched from the start, an obfuscation designed to prevent the understanding of who was actually responsible for the end result.

"Intractable problems of Faith". Wow. How preposterous. Of course Comrade King can't imagine himself declaring solutions. The issue is the Muslim Fundamentalist faith-based belief in Jihad and the expansion of world-wide Islam. ("Sharia" is also a part) All using violent and psychopathic methods. King finds it hard to think that these people are "Bad", as according to him the murderous violence being committed in the name of their religion is merely an "intractable problem", and morally equivalent to Western beliefs.

Rumsfeld was unqualified to run the war. If anything, he was a good example of what happens when politics intrude on military strategy. An aberration with Republican presidents and a norm with Democrat ones.

Comrade King's fundamentally anti-intellectual statist religious beliefs prevent him from understanding the concept of individual freedom and equality, and that the sociopathic infliction of totalitarian religious beliefs, (nothing "Liberal" about that in the classical definition) whether by Leftist/Statists (such as himself or Obama) or Islamic fundamentalists is immoral. King's anti-intellectual, sociopathic, religious, clown-shoe dance continues..

Ken, I'm really glad you use the term "leftist/statist". It is far more descriptive and accurate than the term most commonly used here, "liberal".

Also, is it just me or what's wrong with the vast majority of Americans these days....a Christmas decoration on the White House tree with Mao's picture on it? How about Stalin, Pol Pot and Hitler. They must be feeling left out! You have a bad guy in the White House and plenty more in the national media. This should be a lead story.....so incredibly inappropriate, yet so revealing.

You can thank the Public School system and the Dept. of Education. It's all been incremental, and fairly successful. It might as well be called the Dept. of Statist Religious Indoctrination. The average student these days has no idea about how to be intellectually objective, they've been taught what to believe on a strictly emotionally subjective basis, reinforced by faith-based statist morality. Typical religious indoctrination, used for thousands of years.

Using the term "Liberal" is one of the major problems. Leftists intentionally embraced the term, as it, in the classical sense, is diametrically opposed to what they actually believe. It enables the statists to obfuscate their true philosophy. The quicker the term is abandoned, the better. Examples are obvious, as people like Comrade King and Ed are constantly trying to rationalize totalitarian religious statism as "Liberalism"...

So is the problem one of semantics, or is the problem the tactics the Left has adopted to indoctrinate the masses?

I mean, we have turned to a discussion about whether the proper term is Liberal, non-classical Liberal, modern day Liberal, religious/statist, Liberal Left Socialist, Democrat, Left Wing Democrat, Libtard, Greenie, Progressive, Commie Rat Bastard, etc.

Maybe we could get together and coin a new term to describe them. How about Rel-Stat-tard? Meanwhile, as we debate the most appropriate descriptive term to use, they are busily adopting new strategy to advance their agenda... "OK, the phony Republican War on Women didn't fly this time, so let's motivate our most reliable and easily fooled voter bloc and dredge up a phony widespread War on Black Men based upon a few police shootings that were mostly justifiable. At the same time, let's screw our unemployed and unemployable black constituents, and grant amnesty to 5 million illegal competitors for a dwindling pool of jobs. Let's keep that border wide open as long as we can. Let's just forget about the other 15 million illegals and keep them here too. Then we've got the Hispanic vote. We don't need to fool them all. We only need 51% to win. Oh hey, we see the Muslims are breeders, so let's screw Conservative Christians and turn a blind eye to radical Islam. And by all means possible, we must never go back to verifiable paper ballots or, god forbid (we don't capitalize God because we are Atheists)... gods forbid we ever allow Voter I.D. Laws to pass. Then we must continue to portray the Tea Party as extremists so we can fool spineless Republicans like John Boehner into compromise positions that allow us to slowly move the ball down the field."

We see these tactics on display here on a regular basis coming from foot-soldiers like King Brown. We see pea-brained idiots like ed, homer, nca225, GLS, etc. who have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. All are so-called gun guys who support and defend the Liberal Left Socialist Democrat Libtard Progressive Religious Statist lying rat bastards who continually infringe upon our rights.

That's why I come right out and refer to Liars like King as Liars. I have no intention of faking civility or good manners as King does when I'm dealing with immoral pathological liars. Various Assh*les can come here and deride me for calling a spade a spade. But none of them have been able to demonstrate that King was actually telling the truth when I called him a Liar. Debating King does no good. He simply comes back with more lies. And more anti-2nd Amendment rhetoric... while out of the other side of his mouth, he cries and lies that he is as pro-gun as the rest of us.

So is there really a picture of Chairman Mao on the White House Christmas tree? If so, King Brown must be smiling and saying to himself, "The U.S. really does get it right over time." And GLS will pull his head out from under King's kilt and nod in total agreement. Hey GLS, did you notice that King wished craigd a Merry Atheist Christmas even though craigd constantly confronts his many lies... without coming right out and calling him a liar... yet he totally ignored you? Of course, he ignored me too. We have that much in common.

http://georgia.gov/agencies/georgia-department-natural-resources-environmental-protection-division



I'm not the dumbass that posted online that I sold a house knowing it had a Mercury contamination problem. Therefore, I am not the one with a possible acute need to prove a negative.

Keith, I can't tell if you're just being funny or if you mean it. Pretty sure you feel language is important. It's how we communicate. Your whole thing about King is based on the idea that the words he chooses are not accurate, don't reflect what he really thinks, aren't true, are being used to lull us into complacency. Right?

So if that's true what's the problem with calling a spade a spade, as you put it?

King isn't a liberal, according to the definition of the term. As I have posted before, a leftist in common parlance, or as Ken puts it, a leftist/statist, is far more accurate for someone holding the views you rail against.

King likes to say he's never voted "Liberal", knowing that the name "Liberal", one of our major political parties, will get confused by Americans with the term "liberal", a philosophy.

James, I meant exactly what I said. Language is important, but we shouldn't get hung up on the proper descriptive term for either a Liberal or a Liar, or we become as Nero, fiddling while Rome burns.

I like that you brought up King's frequent claim that he never voted "Liberal" even though the "Greens" he has admitted supporting are to the Left of the Liberal Party in Canada. He calls this the "craft of journalism", and I call it what it is... Weasel Words... intended to confuse and obfuscate. It would be like Bill Clinton claiming he never smoked pot because he never smoked a metal cooking vessel. Or looking the public in the eye and saying, "I never had sex with that woman..." when she had a blue dress with his semen stains on it from a sex act that wasn't intercourse. But liars like King don't acknowledge a Democrat taking advantage of a young impressionable female intern as either misogyny or a War on Women. I think King's words do in fact reflect what he really thinks. And what he thinks is diametrically opposed to the core values and beliefs of our Founders, and precisely what has led us into a steady decline. Even King admits as much when inborn nationalism comes back to the surface and he touts areas where Canada has surpassed the U.S. Yet he credits Socialist things such as your Canadian Health Care and Canadian Gun Control while ignoring the much more massive and costly spending of our Great Society which has yielded zero or negative fruit. I'm not saying that either the U.S or Canada was perfect 50 or 100 years ago. They weren't. But Libtardism will be the eventual downfall of both if it isn't reversed. I think nutjobs like King and Obama have a worldview that do not like to see the U.S. as a world power, and would rather knock us down to level the playing field to their one-world vision. King's words are frequently crafted in a devious manner and filled with intentionally inaccurate data to support his beliefs. Propaganda, in other words. And lies.

Even his phony civility act is a lie because dishonesty is not, and never will be, civility.

It does get tedious for me when I try to differentiate and go with something like Anti-Gun Anti-2nd Amendment Liberal Left Socialist Democrat. I suppose I could abbreviate it as AGA2ALLSD, but no one would know what I was talking about.

What I meant is you think the words he uses are deceptive, chosen to give cover to his real beliefs, while influencing our thoughts towards his aims.

Yes. With a caveat... he does not influence my thoughts and beliefs. How about you?

Thanks for the link to the story about the White House Christmas tree having Mao Tse Tung and transgender drag queen ornaments. As you say, very revealing. But don't blame Obama... blame the turds and idiots who voted for him.

I should have noted that since Radical Leftists have co-opted the term Liberal, all we can do is call them liars when they compare themselves to Liberals in the historical/classical sense.

Careful how you reply... you might not be blessed with a Merry Atheist Christmas message... and GLS will hurt your feelings by calling you anonymous lower case canvasback!

I think this is a good reason to use the word, lib. 'They' don't use the word so much to inflame, but tend to imply it's a word that unites. If that kumbaya, tingle up the leg feel doesn't happen for someone in the center or to the right, then the message should be that there is a divide when a psuedo uniter runs down their talking points.