Fall of a nation.

[dutch508]

There is a certain danglesnish to it.

true

[wasp69]

Did you fail to read the post where I stated, "Think of this as a root cause exercise." ?

No, I didn't.  For that matter, I quoted it in my response.

I have given you the answer in post 2, therefore, exercise over.  Anything that has been posted since has reinforced that answer.

why do you challenge my courage?

Any challenge of your courage from me would have contained the word "coward".  It was not a personal challenge to you, it was a general observation regarding a state of being.

[The Abolitionist]

You have come to this board and expounded at great length about a problem we were all well aware of.  There have been some disagreements about the primary and proximal causes that you, frankly, were schooled on.

The question I have is, what are you prepared to do other than making long drawn out posts stating the obvious to folks who are already aware?

Was trying to have a discussion.  If that bothers you simply return to your Lady GaGa videos and forget that me and this thread exist.

[Eupher]

Was trying to have a discussion.  If that bothers you simply return to your Lady GaGa videos and forget that me and this thread exist.

Hmm. I guess that means you choose not to answer Bad Dog's question.

[Eupher]

I like Fla Gator's response, for which he got a h5 from me.

Frankly, I believe this country is irreparably harmed; a process that started more than a hundred years.

Proglodytes ought to be proud of themselves. They've done well. 

[The Abolitionist]

Have you read the 45 goals of the communist agenda? Quite a shock to those who haven't.  About 95% of them are complete.

http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

They were taken from the book "Naked Communist" written in 1958.

When you couple that with what Yuri Bezmenov said, it explains a lot about what has been happening here.

Yes, I previously read that along with the communist manifesto and rules for radicals. (know thine enemy)

My dad was a WWII vet and participated in the invasion at Omaha Beach and he used that quote about being destroyed from within quite often.  Of course, when I was young I didn't understand how that could happen.  After all, didn't everybody go to church on Sunday and weren't all of our elected officials moral, upstanding people?

[The Abolitionist]

Hmm. I guess that means you choose not to answer Bad Dog's question.

BD's 'what are prepared to do' question smacked of trolling.

[The Abolitionist]

I like Fla Gator's response, for which he got a h5 from me.

Frankly, I believe this country is irreparably harmed; a process that started more than a hundred years.

Proglodytes ought to be proud of themselves. They've done well. 

I agree which begs the question: what do we do now?

(Quite frankly, we probably see eye to eye on many issues.)

[Bad Dog]

BD's 'what are prepared to do' question smacked of trolling.

Indeed.  Since you flubbed the pie question, it is understandable you would shy away from that question.

[The Abolitionist]

... 

Look, if you are going to argue my case for me then I will just go and **** with the Dumpster.

Are you serious?  Prayer/religion binds the family, therefore, one can deduce that in the absence of religion, the family unit is less stable.

I'm afraid that we've reached an impasse.

[The Abolitionist]

Again, the "True Conservative" comes to grace us with his knowledge...


...which we already knew and explained to him.

Of course, then he repeates what we have said, adds cut and paste from sites we already knew about, and struts about, manly conservative.

 

Quid pro quo on schooling:  repeates should be repeats 

[Bad Dog]

I agree which begs the question: what do we do now?

(Quite frankly, we probably see eye to eye on many issues.)

Wait.....what?  that was my trollish question.

Frankly , if we didn't see eye to eye on so many things, I would think you were trying to draw out members on this forum as to illegal acts they might be contemplating.

[The Abolitionist]

Indeed.  Since you flubbed the pie question, it is understandable you would shy away from that question.

At least you're living up to your moniker, albeit a cyber setting.

[The Abolitionist]

Wait.....what?  that was my trollish question.

Frankly , if we didn't see eye to eye on so many things, I would think you were trying to draw out members on this forum as to illegal acts they might be contemplating.

Totally different.  I asked the question in the body of a civil discussion.  You asked the question after preceding it with a personal attack.

You do see the difference don't you?

[Bad Dog]

Totally different.  I asked the question in the body of a civil discussion.  You asked the question after preceding it with a personal attack.

You do see the difference don't you?

I am happy to admit mine was more direct and honest and yours was more dishonest and sneaky.

[txradioguy]

The 'people' elected a homosexual marxist.  Twice.

The defense rest......

Marxist...probably.  Homosexual?  Rumor only...and a pretty flimsy one at that.  Why do you treat it like it's fact?

[txradioguy]

Are you trying to suggest that Bible instructs us to not only love homosexuals but to accept their lifestyle?

Love the sinner...hate the sin.

[txradioguy]

Was trying to have a discussion.  If that bothers you simply return to your Lady GaGa videos and forget that me and this thread exist.

So...you've presented what you think is the real problem...what do you suggest we do to fix it?

[Bad Dog]

So...you've presented what you think is the real problem...what do you suggest we do to fix it?

Good luck with that.

[Eupher]

I agree which begs the question: what do we do now?

Let me get this straight. You say that the question BD posed "smacked of trolling" and yet you turn around and ask the same question of me?

Am I supposed to conclude that you're trolling just as much as BD allegedly trolls?

BD's been on this site for a good while and in my view, doesn't suffer fools well. And he doesn't resort to trolling behavior.

You, on the other hand, I don't know at all.

So please explain. How are the two questions different?

[NHSparky]

Was trying to have a discussion.  If that bothers you simply return to your Lady GaGa videos and forget that me and this thread exist.

Trust me, scooter--your type has been and gone from here many, many times.  To say that you'd be easy to ignore would be an understatement.

Oh, and you can shove the "true conservative" shit straight up your ass.  Homey don't play 'dat.

[Bad Dog]

Let me get this straight. You say that the question BD posed "smacked of trolling" and yet you turn around and ask the same question of me?

Am I supposed to conclude that you're trolling just as much as BD allegedly trolls?

BD's been on this site for a good while and in my view, doesn't suffer fools well. And he doesn't resort to trolling behavior.

You, on the other hand, I don't know at all.

So please explain. How are the two questions different?

You left out the good part "(Quite frankly, we probably see eye to eye on many issues.)" .  So there's that.

[dutch508]

Are you serious?  Prayer/religion binds the family, therefore, one can deduce that in the absence of religion, the family unit is less stable.

I'm afraid that we've reached an impasse.

Possibly. I say that the only way to weaken faith is to destroy the family unit. You say the only way to destroy the family unit is to weaken faith.

Your own statement supports my thesis. However, if you read my first post you will see that I state that weakening faith comes later, after the family unit is weakend enough that the leftist teachings start to take root in the children. (see education and the rermoval of God from society)


Let's argue for a moment that you are correct and all it takes to destroy faith is to replace it with the state. We have a couple of expamples, NAZI Germany and Soviet Russia.

The Soviets did everything it could to destroy religion and failed. Why? Because the family remained a strong source of faith. During WWII the Soviets returned to religion using it to bulster up the Russian people. Even after a strong sense of religion remained in the USSR and after the fall of communism it returned in strength.

Leftists in the US saw this flaw in the system and worked to fix it by destroying the family through every means it could think of. With out the family to raise it's children the massess turned away from morality and turned into the welfare state.

Now- can you argue your point of view with more than a "Nuh-Uh... Is Not"?

[dutch508]

Quid pro quo on schooling:  repeates should be repeats 

yes, of course ab aeterno... Because an additional letter is exactly like misunderstanding the definition of key words in your arguement.



Accipe Hoc

[dutch508]

Totally different.  I asked the question in the body of a civil discussion.  You asked the question after preceding it with a personal attack.

You do see the difference don't you?

Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare.