Mischa Gelman wrote:
> I'd gladly take the moral, faith-based foreign policy of William Jennings Bryan,
> Jimmy Carter and Andrew Young,
Would that be the same Jimmy Carter who stood by one of the most
dictators in the mideast, The Shah of Iran, and proudly declared the
US's support and personal admiration for? The same Jimmy Carter who
actively supported The Sandinistas and their attempts to jail political
opponents, shut down opposition newspapers and actively participated in
efforts to undermine free elections that threatened them in Nicaragua?
Faith based, what a joke. Since when did communism become a faith?
Paul Galvanek - Ver. 4.0
In article <bbernardini-AF8266.16530606072003@no-spam>,
Brian Bernardini <bbernardini@no-spam> wrote:
> In article <look-BBCEFF.16145906072003@no-spam>,
> The Expatriate <look@no-spam> wrote:
>
> > In article <dommanno-21136A.23182605072003@no-spam>,
> > "D.F. Manno" <dommanno@no-spam> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <look-7E3EFE.12061005072003@no-spam>,
> > > The Expatriate <look@no-spam> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Those responsible for overturning the sodomy laws are opening the door
> > > > to legalized incest.
> > >
> > > Let's say for argument's sake that that happens. As long as the
> > > participants are consenting adults, what's the problem?
> >
> > Do you really want me to explain "the problem" with a society that
> > allows marriage between siblings, or parent and child?
> >
> > Too bad your question wasn't published in a forum where a significant
> > number of people will actually read it. It shows your side's true
> > colors, and would have done much to silence this mindless, knee-jerk
> > criticism of Santorum.
>
> And here we see the basic problem with Republicans. They think anybody
> who disagrees is representative of an entire group of people.
Do *you* agree with him?
If so, your argument is both ironic and moot.
If not, then have the backbone to say so. That is, if dissention with
the liberal ranks is permitted. Liberals' failure to denounce such
scenarios as Manno's only proves that Santorum and I are right.
Mischa Gelman wrote:
> Or like your claims that pro-life Democrats don't exist.
I never said they didn't exist, I said anyone who votes for them is a
fool because whatever they claim to be the party and leaders won't allow
them to act any other way but they way they tell them.
You proved that with your own posts describing the party's efforts to
crush the pro-life voice within.
Paul Galvanek - Ver. 4.0