"College student accused of slashing Muslim cabbie" - Turns out he was a liberal http://www.pressherald.com/news/nat...sed-of-slashing-muslim-cabbie_2010-08-26.html "Gunshot Shatters Glass Door Of GOP Office" http://www.wbaltv.com/r/24764054/detail.html "Tea Party Group Hit With Death Threats" http://politics.usnews.com/news/blo.../08/25/tea-party-group-hit-with-death-threats "Rightwing” Michigan Militia Member a Registered Democrat" http://palmettoconservative.wordpress.com/2010/04/03/rightwing-militia-member-a-registered-democrat/ "Man attacks tea party" http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...an_physically_attacks_tea_partiers_in_nc.html etc, etc, etc...
no evidence of him being liberal unknown who did it again no evidence on who did it democrat doesn't equal liberal again no evidence of person being a liberal. what a surprise a right wing attack that is 0 for 5.
Apparently the hate is coming from your side spidergoat. And pjdude, are you serious? Sorry, next time they can check these haters for their libtard cards.
please quit your trolling most liberals are smart enough and urbane enough to fall for such an obvious goad as libtard. if you are going to troll shouldn't you at least do it well? also I'm sorry you are disappointed that I don't take your blind assumptions as fact
Only disappointed in the behavior of your side. And not trolling, simply posting news and truth. If you dont like it dont click on the link.
As usual, you have one little problem. Your "evidence" does not support your claim. In the last video, there was obviously some pushing, but it is not clear who started it. And just because you are some other right wing whacko says it happened does not make it so. In your first article about the cabbie, there was no mention of the attacker being a liberal. Where did you get that nonsense? Did it come to you in a dream?
So you dishonestly place bad things to an ideology claim its my side and say your disappointed in my side. Your posting news and than lying about it.
There no such think as a "Liberal" and a "Conservative" - these are just media labels to make digesting news, and more importantly the commercials on TV the support said "News" easier. - I support pro choice - I support gay marriage - use of animals in experimentation is fine by me - ESC research is fine - didn't support the bailout - don't support extended unemployment benefits - faith should be freely chosen but I support large public discourse on the topic. - I support teaching about religions in public school - I'm fine with people owning guns and keeping them at home - don't support the wars - I want more green energy and more biotech support with public taxes etc....
Yes, he did nuke Japan and for good reasons. Who was it that declared war on The United States? Why SAM, I believe that was Japan. Who was it, that invaded The United States? Why SAM, I believe that was Japan. And who was it that encouraged civilians to commit sucide rather than be captured by Americans? Why SAM, I believe that was Japan. And which country refused to surrender without out extreme loss of blood - including civilian blood? Why SAM, I believe that was Japan. Which country refused to surrender even after the first nuke was dropped on Japan? Why SAM, I believe that was Japan. Which country, even after suffering two nukes, suffered a coup because they did not want to surrender? Why SAM, I believe that was Japan. The unfortunate fact SAM is that the war with Japan was not initiated by The United States. And the war was not made overly bloody because of The United States. It was a very bloody war because Japan insisted on fighting to the very last man, woman and child. It took two nukes to bring them to their senses. You can blame The United States for many things. We don't always get things right. But dropping the nukes on Japan was not one of the things we got wrong. Those nukes saved as many if not more civilian lives than would have been lost had The United States invaded the Japanese homeland island the old fashioned way. It was clear, Japan was preparing for a very bloody defense of their island...including he arming of civilans for the fight.
Since we are on the topic of liberal arseholes: Who was it that forced Japan to open its society when it was isolated and minding its own business? Oops, the United States.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Meanwhile, note that Japan responded to US provocation in WWII. Its the Americans who never mind their own business and mind everyone elses. Why did Japan attack Pearl Harbor? Also wtf were Americans doing in Pearl Harbor? As for surrendering between the first and second nukes within 3 days of each other? Well the Japanese never did agree to the terms they had set from the beginning. It was the Americans who bombed them regardless and accepted the same terms after bombing that the Japanese were willing to concede before the bombs. There is an excellent link in sciforums somewhere on how Americans rationalise the mass murder of Japanese civilians to themselves, since the bombs never changed anything substantial about the war. But hey, we've seen that over and over again, with all the overthrow and wars of the last 100 years, so its not like its something new. Didn't find the link but did find goofy's post on the subject http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=88834&postcount=17 If we want to talk about liberal war mongering arseholes, US foreign policy is a to do list in educating ourselves about them. Both Nagasaki and Hiroshima were acts of terrorism - the worst acts of terrorism the world has seen - while Pearl Harbor was a military act against a military target. This is one of the problems I find with the definition of "liberal" today - the poseurs masquerading as one. It wouldn't surprise me if the worst acts of violence were committed by so-called liberals.
End? Seems like many of them continue indefinitely until ceasefire, slow "withdrawal" because of unpopularity, or simply declaring an end (more than once) and turning things over to private security forces, etc.
One of the interesting things I looked up was US-Japan relations before the war. After the US forced the Japanese to open their society, there was an increase in Japanese immigration to the US. Like most Asians, the Japanese were both hard working and willing to do more work for less pay. Roosevelt [another "liberal"] signed a Gentleman's Agreement with Japan to slow down immigration [1894] because well, Americans were losing jobs to the Japanese. By 1900, Japan agreed to stop visas for Japanese labor but they continued to enter via Mexico and by 1906, San Francisco extended its school segregation laws to exclude all Asians. This was the beginning of discrimination against the Japanese people in the United States.
So Japan was just an innocent bystander, minding its own business? It didn't have its own imperialistic designs on its sphere?
