OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You repeat stuff that's not true as if it's fact because you accept as gospel any old nonsense as long as it conforms to your preconceptions.  

    [/QUOTE]

    ^ Self description.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You repeat stuff that's not true as if it's fact because you accept as gospel any old nonsense as long as it conforms to your preconceptions.  

    [/QUOTE]

    ^ Self description.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not really . .  . any more end of the world prophesies to report old man? 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to AFNAV130's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Mel, Pro

    mel I disagree with the living constitution concept. We are supposed to be a nation on laws not men, the L C makes it very easy to have an oligarchy not a republic. I don't think having the basis of our laws to be interpreted like " it depends what "is" is. It may go your way or my way, but our individual rights shouldn't be subject to some current whim Of a few people. 

    pro,

    Its funny , you are basically a statist. You have no problem giving away powers to the state, which in turn controls individuals. A centrally run government does not work and isn't now. The gov powers are even more powerful than guns. As to a standing military, It would be a wonderful world if we didn't need the military. But then you have to tell me what to do with Putin,China, Iran and the ayatollahs for just a few. And you do know Iran has sips off our coast, and Russia just sent a battle ship to Cuba. Not to say I am in love with the Pentagon EitherI love the grunts t

     

    In the end,I hate giving unlimited power to Men. Right now we have a President who changes laws when he sees fit because he slammed thru an unworkable plan that was based on falsehoods, keep your Doc, your insurance and it will be $2500 cheaper. Add to it a foreign policy that is in total collapse, and an economy that is failing and a tin ear to how majority of people fell about sensitive social issues, and we are going to see anger and frustration. I am less worried about what the people will do and am scared to death of what our own government will do to us.

    have a nice day

    [/QUOTE]

    Pretty much. Funny part is, take these guys, put them in a time machine back to 1773 and they would be saying, what's wrong the stamp act, the tea tax, the quartering et etc etc. The system works! They wouldn't have the country they do have now. It's pretty amazing people can't see the big picture. Huge reason this country, has gotten to the point that you can't even recognize it as America. Socially, politically and economically. Everything. And pro is a combination of statist and socialist. Which gets you totalitarianism. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Totalitarianism has nothing to do with being a Socialist leader or politician.  Don't force me to bludgeon you with history and the facts.

    It means someone is a dictator where everything is channeled through that person leading whatever gov't ideology in place.. That one person using gov't to enforce policy.   It's also known as Fascism.



     

    [/QUOTE]

    What?

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I still love your mention of "The Laws for the Protection of German Blood and Honor"...what a collection of racist hooey!

    http://history1900s.about.com/od/1930s/a/Nuremberg-Laws.htm

    The Nuremburg laws...that was the name given to the "Law for the protection of German Blood and Honor"..
    On September 15, 1935, the Nazi government passed two new racial laws at their annual NSDAP Reich Party Congress in Nuremberg, Germany. These two laws (the Reich Citizenship Law and the Law to Protect German Blood and Honor) became collectively known as the Nuremberg Laws. These laws took German citizenship away from Jews and outlawed both marriage and sex between Jews and non-Jews. Unlike historical antisemitism, the Nuremberg Laws defined Jewishness by heredity (race) rather than by practice (religion).

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you love it, though?  

    [/QUOTE]

    I DON'T LOVE IT...JUST THE MENTION OF IT...THE PRETENTIOUS WAY THEY LABLED THE LAW THAt was all about genocide and racism...little different than what's being tried now...dress it up as a blow to the rights of a few bigots, the right to serve who they want to serve....in germany they had to give it a high sounding moral blanket to hide under...here they are trying to use religious freedom...there is no difference....it's just plain dangerous!

    "The Law for the protection of religious freedom"

    What a bunch of hooey!

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    Just a note

    i stand corrected by Pro on the pelosi quote, it's just that she is so dumb, and believes she knows more about catholism than the pope, I believed something I heard 

     

    my bad

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You repeat stuff that's not true as if it's fact because you accept as gospel any old nonsense as long as it conforms to your preconceptions.  

    [/QUOTE]

    ^ Self description.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not really . .  . any more end of the world prophesies to report old man? 

    [/QUOTE]


    You're phoney as a $3 bill as you cry about discrimination then use age as an insult.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just a note

    i stand corrected by Pro on the pelosi quote, it's just that she is so dumb, and believes she knows more about catholism than the pope, I believed something I heard 

     

    my bad

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fine, and thanks for looking it up.  I just think everyone has to be careful because the internet is full of distortions.  It's frustrating because you can't have serious discussions when the basic facts aren't even right.  This "4th trimester abortion" thing is another one that I think you'll find is a distortion.  

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You repeat stuff that's not true as if it's fact because you accept as gospel any old nonsense as long as it conforms to your preconceptions.  

    [/QUOTE]

    ^ Self description.

    [/QUOTE]

    Not really . .  . any more end of the world prophesies to report old man? 

    [/QUOTE]


    You're phoney as a $3 bill as you cry about discrimination then use age as an insult.

    [/QUOTE]

    It's not so much that you're old in years, but in state of mind. Wink

    In years, I'm not far behind you . . . 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    The good thing Rusty is the democratic process worked and better sense prevailed in the end.  Some reason for hope when the right wing loses in a heavily right wing state.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    The feeble governor knowing her background, probably won't veto it on principle, and she'll sign off on it for political gain like the spineless and corrupt politician she probably is.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wrong again............

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    The good thing Rusty is the democratic process worked and better sense prevailed in the end.  Some reason for hope when the right wing loses in a heavily right wing state.

     



    I don't think it did.  The governor simply reacted to the backlash and the financial fears.  I don't see that as Democracy necessarily.

     

    In the end, I see it as that bill being so evil and pathetic at its core, that even a right wing nutty moron governor, couldn't even bypass her conscience and justify it.

     



    The Republicans do have a bit of a problem navigating between the disenfranchised tea party types and the hyperenfranchised CEO types that populate their party.  While their opinions overlap on taxes and regulation, they diverge greatly on many of the social issues. 

    The hyperenfranchised have the money, power, and sophistication to generally prevail, which is why our soldier friend wants to grab a gun and start a civil war.

     

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just a note

    i stand corrected by Pro on the pelosi quote, it's just that she is so dumb, and believes she knows more about catholism than the pope, I believed something I heard 

     

    my bad

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fine, and thanks for looking it up.  I just think everyone has to be careful because the internet is full of distortions.  It's frustrating because you can't have serious discussions when the basic facts aren't even right.  This "4th trimester abortion" thing is another one that I think you'll find is a distortion.  

    [/QUOTE]

    have long learned that having false statements always come back to undermine an honest person. When you find out you are wrong fess up

    As to Obama , he played fast and loose on this issue , but his support in committee was documented. There are non political groups who affirmed this. For me there  is nothing that comes out of his mouth I believe. And has no policy that works. this gov is failing.

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just a note

    i stand corrected by Pro on the pelosi quote, it's just that she is so dumb, and believes she knows more about catholism than the pope, I believed something I heard 

     

    my bad

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fine, and thanks for looking it up.  I just think everyone has to be careful because the internet is full of distortions.  It's frustrating because you can't have serious discussions when the basic facts aren't even right.  This "4th trimester abortion" thing is another one that I think you'll find is a distortion.  

    [/QUOTE]

    have long learned that having false statements always come back to undermine an honest person. When you find out you are wrong fess up

    As to Obama , he played fast and loose on this issue , but his support in committee was documented. There are non political groups who affirmed this. For me there  is nothing that comes out of his mouth I believe. And has no policy that works. this gov is failing.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I can't find any record of Obama ever saying anything about "4th trimester abortions" and I'm almost certain he never did because that term is merely a right wing rhetorical device that no one but right wingers use.  As a state senator, Obama opposed a bill that would have defined an aborted fetus that showed signs of life as a legal person.  This has been distorted by right wing rhetoricians into a claim that Obama supports killing babies after birth, but that claim grossly misrepresents Obama's actual position.  

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just a note

    i stand corrected by Pro on the pelosi quote, it's just that she is so dumb, and believes she knows more about catholism than the pope, I believed something I heard 

     

    my bad

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fine, and thanks for looking it up.  I just think everyone has to be careful because the internet is full of distortions.  It's frustrating because you can't have serious discussions when the basic facts aren't even right.  This "4th trimester abortion" thing is another one that I think you'll find is a distortion.  

    [/QUOTE]

    have long learned that having false statements always come back to undermine an honest person. When you find out you are wrong fess up

    As to Obama , he played fast and loose on this issue , but his support in committee was documented. There are non political groups who affirmed this. For me there  is nothing that comes out of his mouth I believe. And has no policy that works. this gov is failing.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I can't find any record of Obama ever saying anything about "4th trimester abortions" and I'm almost certain he never did because that term is merely a right wing rhetorical device that no one but right wingers use.  As a state senator, Obama opposed a bill that would have defined an aborted fetus that showed signs of life as a legal person.  This has been distorted by right wing rhetoricians into a claim that Obama supports killing babies after birth, but that claim grossly misrepresents Obama's actual position.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I had just googled it, it wasn't under 4th qtr, but under something else, I am on ipad and it's hard for me to link, tomorrow I will post the link and we can figure it out. But it was a yahoo answer blog.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 347pg's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    The feeble governor knowing her background, probably won't veto it on principle, and she'll sign off on it for political gain like the spineless and corrupt politician she probably is.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wrong again............

    [/QUOTE]

    How am I wrong? I said "probably won't".  

    She is a loser, but McCain scared the crap out of her. Good for him. Always like McCain. The last Republican with any balls or some principle.

    [/QUOTE]


    Your supposition was wrong.  You thought you knew how she would act and bad-mouthed her on that basis.

    For all intents and purposes, McCain is a democrat.  He follows liberal ideas that you espouse which is why you like him.   These same "Principles" got us to where we're at today.  The country is a mess thanks to liberals.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from AFNAV130. Show AFNAV130's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 347pg's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    The feeble governor knowing her background, probably won't veto it on principle, and she'll sign off on it for political gain like the spineless and corrupt politician she probably is.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wrong again............

    [/QUOTE]

    How am I wrong? I said "probably won't".  

    She is a loser, but McCain scared the crap out of her. Good for him. Always like McCain. The last Republican with any balls or some principle.

    [/QUOTE]

    You are so wrong.  You know he backed publicly Al-Queda rebels in Syria right? You know the ones who execute kids in the street? Word is, if McCain is for it, the right way is the opposite direction. You keep on and on that this is a war on gays or whatnot. It isn't. So if some guy doesn't want to photograph two dudes who, well ay know what, that's a moral rejection for him. To hell with religion. So answer this. If some person, kindly and politely said in my conscience I can't do this sorry, would the appropriate course of action be to then just say thank you, I understand and then just move on? I'm sure there are plenty of gay photographers. Much like I would think someone might not want to photograph Muslims, if they had a relative die on 9/11. Would that not be fair? This isn't color, or gender or race. You are using arguments that don't hold water. Your intent is good, misguided though as it is. One neesa to make sure things don't get out of control.  No one is calling for gays to be shot, or imprisoned or treated across the board as bad. However they need to start corralling their mouthpieces before some people with not enough intestinal fortitude start something that can't be stopped. I'm talking about the dissolution of gender identity. Start limiting that, and you might see progress. By the way, I don't have a truck with big tires. A Mustang Cobra and a Dodge Viper. I don't fit your stereotype I suppose.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to AFNAV130's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm talking about the dissolution of gender identity... 

    [/QUOTE]

    I heard that facebook now has about 17 (or someything like that) ways to describe your gender.


     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from AFNAV130. Show AFNAV130's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just a note

    i stand corrected by Pro on the pelosi quote, it's just that she is so dumb, and believes she knows more about catholism than the pope, I believed something I heard 

     

    my bad

    [/QUOTE]

    That's fine, and thanks for looking it up.  I just think everyone has to be careful because the internet is full of distortions.  It's frustrating because you can't have serious discussions when the basic facts aren't even right.  This "4th trimester abortion" thing is another one that I think you'll find is a distortion.  

    [/QUOTE]

    have long learned that having false statements always come back to undermine an honest person. When you find out you are wrong fess up

    As to Obama , he played fast and loose on this issue , but his support in committee was documented. There are non political groups who affirmed this. For me there  is nothing that comes out of his mouth I believe. And has no policy that works. this gov is failing.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I can't find any record of Obama ever saying anything about "4th trimester abortions" and I'm almost certain he never did because that term is merely a right wing rhetorical device that no one but right wingers use.  As a state senator, Obama opposed a bill that would have defined an aborted fetus that showed signs of life as a legal person.  This has been distorted by right wing rhetoricians into a claim that Obama supports killing babies after birth, but that claim grossly misrepresents Obama's actual position.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I had just googled it, it wasn't under 4th qtr, but under something else, I am on ipad and it's hard for me to link, tomorrow I will post the link and we can figure it out. But it was a yahoo answer blog.

    [/QUOTE]
    This it?

    Obama pro choice 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to 347pg's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 347pg's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    The feeble governor knowing her background, probably won't veto it on principle, and she'll sign off on it for political gain like the spineless and corrupt politician she probably is.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wrong again............

    [/QUOTE]

    How am I wrong? I said "probably won't".  

    She is a loser, but McCain scared the crap out of her. Good for him. Always like McCain. The last Republican with any balls or some principle.

    [/QUOTE]


    Your supposition was wrong.  You thought you knew how she would act and bad-mouthed her on that basis.

    For all intents and purposes, McCain is a democrat.  He follows liberal ideas that you espouse which is why you like him.   These same "Principles" got us to where we're at today.  The country is a mess thanks to liberals.

    [/QUOTE]

    You are so wrong sir...just because he's not going after gays with a torch and holding a pitchfork doesn't mean he's a Democrat...get a grip dude!

    REALLY! That's just extreme talk...not surprising...you must have several loaded AR-15's at the ready ...am I correct?

    You lost...it's over...ALEC will push this "religous freedom" line in some other standard bill in some friendly southern state...it will go through the fed courts...it will eventually reach the Supreme Court...but you better act fast...because no one is beating Hillary in 2016, even a lot of Republican women will vote for her because she's a qualified woman, and three Justices, 2 staunch Republicans' will be 80 or over by then...very soon after she becomes President she'll appoint three Democrats to the court...they'll be around 40-50 years old, and be there for 30 more years..so get your bill to the state legislature soon, or it won't matter...

    THEN...you can have your right wing revolution.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from AFNAV130. Show AFNAV130's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to 347pg's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to AFNAV130's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm talking about the dissolution of gender identity... 

    [/QUOTE]

    I heard that facebook now has about 17 (or someything like that) ways to describe your gender.


    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah no kidding. It's an epic disaster. Genderless society. Bet this wouldn't even be allowed to be released today.

    Da Kinks.

    Girls will be boys, and boys will be girlsIt's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world. Except for Lola. Lo lo lo Lola. Lo lo lo Lola Well I'd left home just a week ...

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to AFNAV130's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 347pg's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to AFNAV130's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm talking about the dissolution of gender identity... 

    [/QUOTE]

    I heard that facebook now has about 17 (or someything like that) ways to describe your gender.


    [/QUOTE]

    Yeah no kidding. It's an epic disaster. Genderless society. Bet this wouldn't even be allowed to be released today.

    Da Kinks.

    Girls will be boys, and boys will be girlsIt's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world. Except for Lola. Lo lo lo Lola. Lo lo lo Lola Well I'd left home just a week ...

     

    [/QUOTE]


    LMAO....good one!

    There's a genius living in London...Ray Davies is his name........

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from AFNAV130. Show AFNAV130's posts

    Re: OT: Nuremberg Laws in AZ

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 347pg's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to 347pg's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:

    [/QUOTE]

    The feeble governor knowing her background, probably won't veto it on principle, and she'll sign off on it for political gain like the spineless and corrupt politician she probably is.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wrong again............

    [/QUOTE]

    How am I wrong? I said "probably won't".  

    She is a loser, but McCain scared the crap out of her. Good for him. Always like McCain. The last Republican with any balls or some principle.

    [/QUOTE]


    Your supposition was wrong.  You thought you knew how she would act and bad-mouthed her on that basis.

    For all intents and purposes, McCain is a democrat.  He follows liberal ideas that you espouse which is why you like him.   These same "Principles" got us to where we're at today.  The country is a mess thanks to liberals.

    [/QUOTE]

    You are so wrong sir...just because he's not going after gays with a torch and holding a pitchfork doesn't mean he's a Democrat...get a grip dude!

    REALLY! That's just extreme talk...not surprising...you must have several loaded AR-15's at the ready ...am I correct?

    You lost...it's over...ALEC will push this "religous freedom" line in some other standard bill in some friendly southern state...it will go through the fed courts...it will eventually reach the Supreme Court...but you better act fast...because no one is beating Hillary in 2016, even a lot of Republican women will vote for her because she's a qualified woman, and three Justices, 2 staunch Republicans' will be 80 or over by then...very soon after she becomes President she'll appoint three Democrats to the court...they'll be around 40-50 years old, and be there for 30 more years..so get your bill to the state legislature soon, or it won't matter...

    THEN...you can have your right wing revolution.

    [/QUOTE]

    Qualified woman? Ahhh so you are a liberal. Mental problem with those types. Hilary is insanely un-qualified. Benghazi. "What does it matter?". Sure thing. Hubby touched everything that moved. Check that latest E. Hurley story? Yeah. She is an evil, vindictive, slimy disgusting individual. Put it this way. Any candidate, republican or democrat that the media puts out there as a candidate is the wrong person. Just another corrupt non thinking puppet. Hey, let's grab another Bush. Wait. No. If people weren't so dense nowadays, they wouldn't vote period. Or at least for anyone the media (ALL Media) tells you has a chance to win.

    As for your last part, a true believer in democracy wouldnever utter such a statement. It outs you for who you are. If you want a revolution, you will get it. Keep pushing, keep trying to shove your agenda down unwilling throats. You will see it in the end, and god willing, you'll actually have the temerity to fight for them. I do believe however, the first sign of war, you will be scurrying for the hills. That's what swine does. Hillary. Maybe she'll be there with you. 

     

Share