Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/3/2006 6:27:27 AM EDT
He wouldn't join? Well, I wouldn't want him to!!! He would bring the Team down.

What an idiot! He doesn't care a whit about the morale of the troops or our success in this war.



Murtha says he wouldn't join military now
Tue Jan 3, 2006 9:00 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Rep. John Murtha, a key Democratic voice who favors pulling U.S. troops from Iraq, said in remarks airing on Monday that he would not join the U.S. military today.
A decorated Vietnam combat veteran who retired as a colonel after 37 years in the U.S. Marine Corps, Murtha told ABC News' "Nightline" program that Iraq "absolutely" was a wrong war for President George W. Bush to have launched.

"Would you join (the military) today?," he was asked in an interview taped on Friday.
"No," replied Murtha of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives subcommittee that oversees defense spending and one of his party's leading spokesmen on military issues.

"And I think you're saying the average guy out there who's considering recruitment is justified in saying 'I don't want to serve'," the interviewer continued.

"Exactly right," said Murtha, who drew White House ire in November after becoming the first ranking Democrat to push for a pullout of U.S. forces from Iraq as soon as it could be done safely.
At the time, White House spokesman Scott McClellan equated Murtha's position with surrendering to terrorists.

Since then, Bush has decried the "defeatism" of some of his political rivals. In an unusually direct appeal, he urged Americans on December 18 not to give in to despair over Iraq, insisting that "we are winning" despite a tougher-than-expected fight.

Murtha did not respond directly when asked whether a lack of combat experience might have affected the decision-making of Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and their former top deputies.

"Let me tell you, war is a nasty business. It sears the soul," he said, choking up. "And it made a difference. The shadow of those killings stay with you the rest of your life."

Asked for comment, a Defense Department spokesman, Lt. Col. John Skinner, said: "We have an all-volunteer military. People are free to choose whether they serve or not."

"Our freedom of speech in this country allows all of us the opportunity to voice an opinion. It's one of our great strengths as a nation," he added in an e-mailed reply.

The White House had no immediate comment.


http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-01-03T135945Z_01_KWA315575_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-USA-MURTHA.xml&rpc=22

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:33:05 AM EDT
Anyone care to explain to me how this is not treason? Aid and comfort? I think so.

Anyone care to explain to me why this is not as bad as Hanoi Jane? (given its worse since Murtha is a Congressman)

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:33:09 AM EDT
It's sad to watch this guy spiraling into alzhiemer's dementia with full press coverage.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:33:29 AM EDT
The light colonel quoted at the end is correct, Murtha is free to make his comments.

I am free to think he has become a worthless traitorous old man, who should be locked away...

That is all....
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:35:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Lon_Moer:
It's sad to watch this guy spiraling into alzhiemer's dementia with full press coverage.



McCain too.

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:36:00 AM EDT
Democrats the party of defeat.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:46:03 AM EDT
Well, I think that the CIC should have him recalled to active duty. THat would shut his trap pretty quick.

And if it didn't, then he could be charged under the UCMJ, and go to a GCM and be given a Dishonorable Discharge, and then he would be fucked...

Oh well, I'll keep dreaming.

(FYI: retired military personel are subject to recall to active duty)
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:47:58 AM EDT
Let him and his puke lib cronies blab their hate and stupidity for all the world to see.

Watch them go down in flames come election time.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 6:48:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hydguy:
Well, I think that the CIC should have him recalled to active duty. THat would shut his trap pretty quick.

And if it didn't, then he could be charged under the UCMJ, and go to a GCM and be given a Dishonorable Discharge, and then he would be fucked...

Oh well, I'll keep dreaming.

(FYI: retired military personel are subject to recall to active duty)



anyone who has ever served is subject to recall, they are still not subject to the UCMJ until they are recalled though.

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:01:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:

Originally Posted By Hydguy:
Well, I think that the CIC should have him recalled to active duty. THat would shut his trap pretty quick.

And if it didn't, then he could be charged under the UCMJ, and go to a GCM and be given a Dishonorable Discharge, and then he would be fucked...

Oh well, I'll keep dreaming.

(FYI: retired military personel are subject to recall to active duty)



anyone who has ever served is subject to recall, they are still not subject to the UCMJ until they are recalled though.




If you are an officer, and resign your comission prior to retirement, you are not subject to recall.
If you are enlisted, and complete your 8 years, and get out before retirement, you are not subject to recall.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:03:34 AM EDT


Who is encouraged by such a comment? Our men and women in the military or the terrorists trying to kill them?


Murtha is a traitor and should be tried, convicted and executed.

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:04:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hydguy:

Originally Posted By Dino:

Originally Posted By Hydguy:
Well, I think that the CIC should have him recalled to active duty. THat would shut his trap pretty quick.

And if it didn't, then he could be charged under the UCMJ, and go to a GCM and be given a Dishonorable Discharge, and then he would be fucked...

Oh well, I'll keep dreaming.

(FYI: retired military personel are subject to recall to active duty)



anyone who has ever served is subject to recall, they are still not subject to the UCMJ until they are recalled though.




If you are an officer, and resign your comission prior to retirement, you are not subject to recall.
If you are enlisted, and complete your 8 years, and get out before retirement, you are not subject to recall.


Thank you for stating the issue correctly. I am tired of people who have no idea who is subject to reacll and who is not flapping their gums.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:12:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Brohawk:
"Would you join (the military) today?," he was asked in an interview taped on Friday.
"No," replied Murtha of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives



Hey MURTHA!!

SHUT

THE

FUCK

UP!


You traitorous old man. You loser! We don't give a flying fuck what you think!!!
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:13:29 AM EDT
Talk about providing aid and comfort
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:32:54 AM EDT
Murtha has alot more merit then bushster will ever have. His comments are pretty Shamefull,But i will always listen to someone who has combat experience.. over someone who doesnt. Ie: bush..cheney..rumsfeld. I may not agree with Mr.Murtha but he still holds somthing that our current leaders dont... COMBAT EXPERIENCE.

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:41:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By KeMiCaLs:
Murtha has alot more merit then bushster will ever have. His comments are pretty Shamefull,But i will always listen to someone who has combat experience.. over someone who doesnt. Ie: bush..cheney..rumsfeld. I may not agree with Mr.Murtha but he still holds somthing that our current leaders dont... COMBAT EXPERIENCE.





Well, so did Kerry, supposedly. As a vet, I will say that Murtha has no merit nor credibility.

I suppose your boy bill gets a pass, huh.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 7:55:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By KeMiCaLs:
Murtha has alot more merit then bushster will ever have.



No, actually he has no merit whatsoever. His combat experience was 40 years ago in a different war in a different world with a different military. And btw, combat experience doesn't automatically make you wise or even make you know anything about combat other than what it feels like to get shot at.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:00:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By KeMiCaLs:
Murtha has alot more merit then bushster will ever have. His comments are pretty Shamefull,But i will always listen to someone who has combat experience.. over someone who doesnt. Ie: bush..cheney..rumsfeld. I may not agree with Mr.Murtha but he still holds somthing that our current leaders dont... COMBAT EXPERIENCE.




His past experience doesn't get him a pass for stupid things he says today.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:01:09 AM EDT
A lot of ppl. won't sign up when Hitlery is the LezPrez...
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:01:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By KeMiCaLs:
Murtha has alot more merit then bushster will ever have. His comments are pretty Shamefull,But i will always listen to someone who has combat experience.. over someone who doesnt. Ie: bush..cheney..rumsfeld. I may not agree with Mr.Murtha but he still holds somthing that our current leaders dont... COMBAT EXPERIENCE.


October 2005.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:04:44 AM EDT
The Mob is fickle.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:21:30 AM EDT
People like him think the people of America would be safe if we all just layed our weapons down and walked away, and thats BULL , he should be put in prison for treason
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:22:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/3/2006 8:44:13 AM EDT by OBird]

Originally Posted By garandman:
Anyone care to explain to me how this is not treason? Aid and comfort? I think so.

Anyone care to explain to me why this is not as bad as Hanoi Jane? (given its worse since Murtha is a Congressman)





Well, realistically, I don't think it could be considered an instance of giving "aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war." People have a legal right to choose whether or not they want to join the military, and I don't think a congressman's endorsement of the more popular choice in the decision in question really counts as treason. I mean, read closely what he said: he simply answered "no" to the question of whether he would join the military now. Millions of people make that very choice every year. I bet a large amount (if not most) of the people on this site have made that same decision. Is it somehow treason to say "no" publicly? Is it treason to say "no" if you're a congressman? Is it somehow magically treason to say "no" if you served in the Marines for almost four decades and were decorated for service in Vietnam? Hardly. If you can legally say "no" as a civilian, you can say legally "no" in public or as a congressperson. Also, when asked if he thought that a young potential recruit decides not to join is justified, he says yes. What is the alternative to saying "yes" to that question? That anyone who decides not to join the military is unjustified in their actions and therefore an immoral person? Maybe in some of our minds, but legally, no. Not in the slightest. Murtha has not done anything even remotely illegal. Hanoi Jane was MUCH worse. Now THAT there is treason. Actually going to Vietnam and hob-knobing with the enemy, helping them make propaganda films, actively trying to demoralize our POW's stuck being tortured in the Hanoi Hilton, etc. etc.. Now THAT's an actual occurance of directly giving aid to an American combative enemy. I honestly think she should have been at least given life in prision if not execution for those crimes. If Murtha actually went to Iraq and appeared on Al-Jazeera and made this statement, then you could consider that treason. But not this.

Not saying I agree with this guy, quite the contrary. He should shut up and leave our guys alone. This post also only concerns this specific statement of his. Maybe (perhaps probably) he has committed treason in other ways. I'm just saying that it if you took him to court for treason based on this comment, he would get of scott free no question about it.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:27:52 AM EDT
Combat vet or not, a turd is a turd.

What Murtha has said makes him a defeatist turd.

While I do respect and appreciate his service that he provided this country, what he has done to harm it now, far outways his contribution years ago.

Screw Murtha, and all those who would harm this nation.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:32:26 AM EDT

Murtha says he wouldn't join military now
Tue Jan 3, 2006 9:00 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Rep. John Murtha, a key Democratic voice who favors pulling U.S. troops from Iraq, said in remarks airing on Monday that he would not join the U.S. military today.
A decorated Vietnam combat veteran who retired as a colonel after 37 years in the U.S. Marine Corps, Murtha told ABC News' "Nightline" program that Iraq "absolutely" was a wrong war for President George W. Bush to have launched.

"Would you join (the military) today?," he was asked in an interview taped on Friday.
"No," replied Murtha of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives subcommittee that oversees defense spending and one of his party's leading spokesmen on military issues. "I would advocate and actively participate in taking up arms aginst the United States as long as George Bush is President. I believe the U.S. should be disbanded and we should allow ourselves to be governed by the United Nations.
"I would also take steps to reinstate Saddam Hussein as rightful dictator of Iraq." he added to his comments.

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:35:05 AM EDT
If I were the president, I'd let him talk.

Bush's ratings have been on a steady uptick ever since this guy showed up to remind americans that the Democrats are the cut and run white flag party of surrender and appeasement.

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:38:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/3/2006 8:45:08 AM EDT by OBird]

Originally Posted By efpeter:

Murtha says he wouldn't join military now
Tue Jan 3, 2006 9:00 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Rep. John Murtha, a key Democratic voice who favors pulling U.S. troops from Iraq, said in remarks airing on Monday that he would not join the U.S. military today.
A decorated Vietnam combat veteran who retired as a colonel after 37 years in the U.S. Marine Corps, Murtha told ABC News' "Nightline" program that Iraq "absolutely" was a wrong war for President George W. Bush to have launched.

"Would you join (the military) today?," he was asked in an interview taped on Friday.
"No," replied Murtha of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives subcommittee that oversees defense spending and one of his party's leading spokesmen on military issues. "I would advocate and actively participate in taking up arms aginst the United States as long as George Bush is President. I believe the U.S. should be disbanded and we should allow ourselves to be governed by the United Nations.
"I would also take steps to reinstate Saddam Hussein as rightful dictator of Iraq." he added to his comments.




Holy crap. I didn't see that in the starting post (didn't read the link, figured it was all here in this thread). That quote in red changes things a lot from my previous post.

EDIT: Ok...I don't see that anywhere. I get it now, that red section was what efpeter "read between the lines". I could've sworn I didn't see that part. That would be insane if a congressman said something like that.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:50:02 AM EDT
Fucker got me too....I had to go back and reread the initial post.

Whew!
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:55:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:

Originally Posted By KeMiCaLs:
Murtha has alot more merit then bushster will ever have. His comments are pretty Shamefull,But i will always listen to someone who has combat experience.. over someone who doesnt. Ie: bush..cheney..rumsfeld. I may not agree with Mr.Murtha but he still holds somthing that our current leaders dont... COMBAT EXPERIENCE.


October 2005.



w00000t ! TROLLS ! Let loose the hounds !
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:59:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By redfisher:

Originally Posted By Brohawk:
"Would you join (the military) today?," he was asked in an interview taped on Friday.
"No," replied Murtha of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives



Hey MURTHA!!

SHUT

THE

FUCK

UP!


You traitorous old man. You loser! We don't give a flying fuck what you think!!!



Ya the old moss headed bastard rates right up there with the likes of hillary and teddy[hey look at me I'm a worthless piece of shit pompous ass] kennedy.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 8:59:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By efpeter:

"I would advocate and actively participate in taking up arms aginst the United States as long as George Bush is President. I believe the U.S. should be disbanded and we should allow ourselves to be governed by the United Nations.
"I would also take steps to reinstate Saddam Hussein as rightful dictator of Iraq." he added to his comments.




LOL!!! If you sent that to the DNC Dean might make it the centerpiece of the democratic party's platform!
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 9:00:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/3/2006 9:00:32 AM EDT by OBird]

Originally Posted By CavVet:
Fucker got me too....I had to go back and reread the initial post.

Whew!



Sneaky little bugger, ain't he?
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 9:02:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By OBird:

Sneaky little bugger, ain't he?



Who, me?





Link Posted: 1/3/2006 9:19:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/3/2006 9:28:21 AM EDT by garandman]

Originally Posted By OBird:

Originally Posted By garandman:
Anyone care to explain to me how this is not treason? Aid and comfort? I think so.

Anyone care to explain to me why this is not as bad as Hanoi Jane? (given its worse since Murtha is a Congressman)





Well, realistically, I don't think it could be considered an instance of giving "aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war." People have a legal right to choose whether or not they want to join the military,



Murtha is NOT making a decision to join or not, as he is not eleigible to join.

He is intentionally demoralizing our troops, and emboldening al Queda.

He would accomplish less for al Queda if he picked up an AK and shot a USGI than as compared to what he's doing now. Money can't buy what Murtha is giving al Queda for free.

Aid and comfort, clearly.

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 9:23:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By OBird:

Originally Posted By garandman:
Anyone care to explain to me how this is not treason? Aid and comfort? I think so.

Anyone care to explain to me why this is not as bad as Hanoi Jane? (given its worse since Murtha is a Congressman)





Well, realistically, I don't think it could be considered an instance of giving "aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war." People have a legal right to choose whether or not they want to join the military,



Murtha is NTO makinga decision to join or not, as he is not eleigible to join.

He is intentionally demoralizing our troops, and emboldening al Queda.

He would accomplish less for al Queda if he picked up an AK and shot a USGI than as compared to what he's doing now. Money can't buy what Murtha is giving al Queda for free.

Aid and comfort, clearly.




Exactly... he is giving aid and comfort.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 9:41:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/3/2006 9:56:07 AM EDT by OBird]

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By OBird:

Originally Posted By garandman:
Anyone care to explain to me how this is not treason? Aid and comfort? I think so.

Anyone care to explain to me why this is not as bad as Hanoi Jane? (given its worse since Murtha is a Congressman)





Well, realistically, I don't think it could be considered an instance of giving "aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war." People have a legal right to choose whether or not they want to join the military,



Murtha is NTO makinga decision to join or not, as he is not eleigible to join.

He is intentionally demoralizing our troops, and emboldening al Queda.

He would accomplish less for al Queda if he picked up an AK and shot a USGI than as compared to what he's doing now. Money can't buy what Murtha is giving al Queda for free.

Aid and comfort, clearly.




Exactly... he is giving aid and comfort.



Show me where he actually said something to demoralize those alreadly serving. He didn't (IN THIS QUOTE). He simply said that he wouldn't join the military if he was able to, and that he thinks that if someone else decides not join to they are justified as well. The fact that he is no longer eligible for service matters diddly squat - the reporter didnt' ask "will" he join the military, but if he "would" join the military [if he were able to do so]. NOWHERE (in this quote that we are discussing, mind you) did Murtha say that people who do in fact decide to join the military are immoral or unjustified. He simply said that he wouldn't if he had the choice and he doesn't mind if other people choose not to either. Anything that we read between the lines in his statements (such as your somewhat bold assertion that he was "intentionally emoboldening al Queda") are not legal justifications or precedents for judicial prosecution on the grounds of treason.

Some of you people apparently just don't realize how severe treason really is. Ever heard of the Rosenbergs? Giving nuclear secrets that endangered the very existence of our nation (or even civilzation as a whole) = treason. Saying that you would side with the (rather vast) majority of Americans in your decision to not join the military if given the option = not treason. If everyone who said anything in opposition to the war in Iraq was legally treasonous...well, we'd either have to increase our prision population capacity by about 10,000% or we'd have to build a new nuclear power plant just to power all those extra electric chairs. And if everyone who found themselves justified in not joining the military when they were eligible were legally treasonous in the real world, there wouldn't be much of an America left to defend. Just because a congressman says something we don't like doesn't mean he's guilty of treason. Not that I would really mind if Murtha was locked away, mind you, but realisitically there is no way he could even be remotely charged with actual treason.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 9:43:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Lon_Moer:
It's sad to watch this guy spiraling into alzhiemer's dementia with full press coverage.




Were on the same page here lon! This guy is loosing it
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 10:18:04 AM EDT
What if we had a massive campaign to mail him copies of the infamous McUzi Rant?
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 1:27:15 PM EDT

All that fat sack of horsefuck has to do now is drag his fat treasonous carcass down to the Whitehouse gate and throw his medals over the fence.

Then he can go spit on some returning troops and call them all baby-killers and it'll be Vietnam all over again.


Link Posted: 1/3/2006 1:32:29 PM EDT
I was in the military and I can say I wish he would drop dead on the front steps of the capital building. Fuck him.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 1:45:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By OBird:

Show me where he actually said something to demoralize those alreadly serving. He didn't (IN THIS QUOTE).



If you can't see it, its more becasue you won't see it.

You think he said he wouldn't join the military because of the quality of the chow?

His comments are a DIRECT attack on the chain of command, including the C in C and the generals.

he is fomenting rebellion within teh ranks. He is sowing seeds of discord. Tokyo Rose had nothing on this clown.

He is telling al Queda how to win - by disheartening the American people ala Viet Nam.

<­table width=85% border=0>

Some of you people apparently just don't realize how severe treason really is.


And SOME people think nothing short of picking up a rifle for al Queda is treason.

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 2:29:22 PM EDT
I wonder how many people that were congress critters, quit congress in the midst of their elected term and went and served in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam or Iraq. That would be an interesting story.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 2:46:10 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 3:03:12 PM EDT
Not that I agree with Murtha, but exactly how does one voice disagreement with an Administration without getting branded as a "traitor?"
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 3:06:38 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 3:08:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 82ndAbn:

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
Not that I agree with Murtha, but exactly how does one voice disagreement with an Administration without getting branded as a "traitor?"


They can disagree with the President all they want on other issues.

But the time for bashing the war effort passed back before they all voted to support it.

JMO


Even in WWII we had "loyal dissent."

Are you suggesting dissent should not be tolerated?
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 3:12:51 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 3:13:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
Not that I agree with Murtha, but exactly how does one voice disagreement with an Administration without getting branded as a "traitor?"



By proposing some alternate actions that fall short of surrender and do not negate the unanimous consent that allowed us to go to Iraq in the first place.. Actually it's mostly political posturing and not real disagreement....."gotcha" politics, as usual.

I think Murtha, having already served, should feel no obligation to do so again. It could easily be construed to mean he's as capable at his age as a 25 year old, which would probably be a big fat lie. You cannot make judgments at 25 that can predict how you'd feel and act at 70, so I'd say the reverse holds true, hence his comments are pretty useless to me.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 3:16:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 82ndAbn:
When a Congressman's highly publicized comments can have an adverse affect on the safety of troops in a theater of combat, yes.


Who gets to decide what is "adverse?"

There has to be a forum or a conduit for disagreement and dissent, however. Simply declaring certain speech to be "adverse" to the safety of troops is pretty vague.
Link Posted: 1/3/2006 3:17:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
Even in WWII we had "loyal dissent."



It is idiotic to compare the occasional dissenting voice in WW2 to the actively-working-for-AQ idiocy that we have going on today.



Are you suggesting dissent should not be tolerated?



Are you suggesting that we shouldn't be allowed to comment on so-called 'dissenting voices'?

Link Posted: 1/3/2006 3:23:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Tomislav:

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
Even in WWII we had "loyal dissent."


It is idiotic to compare the occasional dissenting voice in WW2 to the actively-working-for-AQ idiocy that we have going on today.


You need to check up on your history. The Isolationist movement was VERY strong in the US even after Pearl Harbor. Some people even speculate that PH was allowed by FDR to weaken the Isolationists.


Are you suggesting dissent should not be tolerated?

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't be allowed to comment on so-called 'dissenting voices'?


By no means. Knock yourself out. That's the whole point.

You see, liberals and leftists are typically hyporcrits. They espouse tolerance and "freedom of choice," yet anyone who disagrees with them gets labeled a "hate monger" or an "extremist." Conservatives don't need censorship or gag orders. We win on our ideas alone. Been that way for quite a while now.

Dissent and disagreement should be welcome. All too often, when it's the liberals and leftists who are the ones disagreeing, they are only making it worse for their side anyway.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Archived [ARCHIVED THREAD] - Murtha Needs To Shut Up and Go Away (Page 1 of 2)
Page General » General Discussion
silencerShop
ZonaTactical
jt
dsa
apex
JRH
alienGearHolsters
samson
blackhills
gemtech
Faxxon
laRue
handgunGrips
geissele
primaryArms
EagleLite
brownells
Xtreme
aeroPrecision
delton
CA
bravocompany
22Mods4All
BearCreek
Top Top