Comments on: Exposing the Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror

By: filthykafir

filthykafir — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 04:14:23 +0000

Read: “…very much about honoring…”

By: filthykafir

filthykafir — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 03:57:45 +0000

I’m conservative, and I proudly and intentionally am not “receptive” to new ideas. Ideas are not worthy because they’re new — or old, necessarily. Prostitutes are known to be wonderously receptive, but generally don’t fit well to a long-term relationship.

Genuine conservatism is very about much honoring and retaining(conserving) what is worthy of the past and the present and delivering it intact and not dishonored to our children. Before I marry a new idea, I like to date it for a while, maybe meet its mother, have a chat with its daddy and inquire into his shotgun collection. Don’t expose onself to HIV on the first date I have found a helpful policy.

Leftists, on the other hand…

By: Steve Golay

Steve Golay — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:24:17 +0000

Dear Mr Casey,

It is the working together of the (leftist) homosexual mind with the islamist mind which is the point. One could call that the reign of totalitarian islam or totalitarian homosexuality.

Steve G.
Sonora, CA

By: deguello

deguello — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 14:32:27 +0000

libertasdon: fair enough: What is your overall opinion of Glazov’s article?

By: TalkinKamel

TalkinKamel — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:58:28 +0000

The Left’s unhealthy fixation with radical Islam is obvious, and it’s been going on ever since the media made Arafat a hero back in the 70’s. Glazov is right to expose it in his book.

By: libertasdon

libertasdon — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 09:04:02 +0000

Look, let’s stop with the put-downs and ad hominen attacks. There is a lot of education and intelligence wasted in acrimony on this thread. How about we get back to the consideration of Glazov’s book? Let’s put some of the talent displayed here into a reasoned argument for or against his thesis. If a contributor wants to use a quote from a technical source, please provide a short explanation of the jargon.

By: deguello

deguello — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 20:48:02 +0000

#51 Hortense(HORACE WELLS),read # 54

By: deguello

deguello — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 20:46:18 +0000

#52 JACK T (T for trash) I thought senator Byrd, former kkk kleagle, was a democrat?Wasn’t it the democrat party that ran the south during Jim Crow? Finally: I seem to recall that lincoln was a republican. Go back to your trash can and this time SHUT THE LID!

By: deguello

deguello — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 20:40:48 +0000

Very, very, feeble,realizing that liberals sympathze with left-wing terrorism is not fanaticism;it’s common sense borne out by history.I have read your posts;and to deny your liberalism is to engage in blatant lying,or to suffer from schizophrenia.I’m glad you wish me dead;it belies your pose of reasonableness,and exposes your totalitarian thugishness:PROVOKE A LIB,FIND A STALINIST!

By: JFM

JFM — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 23:51:23 +0000

Mr JackT. The KKK was/is an organization related to the democratic party: created by democrats, nurtured by dixiecrats and propelling a prominent KKK member (Senator Trent Lott) to the highest positions and calling him less than five a years ago: the “conscience of the party”. For the links with the Nazis let’s begin with a such Joseph Kennedy and let’s continue with pro-Palestinian activists (99% democrats). Because only a Nazi would lose any sleep for people who try to bomb maternities, danced in the streets on 9/11 and are well fed thanks to the western (40% american) tax payer instead of for the Darfur people who are starving, don’t dream of genocide and haven’t spent sixty fricinkg years on the dole.