>> ^quantumushroom:
"Religious nutcase" here defined as anyone who isn't a "secular humanist".
I'd rather have an atheist president than a Muslim cough one.


You don't want a president.

You want a king like your beloved King George, the man who is above the law, to whom you bow with reverence and servility.

>> ^quantumushroom:
"Religious nutcase" here defined as anyone who isn't a "secular humanist".

Yeah, and?



I'd rather have an atheist president than a Muslim cough one.

I think that's spelled "muslin"
http://wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/obamabestsignever.jpg

>> ^quantumushroom:
"Religious nutcase" here defined as anyone who isn't a "secular humanist".
I'd rather have an atheist president than a Muslim cough one.


At least Jeremiah Wright doesn't defend Agent Orange, Joe McCarthy, stealing land from Mexico, two dozen CIA-backed coups, and forced indian removal.

>> ^quantumushroom:
"Religious nutcase" here defined as anyone who isn't a "secular humanist".
I'd rather have an atheist president than a Muslim cough one.


When a Muslim candidate shows up, I guess you can start rapidly frothing at the mouth with the rest of the right wingers.

Ironically, you do them the justice of capitalising "Muslim", showing it a degree of respect even as you denigrate it... X D

"Religious nutcase" here defined as anyone who isn't a "secular humanist".

I'd rather have an atheist president than a Muslim *cough* one.

experience at what?

being near russia for a while? CHECK
dealing with antiamerican religious fundamentalist nutcases? CHECK
wearing lipstick? CHECK
knowing what it is like to be a white woman? CHECK
exercising the ability to have too many children? CHECK

i'd say that's conclusive, Palin is infinitely more qualified than Obama. Obama for example doesn't even have a womb, and has probably never been to alaska, let alone GOVERNED the place. Eat that!

Warren is just another "Believe in God or Else" fundamentalist nutcase.

>> ^MINK:
wow.
some guy is so insane he disobeys one of the Ten Commandments in the name of "religion" and we have to DISCUSS this?

Actually no, not in the name of "religion", those stories are a dime a dozen.

He did this in the name of trying to stop the "liberal movement". To quote from the article I linked, he said:

"[He] could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement that he would then target those that had voted them in to office."

The article also says he wasn't a member of a church himself, and said that he was frustrated because he lost his job, and hadn't been able to find another.

If he listens to right-wing noise, he would know that the only cause for suffering in this country is them damned liberals.

His house was full of books by the Great Sages of America: Bill O'Reilly, Michael Savage, and Sean Hannity, who would've reinforced the idea that the only reason there are any jobless poor people in America are those liberals.

Buttsex is secondary -- it's that pernicious liberalism he needed to take up arms against.

I'm finding I'm mostly curious how insane he really is, or if he's just a normal guy, broken by the stress of the pace of modern life, who's been lied to about why everything is broken.

From what little I've heard, it sounds like he's closer to that, than some total nutcase listening to voices in his head.

One thing I'd like to point out, especially to all the "Nader is crazy" people. The source of Nader's info is a Congressman from Massachusetts by the name of John W. Olver. This is not a conspiracy theory nutcase (at least, I don't think Olver is one of those) but someone who has first-hand knowledge (read: greater than yours) of how Washington DC really works.

And I'm not even saying that Nader isn't crazy. He may well be. The only way I'd discount this concern is if...

a) John Olver turned out to be a nutjob himself.
or
b) it came out that Nader made up the source of the letter.

In looking at his Wikipedia article and the Congressman's own website, I do not find anything to suggest item 'a' being true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Olver
http://www.house.gov/olver/index.shtml

And item 'b'? Well, who knows? Anything's possible.

Chomsky is a total nutcase.

He famously said that Cambodia was better off under Pol Pot, among a lot of other amazingly deluded things.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'ann, coulter, right, wing, nutcase, godless, freak, loopy, muslin, hating, hate, monger' to 'ann, coulter, right, wing, nutcase, godless, freak, loopy, muslim, hating, hate, monger' - edited by winkler1

"The truth of the matter is, America... is afraid of working class white folks."

Yeah, word.

Wait, what? Who's afraid of working class whites???

What a bunch of nutcases. Half of them probly lurk here on LiberalSift.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'creationists, nutcases, ignorance' to 'creationists, nutcases, ignorance, dinosaurs, noahs, ark' - edited by Zonbie

Saying "islam is not a religion of peace" is a reasonable interpretation of the Koran. Muhammad was a great conqueror, after all. That does not imply that most muslims are not peaceful, but you seem to take offense on the assumption that she intends that implication.

She makes the valid point that the infamous cartoons spurred more mass-protests by Muslims than any recent beheading perpetrated by Muslim insurgents, but it should have been the other way around.

There's a difference between focusing on the religious nutcases because the nutcases are more newsworthy, and denying the existence of the moderates (The unabomber got a lot more news coverage than my sweet old grandmother but I don't go complaining about the media having a bias against Christianity). Nowhere did she say all Muslims are bad. In her other works she just has criticized its foundation (the Koran) and noted specific abuses, and probably wished for the demise of the religion itself, not its followers. Connecting the dots between terrible things done by a few and passages in the Koran != hating all muslims.

This is pathetic NeoCon propaganda.. what do you expect? Not all Republicans think like this.. just the fringe nutcases on the far right. It's extremely unfortunate they control the committee.... this is why McCain is touted as the only Republican candidate in the media even though Ron Paul is still running.