WHOOPS THE DUCK MAN DID IT AGAIN !

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2526838/Is-end-Duck-Dynasty-Robertson-family-rallies-round-embattled-patriarch-anti-gay-rant-claim-imagine-going-forward-without-helm.html#ixzz2o1TSqWSn

'They are ruthless and full of murder': Duck Dynasty's entire future in jeopardy as SECOND anti-homosexuality rant emerges . . . and show's other stars say they can't go on without patriarch

'They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents and they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.'

But rhe liberals have given Rev Wright's hate speech against whites and even him saying "G-D America", do liberals can stuff a sick in it for all I care.

Wow I hate iPhone auto spell

Good to see you two are getting such a rush out of the ducks hate/judgment.


Can you feel your ego rising up?

I think the duck guy himself has now had his fifteen minutes.

It's not the duck guy himself that's driving this thing. He's just become a symbol for something like Rodney King or Trayvon Martin (or Zimmerman if you prefer).

It's really just a rehash of the liberal vs conservative thing. How many times are we gonna remake this movie?
The answer to that is, we will remake this movie over and over and over until we finally get this hay down to where the goats can get at it (credit to W.D. Childers who some of you are familiar with and others aren't).
What Childers meant was, we have to get this liberal vs conservative thing into a form that we can all fully comprehend.

We need to get a workable definition for what the two goddamn words, liberal and conservative, mean.

It seems to be boiling down to this. "Conservative" now means whatever Fox News, talk radio, and Phil Robertson says. And liberal is whatever is not Fox News, talk radio and Phil Robertson.

But beyond that, I'm still trying to figure it out.

Bob wrote:I think the duck guy himself has now had his fifteen minutes.  

It's not the duck guy himself that's driving this thing.  He's just become a symbol for something like Rodney King or Trayvon Martin (or Zimmerman if you prefer).

It's really just a rehash of the liberal vs conservative thing.  How many times are we gonna remake this movie?  
The answer to that is,  we will remake this movie over and over and over until we finally get this hay down to where the goats can get at it (credit to W.D. Childers who some of you are familiar with and others aren't).
What Childers meant was,  we have to get this liberal vs conservative thing into a form that we can all fully comprehend.  

We need to get a workable definition for what the two goddamn words,  liberal and conservative,  mean.

It seems to be boiling down to this.  "Conservative" now means whatever Fox News,  talk radio,  and Phil Robertson says.  And liberal is whatever is not Fox News,  talk radio and Phil Robertson.

But beyond that,  I'm still trying to figure it out.

crap, if that's true then im left out again not fitting in anywhere. oh well

its not really that bad not fitting in

Does any responsible adult on this forum actually think that Phil Robertson or any of the Robertson clan really give a shit about the A&E Show? They were multimillionaires before the show and will be multimillionaires after the show is long gone. A&E is the one making a profit off the show, not the other way around. I also read yesterday where several of the sponsors are backing Phil on this and one is his biggest sponsor, Under Armour. A spokesman for Under Armour stated that they will stand with him because he has a right to his opinion even if it goes against their own policies.


People don't fret for the Robertson clan, they will be just fine with or without A&E.

Ghost Rider wrote:


People don't fret for the Robertson clan, they will be just fine with or without A&E.

That's such a load off my mind.  I was really worried for them.  I can't imagine having to live in a world without duck people killing ducks, saving souls and keeping the spirit of ZZ top alive.

Bob wrote:

Ghost Rider wrote:


People don't fret for the Robertson clan, they will be just fine with or without A&E.

That's such a load off my mind.  I was really worried for them.  I can't imagine having to live in a world without duck people killing ducks,  saving souls and keeping the spirit of ZZ top alive.

Everybody is entitled to their opinion Bob, even you.

I just read a article that said the backlash over Phil suspension so far has not hurt anyone or any organization except GLAAD. The article said that GLAAD has suffered a tremendous backlash over this.

Ghost Rider wrote:

I just read a article that said the backlash over Phil suspension so far has not hurt anyone or any organization except GLAAD. The article said that GLAAD has suffered a tremendous backlash over this.

I agree with you.  I don't want to see Phil Robertson censored or lose a tv show or lose anything he has.
All I want is a chance to be on the same stage with him.

And I don't know anymore about "GLAAD" than you do. I thought it was a kitchen cleanser.

I get tired of seeing the guy he is all over my face book everyday , Hes had many other offers to appear on diff--other stations , They should just move the show carry on , I don't watch it seamed boring to me once so I changed the channel .

Totally ducked out and have never seen the show.

Bob I take exception with one of your statements re: conservatives vs. liberals.

I feel you're leaving out a significant 3rd group of people....the libertarian.

We could be called conservative and sometimes are called liberal. But, for me?

I'm financially conservative, very much so, but could give a flip about what people do in their own homes or what's on TV. Like Chrissy said, we all have the option of changing the channel. Frankly, the FU's on some of the movies disgust me more. It's as though there is a 25 word vocabulary limit on some movies anymore.

I do laugh that there's not backlash from the adulterers, as I imagine they outnumber the gays.   

Whatever. what you do is your business and I don't care as long as you're happy, but think it's time we start giving the libertarian more notice and stop lumping financial conservatives (realists) with those who try to police morality.

stormwatch89 wrote:
Totally ducked out and have never seen the show.

Bob I take exception with one of your statements re: conservatives vs. liberals.

I feel you're leaving out a significant 3rd group of people....the libertarian.

We could be called conservative and sometimes are called liberal. But, for me?

I'm financially conservative, very much so, but could give a flip about what people do in their own homes or what's on TV. Like Chrissy said, we all have the option of changing the channel. Frankly, the FU's on some of the movies disgust me more. It's as though there is a 25 word vocabulary limit on some movies anymore.

I do laugh that there's not backlash from the adulterers, as I imagine they outnumber the gays.   

Whatever. what you do is your business and I don't care as long as you're happy, but think it's time we start giving the libertarian more notice and stop lumping financial conservatives (realists) with those who try to police morality.

Nice post Stormy..!! I'm not even sure what I'm labeled... I don't give it any thght.

[/quote]

Nice post Stormy..!! I'm not even sure what I'm labeled... I don't give it any thght.[/quote]

Thanks, Pkr. I didn't either truthfully until I saw so much stereotyping of conservatives and knew that it didn't fit me at all.

After some study and self evaluation I know that I'm truly and totally a Libertarian.

We agree on so much here you might want to be careful...you may just be one too!  

Be prepared to be called an anarchist.   

Merry Christmas!  

stormwatch89 wrote:
Totally ducked out and have never seen the show.

Bob I take exception with one of your statements re: conservatives vs. liberals.

I feel you're leaving out a significant 3rd group of people....the libertarian.

We could be called conservative and sometimes are called liberal.  But, for me?

I'm financially conservative, very much so, but could give a flip about what people do in their own homes or what's on TV.  Like Chrissy said, we all have the option of changing the channel.  Frankly, the FU's on some of the movies disgust me more.  It's as though there is a 25 word vocabulary limit on some movies anymore.

I do laugh that there's not backlash from the adulterers, as I imagine they outnumber the gays.      

Whatever. what you do is your business and I don't care as long as you're happy, but think it's time we start giving the libertarian more notice and stop lumping financial conservatives (realists) with those who try to police morality.

Right on! I don't want a pastor to run the country or a communist.

Very good post. Thank you  

stormwatch89 wrote:

Nice post Stormy..!! I'm not even sure what I'm labeled... I don't give it any thght.[/quote]

Thanks, Pkr. I didn't either truthfully until I saw so much stereotyping of conservatives and knew that it didn't fit me at all.

After some study and self evaluation I know that I'm truly and totally a Libertarian.

We agree on so much here you might want to be careful...you may just be one too!  

Be prepared to be called an anarchist.  

Merry Christmas!  [/quote]

Ya... Seagoat tries to label me that. It's not true... it must sooth the small bit of ideologic honesty left in him.

I dunno.  Before you libertarians accept a label for yourselves,  make sure you know what that label stands for.  It might be a little too over-the-top for your tastes.  Maybe WAY too over-the-top. Maybe even for me too.  lol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_perspectives_on_LGBT_rights#Perspectives_of_libertarians_in_the_United_States

Ya... Seagoat tries to label me that. It's not true... it must sooth the small bit of ideologic honesty left in him.
[/quote]

SO tries to label everyone. The post that he made that made my jaw drop was proudly declaring himself judgmental.

That is something I try desperately not to be and tried even more desperately to teach my daughters to avoid. It's hard with lots of trials, but certainly not something to be proud of.

No, Bob, it's not over the top, at all.

I'll repost something I posted years ago and think you'll find yourself there to some degree.

Like all political affiliations, there are degrees.

stormwatch89 wrote:

I'll repost something I posted years ago and think you'll find yourself there to some degree.

I look forward to reading that.

But I really need to put a shirt on and get rid of the bowling ball.  My arm's getting tired from holding it.

stormwatch89 wrote:
Totally ducked out and have never seen the show.

Bob I take exception with one of your statements re: conservatives vs. liberals.

I feel you're leaving out a significant 3rd group of people....the libertarian.

We could be called conservative and sometimes are called liberal.  But, for me?

I'm financially conservative, very much so, but could give a flip about what people do in their own homes or what's on TV.  Like Chrissy said, we all have the option of changing the channel.  Frankly, the FU's on some of the movies disgust me more.  It's as though there is a 25 word vocabulary limit on some movies anymore.

I do laugh that there's not backlash from the adulterers, as I imagine they outnumber the gays.    

Whatever. what you do is your business and I don't care as long as you're happy, but think it's time we start giving the libertarian more notice and stop lumping financial conservatives (realists) with those who try to police morality.

I guarantee you, Stormy, that I'm just as fiscally conservative as you are, and probably more so because of necessity. And I do believe that the NSA and the TSA are unconstitutional, which you would probably call a libertarian viewpoint, although I call it common sense. But I'm no corporatist, and in my view the GOP is exactly that...fascist in the real sense of the word. I'm for the individual. If one person's constitutional rights are violated in the USA, the potential exists for everyone's rights to be violated...and that's exactly what's been happening.

[/quote]

I guarantee you, Stormy, that I'm just as fiscally conservative as you are, and probably more so because of necessity.  And I do believe that the NSA and the TSA are unconstitutional, which you would probably call a libertarian viewpoint, although I call it common sense.  But I'm no corporatist, and in my view the GOP is exactly that...fascist in the real sense of the word.  I'm for the individual.  If one person's constitutional rights are violated in the USA, the potential exists for everyone's rights to be violated...and that's exactly what's been happening.

[/quote]

Ha! We're not that different. Once while flying a big girl dressed in "scary looking clothes" pulled out a knife. I was nervous! She began cutting up an apple, but I watched her the whole time! I don't really mind the TSA, believe it or not.

I do believe the term fascist is overused and also has varying degrees, some quite liberal.

Where you and I differ, I think, is that you blame more Corporate and rely on Govt. where I certainly don't love Corp. but know they pay they pay the bills to maintain the Govt.

Both are necessary evils.

Merry Christmas, FT!   

Floridatexan wrote:

stormwatch89 wrote:
Totally ducked out and have never seen the show.

Bob I take exception with one of your statements re: conservatives vs. liberals.

I feel you're leaving out a significant 3rd group of people....the libertarian.

We could be called conservative and sometimes are called liberal.  But, for me?

I'm financially conservative, very much so, but could give a flip about what people do in their own homes or what's on TV.  Like Chrissy said, we all have the option of changing the channel.  Frankly, the FU's on some of the movies disgust me more.  It's as though there is a 25 word vocabulary limit on some movies anymore.

I do laugh that there's not backlash from the adulterers, as I imagine they outnumber the gays.    

Whatever. what you do is your business and I don't care as long as you're happy, but think it's time we start giving the libertarian more notice and stop lumping financial conservatives (realists) with those who try to police morality.

I guarantee you, Stormy, that I'm just as fiscally conservative as you are, and probably more so because of necessity.  And I do believe that the NSA and the TSA are unconstitutional, which you would probably call a libertarian viewpoint, although I call it common sense.  But I'm no corporatist, and in my view the GOP is exactly that...fascist in the real sense of the word.  I'm for the individual.  If one person's constitutional rights are violated in the USA, the potential exists for everyone's rights to be violated...and that's exactly what's been happening.

being "frugal" with your own finances is not the same thing as being a fiscal conservative.

You believe in big gov solutions, your views represent communism and its extremely apparent on this forum to all.

let me help you with fiscal conservatism.

Fiscal conservatism is a politicoeconomic philosophy with regards towards fiscal policy and the advocating of fiscal responsibility. Fiscal conservatives advocate and often consider avoiding deficit spending and the reduction of overall government spending and national debt as well as ensuring balanced budget of paramount importance. Fiscal conservatives would also support pay-as-you-go financial policies. Free trade, deregulation of the economy, lower taxes, , and other conservative policies are also often, but not necessarily, affiliated with fiscal conservatism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_conservatism

Obama's proposal to fix the NSA constitutional violations are to have the communication corporations store the data... you can't be against fascism and support him or either of the two major parties. It makes no sense.

I guarantee you, Stormy, that I'm just as fiscally conservative as you are, and probably more so because of necessity.  And I do believe that the NSA and the TSA are unconstitutional, which you would probably call a libertarian viewpoint, although I call it common sense.  But I'm no corporatist, and in my view the GOP is exactly that...fascist in the real sense of the word.  I'm for the individual.  If one person's constitutional rights are violated in the USA, the potential exists for everyone's rights to be violated...and that's exactly what's been happening.

[/quote]

Ha!  We're not that different.  Once while flying a big girl dressed in "scary looking clothes" pulled out a knife.  I was nervous!  She began cutting up an apple, but I watched her the whole time!  I don't really mind the TSA, believe it or not.

I do believe the term fascist is overused and also has varying degrees, some quite liberal.

Where you and I differ, I think, is that you blame more Corporate and rely on Govt. where I certainly don't love Corp. but know they pay they pay the bills to maintain the Govt.

Both are necessary evils.

Merry Christmas, FT!   [/quote]

Merry Christmas to you, too, Stormy.   

If the corporations were paying their fair share, and the banks were lending to small business and cottage industry, or trying to restore our manufacturing base, I would agree with you...but they're not. I believe in a reasonable return on investment, but no one should make outrageous sums just for pushing money around. We need to drop the consumer mentality and become more productive, so that everyone can benefit, not just a few.