The A.C.L.U Vs. America.

[Redneck]

Has anyone else read this book? I highly recommed it. It crushes the disguise the A.C.L.U. has been wearing since they began, over 80 years ago.

[Bumblebee]

Redneck, who is the author of the book? I love all political books and I'll check it out at the book store. Thanks for the tip.

[Wadi66]

Maybe we should take up a collection and send it to CommieCount for Christmas.

[Argonath]

Who's CommieCount?

[Wadi66]

Who's CommieCount?That's my name for Count Rugen... based on many months of reading his liberalism nonsense.

[Count Rugen]

That's my name for Count Rugen... based on many months of reading his liberalism nonsense.
Nice. I don't have a nickname for Wadi. I find name calling abhorrent and, as a Christian, I just can't bring myself down to that level. Call it morals if you want, I call it trying to live like Christ.

[erichthewebguy]

Redneck, who is the author of the book? I love all political books and I'll check it out at the book store. Thanks for the tip.
The Aclu Vs. America: Exposing the Agenda to Redefine Moral Values
by: Alan Sears, Craig Osten

Description from Amazon:


As a result of the work of the American Civil Liberties Union and their war on America, we now live in a country where the church has been progressively silenced, parental authority has been undermined, children are less safe, and human life continues to be cheapened-both at birth and death. While the ACLU and its allies in the media have positioned themselves as the great defenders of freedom, they are in reality eliminating the freedoms of millions of Americans. Sadly, most Americans are unaware of the extreme positions of the ACLU.

But there is hope. Many Americans are waking up to the dangerous agenda of the ACLU. The ACLUvs. America will clue readers in to the culture wars afoot and will equip them to become effective agents for liberty and freedom against the ACLU's onslaught.

Here's the link to Amazon's page for this book:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0805440453/002-0882924-9164824?%5Fencoding=UTF8&s=books&v=glance

[Wadi66]

I find name calling abhorrentCalling you a name?? I see it more as a description based on your "progressive" views.

[Count Rugen]

Then why did you say it's your "name" for Count Rugen? Lying is just as bad as namecalling.

[Argonath]

That's my name for Count Rugen... based on many months of reading his liberalism nonsense.

clever, clever.

[Argonath]

Then why did you say it's your "name" for Count Rugen? Lying is just as bad as namecalling.

I think he meant nickname.

[Count Rugen]

I think he meant nickname.
I think he meant Deragatory name.

[Wadi66]

Then why did you say it's your "name" for Count Rugen? Lying is just as bad as namecalling.Believe it or not CC I really don't have all the time in the world to labor over a key board exspousing with complete and utter clarity my thoughts. CommieCount is a name as Count Rugen is a name, however it (the commie portion) can ALSO be a description, and that is how I use it. Now if you want to get tempermental and start splitting hairs so be it. You really like calling people liars don't you, or is it just me? Well so be it CC, I really don't care anymore. I know your arguments and logic is so seriously flawed that calling others a liar can't correct them.

[RightisRightLeftisWrong]

Nice. I don't have a nickname for Wadi. I find name calling abhorrent and, as a Christian, I just can't bring myself down to that level. Call it morals if you want, I call it trying to live like Christ.

Oh come on Count. :icon_roll

[Argonath]

He cant count. AAAAAHAHAHAHA! Sorry, Count, I couldn't help myslef :icon_bigg

[erichthewebguy]

Lying is just as bad as namecalling.
It is indeed. Just like you lied when you said you would answer all of the questions I asked you in this thread (http://www.theamericanright.com/vbforum/showthread.php?t=1840&page=1&pp=15) that you completely dodged. You remember, the one where you told me "I don't like you?" I have been waiting for 15 days and yet you continue to dodge me. Liar!

[Goose]

I find name calling abhorrent and, as a Christian, I just can't bring myself down to that level.Oh I'm sure you've been guilty of this a time or two in your life.


You guys are such a joke.

We'll just chalk that one up as frustration for having to answer so many of our stupid questions.

[Bumblebee]

On the news today, did anybody hear the story about a woman who got on a plane in Reno, she had on a T-shirt with a picture of Bush with the words 'F**k Bush'?
There were kids on the plane and passengers complained. The flight attendants asked her to change her T-shirt, or get off the plane. She got off the plane.

THE ACLU IS GOING TO SUE THE AIRLINE ON THE 1ST AMENDMENT. FREEDOM OF SPEACH.

[erichthewebguy]

We'll just chalk that one up as frustration for having to answer so many of our stupid questions.
Or not, since you [count] STILL have never answered my stupid questions in this thread (http://www.theamericanright.com/vbforum/showthread.php?t=1840&page=1&pp=15) !

edit: clarified post to point that it was count who has not answered my stupid questions

[erichthewebguy]

On the news today, did anybody hear the story about a woman who got on a plane in Reno, she had on a T-shirt with a picture of Bush with the words 'F**k Bush'?
There were kids on the plane and passengers complained. The flight attendants asked her to change her T-shirt, or get off the plane. She got off the plane.

THE ACLU IS GOING TO SUE THE AIRLINE ON THE 1ST AMENDMENT. FREEDOM OF SPEACH.
As I heard it on Rush, the T-Shirt had a picture of Bush, Cheney, and Rice all in a row. It was a takeoff on the movie "Meet the Faukers" except it didn't say Faukers. It said something very similar, yet much more offensive. I will leave it to you imagination. The point is, it had the "F" word in it.

In my younger days, I drove to Denver, CO with a sticker on the back of my badass '65 Dodge Coronet 440 (ask me about that car sometime if you're interested in hotrods) that said F**K A FORD" and I got pulled over and I was told that if I did not get out and remove that right away that I would be going to jail for public indecency. Go figure.

[Argonath]

Technicaly, the A.C.L.U. is right about this one. As disgusted with myself as I am, and will no doubt douse myself in a dilute acid mixture as to boil my eyes out, but, I'm afraid I agree with this one. It is free speech, and it wasn't physicaly harming anyone. But, it did present obscenities in a public area exposed to kids, so I dont think the woman will be able to get more than a refund of money. If it were less than "F*** Bush", then I would have less problems with it, as it wouldn't have been as obscene. So, well, I guess I'm undecided on it, a little.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

And is it not free speech for the rest of the passengers to complain?

Then following this logic, is it not the right of the airline to act to benefit the majority of the FARE PAYING passengers.

Somehow, I don't think free speech applies in this case, this is not public transportation, it is a private company that owns and operates this aircraft.

The ACLU is gonna have a tough time with this one.

What really chaps my ass, is that my tax dollars are going to pay for this stupid lawsuit.

[teens4bush]

Amendment 1:CONGRESS shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Last time I checked, Southwest Airlines's bylaws are not laws of congress. Argonath is tehnichally incorrect. The amendment protections apply to state actors only. For example, my private school can prohibit any free speech they desire (for some reason, they are yet to shut me up), and it is not a constitutional issue. The ACLU will lose this suit on Amendment 1 grounds. The only issue arrising is various reembersment issues in the bylaws, which are not of the ACLU's concern.

[Goose]

And is it not free speech for the rest of the passengers to complain?

Then following this logic, is it not the right of the airline to act to benefit the majority of the FARE PAYING passengers.
Good point. Also it wouldn't be a good way to run a business to if they let her stay, but the rest of the passengers got off and demanded a refund. I wonder if the ACLU would have rushed to defend those passengers’ free speech rights; hard telling.

[Argonath]

The airlines are a private business, 1st admendment rights don't apply.
If you come into my house and I ask you to leave, you have to leave.

OOOHHHHHHH, okay. I forgot this was a private airline thingy. . . woops! :smile: