HOME | DD
Conservatoons — Ignorance Policy
Published: 2007-12-23 18:31:18 +0000 UTC; Views: 2531; Favourites: 20; Downloads: 35
Redirect to original
Description
*Related content
Comments: 87
Like the ones Obama installed in the Mid East? You have a pt. there.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Obama has not installed a single dictator you idiot. It happen during the Cold War.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, regime change is something entirely different. Yeah.
no hippies please.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
These regime changes have nothing to do with Obama.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, Bush's fault.
no hippies please.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The sagging*! Always the sagging*! I've never underst0od why they do that every since I started seeing gangsta wannabe types wearing their pants like that in the late '90s.
*For those unsure, "sagging" is when someone wears their pants with the waist down low for who-knows-why. It originated in prisons as a way for bitches to display that they were "in heat."
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Is that the true origin of sagging?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
unless I'm misinform'ed
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
wrong. prison inmates belts are often taken away so that they don't kill themselves. therefore they sag.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don't understand why they'd want to prevent inmates from killing themselves. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
every persons life matters regardless of how jacked up they are.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I suppose. But doesn't an individual, free or bond, have the right to cho0se whether or not to end their own life?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yes... I guess but often out of wrong reasons. if you are in the hospital and your paralyzed for life then if you want you should be able to die. if you want to die because your life is so messed up you should seek therapy.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh, campus plaza. How I missed gaily avoiding your stoop over the Holiday Break.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Great comic, greater comments. I should be able to double fav this
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh yeah, love how some of this even creates some anti-semitism in the "Party of Tolerance" towards Israel. How dare those Israelies fight for their own right to exsist!!!
Also funny how these people love to act like Terrorism was created the moment Bush stepped into office. Today's situation is really the sad end result of about two and a half decades of pretty much ignoring the problems in the Middle East.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
agreed all. But if they can pin Katrina on Bush the sky is the limit.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Katrina was, unfortunately, a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" sort of situation for Bush.
If he had barged in immediately after Katrina, the Liberals would've had a cow, claiming he'd overstepped his "constitutional boundaries" as a president in terms of states' rights or something, and would've still "investigated," and would've still tried to impeach him and remove him from office. You'd have DNC mouthpieces on the TV clamoring about how he violated this and violated that, and whatnot.
But he chose, instead, to let the local governments "handle it"... and well... they screwed up royally as MOST of us all know. BUT of course you'll never hear that from the media, they're too busy trying to paint a picture that has Bush somehow making this Hurricane, and using it to attack New Orleans, all because of it's large minority population obviously. If not outright creating the Hurricane, then he at least BLEW UP the levvies for... uhh... some strange f'n reason. And when they can't do that, they'll at least try and make it look like his slowness to act was a "lack of concern for African Americans."
Makes me want to puke.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
agreed all. What role does the media serve if it can't report the obvious honestly? It's furstrating.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
O.o.... huh... double-posted somehow.
^.^;; sorry.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks. Angered a lot of libs. Must be near the truth.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Usually does, when you disturb or question their ideal of the "truth", the religion of liberalism begins to fall apart. 
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thank Allah that our appeasement strategy will be reinstated after the 2008 election.
Then we'll show the Iranians and everyone else that hates us that we're on their side.
Allahu Akbar.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sadly, you might be right.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Uh, wow.
Not bombing the f*** out of a country=appeasement?
Just...wow.
Let me guess, you also think that "Jesus is the only way to heaven!"
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You have missed the point entirely. If you can't keep up, please don't comment.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Although the depth of appeasement will depend on the winner; Hillary or Obama.
Hillary would appease, I have no doubt of that, but I don't see her joining sides with our enemies like I would expect from Obama.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
agreed. Obama is weaker than Hillary. Doesn't say much for him.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Because liberal thinking WORKS.
Who cares if abortion is inherently racist and is destroying the family as we know it? It WORKS!
Who cares if easy-access divorce and gay marriage destroy the sanctity of marriage and the importance of child-rearing? It WORKS!
Who cares if putting kids on "behavior mod" drugs makes them grow up to be destructive and borderline insane? It WORKS!
Who cares if legalizing marijuana would increase the influence of drug cartels in the U.S. and increase the number of car accidents due to DUI? It WORKS!
Of course none of these work. The only reason why liberals constantly push them is to see who they can sucker. Of course, in a world where the liberals govern the media and control our TVs and schools and other media outlets, it's pretty easy to create an idiot.
👍: 0 ⏩: 5
Your an idiot. How is Abortion racist?
And I was on behavior modifying (sp?) drugs (Ritalin, to be precise), and I'm not border line insane
And no, you should never divorce...Never...If your husbands beating you and threatening to kill you and your family, or if your wife is sleeping with, like, 20 guys, you should just stay with them. That's the right thing to do. [/sarcasm]
You don't seem to understant that some of these things are hard to meet half-way, but are sometimes neccissary for different situations. I would rather see a woman get an abortion than 20 kids born without a home, healthcare or food.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
How is abortion racist? Help us to understand how it's targeted at any one race. For some reason, I thought it was available to all and forced upon none.
I happen to agree that divorce is a bit too easily said in today's world, as is marriage. However, there should be no restrictions between two consenting adults, whatever their orientation, from having all the same legal protections and provisions as any other couple, whatever you choose to call it. Frankly, I always thought conservatives would support gay marriage as it defines their commitment to each other rather than sleeping around as you guys always complain to be one of their bad sides.
Putting kids on drugs for behavioral modification isn't liberal. It's conservative. Who supports the drug companies at every corner? Republicans/conservatives. Who pushes drugs on doctors and runs ads on television for drugs to handle simple ailments? Drug companies. Who pushes drugs as the solution to all of life's problems? Drug companies. Who lets them get away with it? Republicans/conservatives.
Legalizing marijuana would actual remove all power from the drug cartels. Please refer to the effects of lifting prohibition if you want proof. And as far as DUI's, that would probably remain constant considering that everyone who wants to use it already does. I've tried it, I don't like it, nor do I enjoy most other drugs which is true for most of my liberal friends.
FYI, liberals do not control the media. The media outlets are overwhelmingly owned by conservatives. Most actors, models, movie stars, and artists in general are liberal and most of America wants entertainment with a liberal twist, so that's what they give us. After all, what's more important to a conservative than making money? Please think and do more than listen to Rush before making idiotic posts. Liberals are the ones trying to protect science and mathematics education alongside music and art. Children who have a strong grounding in music have been proven to be more motivated and focused in their studies and more successful in their life, yet it's conservatives who want to cut music programs. Explain that.
Conservatives also want to cut funding for educational programs targeted toward poor and minorities. What's not racist about that?
You claim the liberals want to control every facet of your life and "dumb down" America, yet every time you complain in the above items, it's because liberals want people to have a choice. Pick a side and stay on it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
One: Like I just said, 36% of all aborted babies are black, which is more than all the other minority abortions. Margaret Sanger, abortion leader and founder of Planned Parenthood, was racist against blacks. So there.
Additionally, as I just explained, abortion was not something "won" by voters. It is not ANYWHERE in the Constitution. It was a single decision made by a single judge in a single case. Proving that Democrats and liberals hate voters, abortion does not fair well in opinion polls. Explain THAT.
Two: Yes, putting behavioral mods on kids IS liberal. Everyone who has ever supported it is liberal. Some liberals may not support it, but all who support it are liberal. They do it only to make teachers' jobs easier--they don't have to deal with exciteable kids (Exciteable kids as in, ALL kids). Democrats and liberals are the ones letting drug companies get away with it--after all, conservatives and (some) Republicans aren't the ones defending them, conservervatives don't endorse them. Instead, as proven a hundred times more, conservatives endorse programs that have parents teach their kids (Like home-schooling, which liberals don't support) which keeps them OFF drugs and keeps them CONNECTED to their parents, which is proven scientifically, time and again, that THIS system is the one that works for kids. This is the one program conservatives support. We support it because it WORKS.
Conservatives support home-schooling and parent-child togetherness, overall, we support the health of a child. Liberals support teaching kids to rebel against their parents in order to "evolve", and therefore leaving important decisions up to an immature and untaught child. Explain THAT.
Three: Liberals DO control the media, as proven by your literal lack of sense in reality. Name me one news network that isn't. CNN is predominantly liberal, ABC, CBS, and MSNBC are all liberal. People are moving away from them because of how biased they are. Fox News isn't particularly conservative, but it is distinctly American in how it shows both ends of the spectrum. Or as we call it on Planet Sane, "equality of opinion."
Do explain to me how Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and literally hundreds of other conservative voices having millions of listeners every DAY means they somehow control the more-dominant TV news. They are RADIO personalities. It's true that they are a threat to TV liberal news, and that's because people are tired of only hearing opinions of the fucking idiot newscasters like Susan Estrich. People are waking up from your political spin, and the only thing you can do is keep lying to them, which doesn't work anymore.
And by the way, Rush is smarter than you will ever be. After all, he has over six million listeners, which means that much of our population believes not him, but the facts he provides for his testimony. You rely on "feelings" and "emotion" to provide an argument that has little to no point. There is NO FACT at all in your testimony, but "feelings" and bald-faced lies.
Four: Conservatives only want to cut spending to "education" programs because such programs do not work (UpStart, KickStart, etc.). In international tests, it shows that the longer American kids stay in our failed public school system, the dumber they become. Our first graders score better than first-graders in places like England and Germany. But near twelfth grade (That is, providing the punks haven't already dropped out and become bums), we're trailing behind and are nestled in between kids from Lithu-fucking-ania and Czechoslovakia. By the way, those are the three countries on the bottom: Lithuania, U.S., and Czech. In that order. So, uh, explain to me the liberal definition of "it works!" because I think our definitions are definitely different.
By the way, those programs are aimed at minorities and the poor only to make them so stupid they have to depend on welfare, which is provided by liberal government officials who'd love nothing more than to control your family by being the main provider of the household, rather than, say, your father--who by right is the provider and protector of the family. Once the father is eliminated (Usually by taking his kids away somehow), the government moves in, and that's what they want. They want you to rely on government rather than family. I feel sorry for those minority families that have been suckered into those schemes, as they alone feel the brunt of the crash-and-burn end results. The worst part is, they are lied to by their liberal providers.
Liberals sure do love giving "choice" to others... so long as it's a choice they support. You don't seem to be very supportive of my kind. You're not at all supportive of my beliefs. You're here, telling me I'm an idiot for believing something YOU don't believe. You hate what you don't understand. You've never listened to Rush Limbaugh, or read an Ann Coulter book (Of which sell millions of copies every time she writes one, guess that means that millions of Americans are racist meanies!). You've only heard what CNN has to say about them.
Guess what? I watch CNN and those from time to time. I've read Al Franken and Michael Moore, and even sat through a few parts of Michael's movies, which contain almost no facts (And the facts he does provide are heavily skewed, as discovered by two of his fans who had the balls to make a movie against him). I give you guys a fair shot at arguing with me, and the best you can do is try to obfuscate your message, while at the same time, name-call me with no reason to name-call.
Hugs and kisses, Pilgrim John
--President and CEO of You-Can-Kiss-My-Ass Incorporated
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Gawd
your comment is so win
I want to be able to fave comments
thanks for saying what I was too dazed/lazy to say.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Why the hell are you still here? Don't you have anywhere else to witch hunt or say idiotic things? By the way, I just got through pwning him, it's so nice to know you look up to pathetic losers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You didn't pwn him, all you did was repeat the same bullshit that he already debunked, which he'll probably reply to in order to point that out, and then you probably won't respond to it.
and lol witch hunt? I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was hunting you in the streets, here I thought I was just stating my opinion on a public website that is open for everyone to see and has comments enabled for anyone to comment.
If you want to go somewhere where you can express your opinions but not allow anyone to disagree with you or give you any negative comments, go take that crap to LJ and friends-lock all the journal entries. You won't get that on a place like DA, sorry
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
gay marriage doesn't destroy the importance of child-rearing, since it actually gives benefits to gay couples with children which there are many of, and I know one myself, and "sanctity of marriage?" The only state that allows gay marriage also has the lowest divorce rate in the country, I'd say it hardly destroys anything.
And wtf, abortion is racist and destroying families? Because we love to force abortions on people right, that's what pro-choice is all about? What ISN'T "destroying families" to you?
I mean jesus, if you're going to make arguments at least make them make sense instead of building retarded straw-man fallacies every chance you get
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
And here comes one, now.
Gay marriage destroys marriage. Marriage, defined in the Constitution as a male-to-female union, is 1. Meant to destroy the male sexual... what's the word I'm looking for here... the uncontrollable sexual capacity of males. Seriously. We have sex in so many ways, it's just ridiculous. Restriction helps build character. I thought you KNEW that already. Marriage was never meant to be some kind of "ultimate proof of love between two people", that's what the relationship is for. Marriage on the other hand, forces the male to destroy, to kill, that part of himself that has uncontrollable sexual urges instead of indulging in them, which gay marriage allows. Primarily, marriage is meant to restrict sexual activity to just between the husband and the wife, therefore allowing them to raise children safely. There is no greater scheme to civilise men than to marry them to women, which is one reason why ancient thought it a great idea to ban marriage because they wanted indulgence. Unfortunately, America is heading straight down that same path.
Gay marriage takes all that apart. You can't reproduce homosexually, so the whole idea of a gay marriage is pointless. Additionally, allowing gay marriage is only going to open the door for the freakshows at NAMbLA to demand child-adult marriage. Before you know it, all members of all sexual deviancies will be clamoring for the right to marry animals, dead persons, etc. You'll have started an avalanche, with no way to stop it. It's only going to destroy the family and restructure it the way the corrupted officials of government see fit (That is, that kind of family that relies on government adoption programs and welfare and such... the easiest to control).
Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the States, was profoundly racist against black people and the mentally retarded. Thusly, the main point of her organization was to keep the black people from reproducing. (Well, that and killing the mentally retarded.)
I should take this paragraph to point out that abortion itself was never won by the voting bloc. It was not a right we "earned" for choice. It was a decision by a single judge, ONE judge, to go against the Constitution (where abortion is never mentioned as a "Constitutional right") and deem it legal. And why? Because of the trauma his family felt when his irresponsible daughter had a one-night stand, got pregnant, tried to abort the baby, and was left horribly scarred. Like most kids are these days, thanks to his decision.
Also, today, of the 36 million babies aborted in the States, most of them are black--around 32%, or somewhere in that neighborhood. As a result, easy-access abortion has almost entirely sheared the black family apart.
See a pattern here? These things are meant to destroy the family (defined as "dad, mom, and children", not "partners and adopted children"). In order for sexual indulgence to reign supreme, ideas like family and common sense must be destroyed. Care to tell me how I'm wrong instead of just calling me names?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
"Marriage, defined in the Constitution as a male-to-female union..."
Well, not in the Constitution. It was defined in a new law.
And the people screeching that "gays marrying will destroy marriage" are the same people that said "different races marrying will destroy marriage."
Same BS, different target.
Besides, "traditional marriage" often meant polygamy (remember King Solomon?) or buying a man's daughter.
--------------------
"You can't reproduce homosexually, so the whole idea of a gay marriage is pointless."
So you also believe that sterile couples, women past menopause, and elderly men should be banned from marrying, too? Should all marriages that don't produce children be nullified?
Of course, marriage (as in the secular contract, not the ceremony that occasionally has religious trappings) is a legal contract, not a promise to have children. You'll have to cope with that.
By the way, many European countries have legalized gay marriage. And guess what? Heterosexual marriages haven't changed. They're just as strong, they occur just as often, and nobody but a few sociopaths have a problem with people of the same gender holding hands.
I guess "traditional marriage" isn't in trouble, after all.
--------------------
"Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the States, was profoundly racist against black people and the mentally retarded. Thusly, the main point of her organization was to keep the black people from reproducing. (Well, that and killing the mentally retarded.)"
First of all, that's not the focus of PP, nor is it the reason it was founded. And even if Sanger was racist, that doesn't mean that the organization is. The founders of the Southern Baptist Church were racist; the Pope is a former member of the Hitler Youth; the inventor of the computer was gay. Does that mean all Southern Baptists are racist? That all Catholics are Nazis? That all computer techs are gay? No.
--------------------
"Also, today, of the 36 million babies aborted in the States, most of them are black--around 32%, or somewhere in that neighborhood. As a result, easy-access abortion has almost entirely sheared the black family apart."
Maybe that has something to do with the fact that people in the lower income brackets are more likely to abort, due to not having the resources to care for extra children. Sadly, the majority of low-income families in the highest birth-rate areas (most notably, the South) are black. It's not a matter of abortion being racist, it's a matter of non-whites being stuck in substandard areas for the past 50+ years.
------------
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
tl;dr
Please don't tell gay people what they want since you're not gay and probably don't know any. Marriage as a religious thing can be anything you want, but as long as the government is involved, I think it should include gay people as well. Reproduction has never been a requirement of marriage, and never will be, so please don't get started on that, many married people don't or cannot have kids, some straight people are even more incapable of having kids than gay people. See the sterile couples, kthx.
And no, it's not meant to destroy families, since I think a loving committed couple with an adopted kid don't want benifits just for "indulgance," I know a few couples that are certainly not sacrificing love for indulgance, not that you would know or anything.
Also the founder of an organization's ideals doesn't represent every pro-choice person, I don't know if your claim is true or not since I don't feel like researching it, but regardless, that doesn't mean the whole pro-choice movement is racist because one pro-choice person may or may not have been.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Dont get angry at him, BloodstainHurricane... It's hard to think with your head up your ass all the time. (too little oxygen).
Pilgrim John, you're comparison between being gay and the extreme sexual deviances you make are completely off mark. If Bob and George get married, and adopt little Sara, how does that affect you? Is it going to traumatize her? Not likely. Two gay people getting legally (not religously) married and adopting a child isnt a big deal. The child could be raised properly (assuming there is one Alpha in the family).
A guy marrying his dead goat though... There cant be any real emotional attatchment there without a severe mental disorder, and NAMBLA's pettition would be thrown out because of the danger to the childs well-being.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No oxygen, just a lot of methane
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
How about personal freedom? Isnt that one of the foundations the US was founded on?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That isn't a liberal idea. Liberals believe the government ought to raise your kids and provide for you. Of course, if they did that, the government would control you, and you'd have no personal freedoms.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh yeah now i remember. The american liberal is something completly different. It's easy to forget since our liberals love personal freedom and hate having a goverment that tells them what to do.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
agreed all. I weep sometimes.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
you weep...over that??
There has to be better things to weep about... really.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Maybe he's the conservative emo kid, instead of weeping over not being able to go to an MCR concert he weeps over shit that doesn't concern him like who marries who.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>