Go to the link and sign the WND petition. Show your support.

THANK YOU FOR SIGNING THE PETITION URGING BOY SCOUTS NOT TO ABANDON CENTURY-OLD MORAL POLICY OF EXCLUDING HOMOSEXUALS

0 others have already signed this petition. Sign now to show your support!

WND wants to thank you for supporting our cause.
To show our appreciation, we are offering your choice
of any of dozens of must-read books for only 99 cents each!

http://www.wnd.com/wnd_petition/thank-you-for-signing-the-petition-urging-boy-scouts-not-to-abandon-century-old-moral-policy-under-attack-by-gay-activists/\


By the way, two very interesting titles listed for the 99 cent books are:

1. Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal

2. Climategate: A Veteran Meteorologist Exposes the Global Warming Scam (Hardcover)

---------------------

Two other books (one is a bundle) not on that list but that you can buy on WND.

1. Stop Islamization of America (book) plus The Ground Zero Mosque (DVD) bundle

2. THE CASE AGAINST DARWIN: WHY THE EVIDENCE SHOULD BE EXAMINED - (PAPERBACK)

Originally posted by moon1969
Go to the link and sign the [b]WND petition. Show your support......[/b]

Are these guys SERIOUS !?!

http://www.wnd.com/wnd_survey/in_50_words_or_less_tell_us_why_gays_suck

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
So why should we discuss content from a website which is so obviously satirical?

Interestingly, WND do not intend their material as satire. Norm the creator of this thread views WND as a serious and reliable website.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
The word "article" implies it's a professionally written piece from a reputable source, not some hyper partisan conspiracy theory that caters to stupid people like yourself.

Excerpt:
[b]Many of you will remember a story I broke a long time ago – about presidential candidate Barack Obama’s little-noticed announcement that, if elected in 2008, ...[text shortened]... ge from the bottom up.[/quote]

You, normbenign, the STUPID, are their target audience.

"You, normbenign, the STUPID, are their target audience."

I disagree with you regularly, but don't think you to be stupid. Uninformed, sometimes unthinking. I assure you I'm not stupid.

You might try to make an argument, or share some facts instead of inane name calling.

Ask yourself how USA Freedom Corps, or the Peace Corps amount to or ever could be "a civilian national security force"? Obama as usual is using double speak, and you are too much in the bag to question why? Examine your own lack of intellectual curiosity before calling others stupid.

Originally posted by bill718
Yeah...I did read the article. I was also in a happy, joking mood. Gezzz life's not all that serious, is it??

Just keep giggling away. It might become serious to you inside a FEMA relocation center.

Originally posted by moon1969
"www.wnd.com"

Enough said.

By citing an article from WND, I hardly implied that everything there was gospel. Why not stick to the OP, and deal with it rather than divert attention to extraneous matters.

Your panties were in a twist when GWBush was President, and DHS was his powerful, unconstitutional organization. Now, with a different President, it is all hunky dorry?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
So why should we discuss content from a website which is so obviously satirical?

WND is quite serious, and widely respected among conservative Americans.

Originally posted by moon1969
Go to the link and sign the [b]WND petition. Show your support.

[quote]THANK YOU FOR SIGNING THE PETITION URGING BOY SCOUTS NOT TO ABANDON CENTURY-OLD MORAL POLICY OF EXCLUDING HOMOSEXUALS

0 others have already signed this petition. Sign now to show your support!

WND wants to thank you for supporting our cause.
To show our appreciatio ...[text shortened]... (DVD) bundle

2. THE CASE AGAINST DARWIN: WHY THE EVIDENCE SHOULD BE EXAMINED - (PAPERBACK)[/b]

Good attempt at hijacking a thread.

This isn't about gays sucking, or a Mosque, or WND credibility in general. How about why DHS is stockpiling ammo and weapons?

Originally posted by normbenign

Ask yourself how USA Freedom Corps, or the Peace Corps amount to or ever could be "a civilian national security force"? Obama as usual is using double speak, and you are too much in the bag to question why? Examine your own lack of intellectual curiosity before calling others stupid.

PeaceCorps and AmeriCorps don't and never could be "a civilian national security force" in the literal sense. And that's the point. Nobody with half a brain could have listened to Obama in context (or read the transcript in context) and concluded he was being literal.

The only people who could claim such would be someone who's dishonest (WND) and stupid people (YOU).

Originally posted by normbenign
Good attempt at hijacking a thread.

This isn't about gays sucking, or a Mosque, or WND credibility in general. How about why DHS is stockpiling ammo and weapons?

WND is the source of this claim so of course their credibility is open to scrutiny.

Originally posted by normbenign
WND is quite serious, and widely respected among conservative Americans.

and Jesus wept...

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
PeaceCorps and AmeriCorps don't and never could be "a civilian national security force" in the literal sense. And that's the point. Nobody with half a brain could have listened to Obama in context (or read the transcript in context) and concluded he was being literal.

The only people who could claim such would be someone who's dishonest (WND) and stupid people (YOU).

Why would he use terminology which was absurd on its face? And please stop calling me stupid, or just FO.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
WND is the source of this claim so of course their credibility is open to scrutiny.

So attack the messenger, rather than deal with the message.

Originally posted by finnegan
and Jesus wept...

I thought you lefties didn't want to resort to religion, you know theocracy.

Originally posted by normbenign
So attack the messenger, rather than deal with the message.

You miss the point. Why waste time dealing with the message when the message is unreliable.