Anti-OBAMA bumper sticker Link page

Skully

Skully

NAXJA Forum User
Location
Dacono, Co.
Someone put together a link to a LOT of bumper stickers. Some I had not seen before. Apologies if a repeat post.

http://www.fredstates.com/



I like these;

255573919v1_240x240_Front.jpg


assbumper.jpg


mirror_socialism_bump.jpg


buckofama.gif
 
Last edited:
I believe I am the only Liberal on this damn forum :)
 
I aint no socialist.. haha
 
Whats the definition of a "classical liberal"?
 
HAHAHA
4068365.jpg
 
Undocumented+Worker.jpg
:D
 
XJNOOB93 said:
Whats the definition of a "classical liberal"?
Click to expand...

What the word "liberal" meant before it was co-opted by socialist progressives (i.e. Roosevelt and his ilk) in the 1930's and 1940's -- one who champion's LIBERTY. i.e. a libertarian, a "liberal" in the Jefferson tradition!!!:yelclap:
 
I saw a minivan in Boulder last week.

It had an Obama campaign bumper sticker on it,
about 5 "End This War" stickers,
and one Peace symbol sticker.


It's funny, because I think most Obama supporters took off their anti-war stickers after the election.
I don't think they were so anti-war as they were anti-Bush.
 
Anti-Bush is what I was...
 
mcantar18c said:
Why?
I mean I can understand if someone doesn't support A war, but being against war in general?
There are some things worth fighting for, IMO.
Ya know, like this, and these, and this, and for these lines, and for what this stands for, and for these guys, and for them, and yes even them.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you asked.

Lots of folks who label themselves "conservative" often cite (correctly) the principles our founders advocated concerning "natural rights" -- rights not bestowed upon us by some benevolent government, or earned through trial by fire or religious piety, but rather rights that we as human beings enjoy simply because we are human beings. Specifically, the rights to LIFE, LIBERTY, PROPERTY, and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. Nonetheless, these same folks have a tendency not to recognize these natural rights in regards to those who are either not US citizens, or have the nerve to disagree with whatever our policies may be as the time -- war, ALL war, results in the deprivation of natural rights upon all those who are victims of its violence. I will acknowledge that some of those folks volunteer for that deprivation/sacrifice, and I have the greatest respect for such folks when that sacrifice is made for the proper, constitutionally defendable, reasons.

There is one kind of "just" war -- a war of self defense. It is a central principle of freedom and liberty that people are free to do that which they wish with their property (including their bodies), provided such actions do not infringe upon the natural rights of others -- often summed up with the premise that "my rights end at the tip of your nose". As a result, when you punch me in the nose and violate my rights, I am justified in giving you a measure back, in self defense.

It has been a LONG time since the US fought a "just" war, a war of self defense. WWII is often cited as the "good war" because of the pure evil that was embodied by some of our opponents, and even though it is my opinion that WWII could have been avoided had we avoided fooling involvement in WWI, I sometimes can acknowledge that under the circumstances, something had to be done about Hitler, even if his rise was a product of the power vaccuum and utter poverty created by the treaty of Versailles. That said, it is fairly common knowledge that the attack on Pearl Harbor was not much of a surprise, and that FDR had been baiting the Japanese into an attack in order to provide himself political cover for involving the US in Europe -- I'm not sure he recognized the ferocity with which Japan would strike, but he was nonetheless not "surprised".

War is justified only in defense, in our case, in defense of the US. War is legal in the US only when declared by Congress, per the constitution, a power that cannot be legally delegated. So, since WWII, lets look at them: Korea -- nope, a "police action" based on the sick, imperical Wilsonian doctrine of "preparing the world for democracy", and defendning against so-called communist hordes... Vietnam -- same idea as Korea... Somalia, Grenada, Panama, and all the other petty conflicts that I can't possible count or mention? -- I can recall no agression by those parties against the US. How about the Gulf War? -- yeah, there is Iraqi agression there (against Kuwait), and I understand that some will point to "mutual defense treaties" and the defense of US "intersests" (i.e. oil) -- I believe both to be unconstitutional basis for war, let alone without a congressional declaration of war -- which did not occur in the Gulf.

So we're to the Bush wars. The invasion of Afghanistan for the purpose of pursuing those people, not necessarily the nation of Afghanistan, who perpatrated 9-eleven atrocities and attacked the US certainly has "just" written all over it. I was supportive of the hunt for Bin Laden, or whomever was responsible in that context (despite the unconstitutional nature of such invasion without congressional declaration).... but we lost our way. We invaded Iraq, again on a "US interest" theory. We stopped hunting the 9-11 villians and instead started foolish "nation building" actions -- our top generals now say our number one goal in Afghanistan is "protecting the Afghan people" -- I guess they are a "US interest...?

War, both historically and in todays "global"/small-earth society, is rarely an aggreived party seeking justice. Instead, it is empire-building, tyrrany and oppression of the many for the benefit of the few. It is disrespectful of the constitution and the principles articulated therein -- it is necessarily violative of the natural rights of human beings everywhere. I am anti-war, because I am pro-liberty. Yes, I'd fight to defend the constitution, to defend my children, to defend the principles represented by the flag (not the flag itself), and to defend my fellow men who would stand beside me and fight for the same principles -- that war hasn't presented itself, yet.

You asked.:shhh:
 
mcantar18c said:
Why?
I mean I can understand if someone doesn't support A war, but being against war in general?
There are some things worth fighting for, IMO.
Ya know, like this, and these, and this, and for these lines, and for what this stands for, and for these guys, and for them, and yes even them.
Click to expand...

Damn dude, you are cool in my book!!!!! :patriot: Anyone who tries to say war gets us nowhere is full of S*I*!!!! War is how we created this awesome country and yes inocent lives were lost and much blood was spilt but that is the WAY it IS!! There are armchair warriors and there are real warriors!! Sadly most of your anti war protestors have NOT a single clue what war is, why it happens or even served a cause as noble as what this country STANDS for!! For those who are so dead set against war need to go get infront of our soldiers instead of hiding behind them!! :us:
 
xj-grin said:
I'm glad you asked.

Lots of folks who label themselves "conservative" often cite (correctly) the principles our founders advocated concerning "natural rights" -- rights not bestowed upon us by some benevolent government, or earned through trial by fire or religious piety, but rather rights that we as human beings enjoy simply because we are human beings. Specifically, the rights to LIFE, LIBERTY, PROPERTY, and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. Nonetheless, these same folks have a tendency not to recognize these natural rights in regards to those who are either not US citizens, or have the nerve to disagree with whatever our policies may be as the time -- war, ALL war, results in the deprivation of natural rights upon all those who are victims of its violence. I will acknowledge that some of those folks volunteer for that deprivation/sacrifice, and I have the greatest respect for such folks when that sacrifice is made for the proper, constitutionally defendable, reasons.

There is one kind of "just" war -- a war of self defense. It is a central principle of freedom and liberty that people are free to do that which they wish with their property (including their bodies), provided such actions do not infringe upon the natural rights of others -- often summed up with the premise that "my rights end at the tip of your nose". As a result, when you punch me in the nose and violate my rights, I am justified in giving you a measure back, in self defense.

It has been a LONG time since the US fought a "just" war, a war of self defense. WWII is often cited as the "good war" because of the pure evil that was embodied by some of our opponents, and even though it is my opinion that WWII could have been avoided had we avoided fooling involvement in WWI, I sometimes can acknowledge that under the circumstances, something had to be done about Hitler, even if his rise was a product of the power vaccuum and utter poverty created by the treaty of Versailles. That said, it is fairly common knowledge that the attack on Pearl Harbor was not much of a surprise, and that FDR had been baiting the Japanese into an attack in order to provide himself political cover for involving the US in Europe -- I'm not sure he recognized the ferocity with which Japan would strike, but he was nonetheless not "surprised".

War is justified only in defense, in our case, in defense of the US. War is legal in the US only when declared by Congress, per the constitution, a power that cannot be legally delegated. So, since WWII, lets look at them: Korea -- nope, a "police action" based on the sick, imperical Wilsonian doctrine of "preparing the world for democracy", and defendning against so-called communist hordes... Vietnam -- same idea as Korea... Somalia, Grenada, Panama, and all the other petty conflicts that I can't possible count or mention? -- I can recall no agression by those parties against the US. How about the Gulf War? -- yeah, there is Iraqi agression there (against Kuwait), and I understand that some will point to "mutual defense treaties" and the defense of US "intersests" (i.e. oil) -- I believe both to be unconstitutional basis for war, let alone without a congressional declaration of war -- which did not occur in the Gulf.

So we're to the Bush wars. The invasion of Afghanistan for the purpose of pursuing those people, not necessarily the nation of Afghanistan, who perpatrated 9-eleven atrocities and attacked the US certainly has "just" written all over it. I was supportive of the hunt for Bin Laden, or whomever was responsible in that context (despite the unconstitutional nature of such invasion without congressional declaration).... but we lost our way. We invaded Iraq, again on a "US interest" theory. We stopped hunting the 9-11 villians and instead started foolish "nation building" actions -- our top generals now say our number one goal in Afghanistan is "protecting the Afghan people" -- I guess they are a "US interest...?

War, both historically and in todays "global"/small-earth society, is rarely an aggreived party seeking justice. Instead, it is empire-building, tyrrany and oppression of the many for the benefit of the few. It is disrespectful of the constitution and the principles articulated therein -- it is necessarily violative of the natural rights of human beings everywhere. I am anti-war, because I am pro-liberty. Yes, I'd fight to defend the constitution, to defend my children, to defend the principles represented by the flag (not the flag itself), and to defend my fellow men who would stand beside me and fight for the same principles -- that war hasn't presented itself, yet.

You asked.:shhh:
Click to expand...

You are anti-war because you are pro-liberty................... how pray tell do you think you got the right to even speak this way.......????? It is because we took this land away from the original inhabitors in a brutal manor ( WAR ) Then told the King of England to kick rocks ( WAR ).... War is how we have what we have and are pissing away!! Anyone who speaks out against WAR is foolish! Every war/police action this country has been ivolved in was for a noble cause "FREEDOM" something every American has some of!! This country has championed those who could not defend themselves and as far as I am concerned their is NO nobler cause!! I do not agree with every decision our government makes but I live with them! Sometimes looking out for our interests IS important too!! War is part of the natural order of things in this world and nothing will ever change that!! It is because of anti-war bleeding hearts that we cannot go do what is necessary to end the problem in the middle east!! Did you know that there are over 50 terrorist training camps here in our very own country.......one of which is HERE in Colorado!! What we have is due to alot of blood being shed and to preserve it more blood will have to be shed!!
 
ColoradoRaptor said:
You are anti-war because you are pro-liberty................... how pray tell do you think you got the right to even speak this way.......?????
Click to expand...

The constitution guarantees it -- the 1st amendment.

It is because we took this land away from the original inhabitors in a brutal manor ( WAR )
Click to expand...

Absolutely unjust war, trampling upon the natural rights of the native americans -- what are we going to do about it now though? Pretend it didn't happen? Move all the white folks back to Europe? No, I think we are all stuck with the results of our oppression of the natives, but that doesn't mean we should champion it and encourage the destruction of other cultures either...

Then told the King of England to kick rocks ( WAR )....
Click to expand...

Perhaps the best example in modern-history of a "just" war. (1) King George tramples upon our (American colonists) natural rights, seizing our property, denying us the pursuit of happiness. (2) we tell King George to kick rocks, pound sand, suck %^& through the Declaration of Independence, advising that we are free and do not intend to have our natural rights denied; (3) England ATTACKS US -- in self defense and defense of our natural rights, we go to war, a just war, and hand England her ass and tell her to play nice next time out -- just war of self defense.

War is how we have what we have and are pissing away!! Anyone who speaks out against WAR is foolish!
Click to expand...

Anyone whos speaks of war as some terriffic state of affairs needs to rethink it -- Ira, you've been there and done that. Was it fun? Did you enjoy witnessing the destruction and loss of life? War is to be avoided an virtually all costs -- only in defense of liberty can it be justified, not defense of "interests", i.e. goods that belong to someone else that we would like a peice of.

Every war/police action this country has been ivolved in was for a noble cause "FREEDOM" something every American has some of!! This country has championed those who could not defend themselves and as far as I am concerned their is NO nobler cause!!
Click to expand...

That has certainly been the marketing voice of every war in the last century. I don't buy it, and I say :bs: that people cannot defend themselves. The people of the world will have liberty and freedom when they stand up and take it from their oppressors - just like the colonists did. Liberty and freedom is not a gift that we can give, it is something that the oppressed must obtain for themselves. Iraq will be "free" when we butt out of their affairs and let the chips fall -- It may well take another 100 years before the Iraqi people figure it out and claim their freedom themselves, I hope the US has managed to keep itself together to welcome them to the party when that day comes...

I do not agree with every decision our government makes but I live with them! Sometimes looking out for our interests IS important too!!
Click to expand...

We can agree to disagree - I cannot think of a single instance where the federal government is concerned with much besides perpetuation and growth of its tyrannical self, and manipulating the people into believing in its benevolence.

War is part of the natural order of things in this world and nothing will ever change that!!
Click to expand...

Provided we continue to unjustly pursue war, your are absolutely correct. Were we able to follow the founder's philosiphies of "not going abroad seeking dragons to slay", and engaging in "friendship and trade with all, but avoiding entangling alliances", we might be able to be an example in a freer, more prosperous, and less warlike world. Hard to tell if we don't try.

It is because of anti-war bleeding hearts that we cannot go do what is necessary to end the problem in the middle east!!
Click to expand...

If we wish to end OUR problems in the middle east, we would allow the middle east to deal with their own issues. It is not OUR oil, Israel is not the 51st state, and our attempts to dictate to the people of the middle east how they should and should not live will do nothing but ensure that the centuries-long pattern of constant futile warfare in the middle east continues in perpetuity.

Did you know that there are over 50 terrorist training camps here in our very own country.......one of which is HERE in Colorado!! What we have is due to alot of blood being shed and to preserve it more blood will have to be shed!!
Click to expand...

I don't doubt it for an instant -- we have become experts in creating enemies, and then destroying them. As to bloodshed, no doubt you are right -- if it is for the right reasons, I can at least imagine risking my own. But I can't, and won't, say ALL or even MOST war is justifiable, moral, or consistent with the model of natural rights that we like to say our American experiment is based upon.:patriot:
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Long Arm
Replies
2
Views
166
maxbraketorque
M
Saudade
No Start, Hard Restart or Engine Die-Out, '87-'88 XJ/MJ TSB
Replies
0
Views
133
Saudade
Saudade
DonQuiXJote
Tightened Belt Tensioner w/o Loosening Pulley Bolt
Replies
8
Views
295
ChillyB
C
Bent
The BEST Medicine
Replies
7
Views
185
Nimrod
Nimrod
1
CV axle OEM bs Chinese eBay design questions.
Replies
0
Views
82
1-tonxj
1
Back
Top