JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks on September 19, 2008, 02:26:45 PM
-
Simple and self-explanatory poll--inspired by the Nazi Pat's endorsement of fellow (black) Nazi BHO this past week. Clearly they are two of the most wicked political figures in America, but who is worse? I am going to say Buchanus, because he is so much more educated and scholarly than typical "minority" Jew-haters. Black and Muslim Nazis, like Obama, are for the most part extremely ignorant and zombie-like cretins. Obama may speak well and have the money to pay for the best prompters and coaches on the planet, but at core, we all know he's just a glorified ghetto schvartze. You can't say the same of Buchanus, who has coldly and methodically chosen a life of scholarly Nazi-defense.
Chaimfan
-
Orangutang obama because Buchanan is condemmed by most Jews while Obama the oragutang gets a pass
-
I didn't say more dangerous--I said more evil. Clearly Osama is more dangerous.
-
I didn't say more dangerous--I said more evil. Clearly Osama is more dangerous.
Evil? i guess Buchanan because is I.Q. is about 90 pts higher then husseins
-
Yeah, that was what my poll was about. And 190 points ahead of Osama is more like it. As vile and satanic as white "Christian" Nazis like Martin Luther and Fag Buchanus (yimach schmam vezichram) are, generally they are very intelligent...
-
Orangutang obama because Buchanan is condemmed by most Jews while Obama the oragutang gets a pass
Yes, You have a point. Both have the same evil intentions and hate the USA and the Jews, but Obama has more influence and is more acceptable for society. So he is at least more dangerous.
-
We know Osama is more dangerous. I meant who is, internally, more evil. I say Buchanus. Osama is evil in the primitive, ignorant, savage sense, but Buchanus is evil in the sense that he has freely chosen, despite being extremely educated and living in a modern, civilized nation, to dedicate himself to destroying Jewry.
-
I didn't say more dangerous--I said more evil. Clearly Osama is more dangerous.
That's an important distinction.
-
We know Osama is more dangerous. I meant who is, internally, more evil. I say Buchanus. Osama is evil in the primitive, ignorant, savage sense, but Buchanus is evil in the sense that he has freely chosen, despite being extremely educated and living in a modern, civilized nation, to dedicate himself to destroying Jewry.
Yes, you are right. Buchanan is more evil, because he is culturally one of us.
-
Orangutang obama because Buchanan is condemmed by most Jews while Obama the oragutang gets a pass
Good analysis.
-
Bay Buchanan is sometimes in CNN and defends McCain and Palin. So do she and the Nazi sympathizer disagree on issues?
-
I don't believe she is being sincere.
-
Bay Buchanan is sometimes in CNN and defends McCain and Palin. So do she and the Nazi sympathizer disagree on issues?
Is Buchanan a Mormon? His wife is http://www.nndb.com/people/484/000107163/
-
Is Buchanan a Mormon? His wife is http://www.nndb.com/people/484/000107163/
She was married to a Mormon so she converted she got a divorce and converted back to Catholic
-
She was married to a Mormon so she converted she got a divorce and converted back to Catholic
Thank you :)
-
Thank you :)
:) It's his sister
-
Yeah, that was what my poll was about. And 190 points ahead of Osama is more like it. As vile and satanic as white "Christian" Nazis like Martin Luther and Fag Buchanus (yimach schmam vezichram) are, generally they are very intelligent...
are you a protestant?
-
:) It's his sister
Oh sorry. But I learn here a lot about American politics. This is great. :)
-
Oh sorry. But I learn here a lot about American politics. This is great. :)
That good :)
-
are you a protestant?
What is the relevance here? ML was a Protestant, Buchanan is Catholic.
-
I"ll as a question to this question: Who's more evil? Hamas or Fatah?
-
They are both Koranimal savages. I wanted to compare a primitive "minority" Nazi with a highly educated and intelligent white Nazi. So, the Hamas/Fatah analogy doesn't really fit.
-
What is the relevance here? ML was a Protestant, Buchanan is Catholic.
you said luther was "vile and satanic"
-
Saddam Hussein Osama Bin Laden
-
Dumbo the ape is more evil.
-
Bucancan is more evil from by my assessment, but on this world there should be the same end to both of them.
-
Obama wants to murder babies born alive.
-
Obama is more dangerous but Buchanan is more evil (he denies the holocaust)
Obama, well, he might as well deny the holocaust too with is track record
-
Obama is the one who spent the last 20 years very closely involved with that evil Black liberation 'church'. Obama is the one that had close relations with terrorists and famous anti-semites and America haters.
And Obama has no problems lying to the world about his evil positions and connections, feeding lie after lie after lie to the public, to achieve his evil plans.
Buchanan is nothing more than a senile old irrelevant relic.
-
But Osama is pretty much evil on every moral issue, whereas Buchanan generally wants moral social values. Osama is also much more dangerous at this point, but I would say that if Buchanan were president he would be even more dangerous, because he would not only enable terrorists and evil groups everywhere in their agenda against the Jews, but additionally gain support from so-called conservatives.
Dan, you are assuming here that Buchanan genuinely holds to his "moral views". I don't believe for a second that he sincerely holds to these values--they're talking points to woo conservatives over to his side, so that they will be ready for his real agenda (anti-Semitism). How can Buchanan truly be anti-abortion and anti-gay-marriage when he is endorsing Barack Hussein Obama?
-
I don't necessarily think that even that is true. Poland is a very Catholic and very anti-Semitic nation (Pat should love it!), but also it has an extremely high abortion rate. In any event, he has never really been known as much of a theologian--he trots out Catholicism when he's directly addressing moral conservatives, but I've never seen any treatises on the faith from him. I do have to question how much of a Catholic traditionalist he really is when he has no children* (considering he is always lecturing whites to crank out more babies), and when some of his greatest friends are open homosexuals (i.e. fellow "paleocon" Nazi Justin Raimondo--and also, remember when he said, during his 2000 Reform Party run, that homosexuals were welcome in his campaign?)
*Note: I concede that it is possible that he is incapable of fathering children (he avoided military service on the basis of having a rare form of arthritis that virtually exclusively comes from untreated STDs).
-
But Osama is pretty much evil on every moral issue, whereas Buchanan generally wants moral social values. Osama is also much more dangerous at this point, but I would say that if Buchanan were president he would be even more dangerous, because he would not only enable terrorists and evil groups everywhere in their agenda against the Jews, but additionally gain support from so-called conservatives.
Dan, you are assuming here that Buchanan genuinely holds to his "moral views". I don't believe for a second that he sincerely holds to these values--they're talking points to woo conservatives over to his side, so that they will be ready for his real agenda (anti-Semitism). How can Buchanan truly be anti-abortion and anti-gay-marriage when he is endorsing Barack Hussein Obama?
The question is who is more evil? Not who's more dangerous. Since Obama is in a position to become president, he is very dangerous...but if both were in the same exact position, I still stand that Buchanan is evil.. the media doesn't support him as much sure...so he's less dangerous...Obama is also evil, but even more dangerous also because the media supports him...
-
the media doesn't support him as much sure...so he's less dangerous...Obama is also evil, but even more dangerous also because the media supports him...
I differ with you here. The establishment media NEVER airs any of the Hitler defenses that spew forth from that cesspool Buchanan has below his nose. He is their darling--their poster-boy "conservative". He is a multi-millionaire thanks to CNN, MSNBC, and even PBS.
-
If Buchanan didn't have some type of moral compass, he would be a Democrat like Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and all the other phony Catholics. There's far more Jew-hatred on that side of the aisle. This, however, is not a problem for Osama since his moral compass IS evil.
Buchanus' moral compass is evil too. His behavior and actions show that his "moral conservative" positions are all lip-service--mere fluff. How can you be pro-life and support Barack Obama? How can you be pro-life and support the gassing of millions of Jews? His "right-wing" positions are mere talking-points so that the MSM can parade him out as the house conservative any time there is need for one.