Originally posted by Eronakis

So how is this email legit? You personally got this email from Al franken? Or was this leaked via new source? Funny how people see this has a credible source. So devil do you personally know Al Franken? Like you personally know Alex Jones? Who else do you supposely personally know? I'll post evidence about a false flag even and I get ridiculed for it. When this emial with no sound source is presented people believe it.

 1. I know many people, I do not however know Al Franken, nor am I even in his district.  I do receive quite a few letters from many of our congressmen and women and other officials, you can sign up for them on their sites if you are interested in receiving them as well.  I happen to have received this email from Liberal forum.org, where I also receive many updates from different members of congress as well as blanket " thank you for getting me elected" emails when I am not even in their district. This was the email address it was sent from:  Al.Franken@liberalforum.org

Received: from lib.liberalforum.org ([174.121.227.170]) by col0-mc2-f42.Col0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675);
Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:21:07 -0800

Subject: Sarah Palin and the Tuscon Shooter
X-PHP-Script: liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php for 72.241.180.171
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 20:21:06 +0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: IPS PHP Mailer
From: "America's Political Chat Room" Al.Franken@liberalforum.org
 

In Case you were not aware Liberal Forum.org was founded by Al Franken.

I am omitting my personal information for my own privacy tyvm.

2. Yes, I did personally know ALex Jones. I went to school with the guy in Rockwall Texas. He regretably dated my friend Julie in School. If you would like to call in and ask him about Julie Mace, I am sure he will let you know. Though he was quite a character back then.. even moreso than now.  LOL

3. I have no idea who the original author was, all I know was I was sent this from this email address.  If you would like updates from this particular congressman you can sign up for them here: http://www.alfranken.com/

4.You  are behaving like an ass.

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by Eronakis

So how is this email legit? You personally got this email from Al franken? Or was this leaked via new source? Funny how people see this has a credible source. So devil do you personally know Al Franken? Like you personally know Alex Jones? Who else do you supposely personally know? I'll post evidence about a false flag even and I get ridiculed for it. When this emial with no sound source is presented people believe it.

 1. I know many people, I do not however know Al Franken, nor am I even in his district.  I do receive quite a few letters from many of our congressmen and women and other officials, you can sign up for them on their sites if you are interested in receiving them as well.  I happen to have received this email from Liberal forum.org, where I also receive many updates from different members of congress as well as blanket " thank you for getting me elected" emails when I am not even in their district. This was the email address it was sent from:  Al.Franken@liberalforum.org

Received: from lib.liberalforum.org ([174.121.227.170]) by col0-mc2-f42.Col0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675);
Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:21:07 -0800

Subject: Sarah Palin and the Tuscon Shooter
X-PHP-Script: liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php for 72.241.180.171
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 20:21:06 +0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: IPS PHP Mailer
From: "America's Political Chat Room" Al.Franken@liberalforum.org
 

I am omitting my personal information for my own privacy tyvm.

2. Yes, I did personally know ALex Jones. I went to school with the guy in Rockwall Texas. He regretably dated my friend Julie in School. If you would like to call in and ask him about Julie Mace, I am sure he will let you know. Though he was quite a character back then.. even moreso than now.  LOL

3. I have no idea who the original author was, all I know was I was sent this from this email address.  If you would like updates from this particular congressman you can sign up for them here: http://www.alfranken.com/

4.You  are behaving like an ass.

Well hmm. Another poster found some information that most of what was written in your email was written by someone else. Was this guy here, sent the emial as well? He said he wrote this. By Boyce Watkins PHD at Syracuse.

Here are the links again: http://boycewatkins.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/should-sarah-palin-be-blamed-for-the-shooting-of-congresswoman-giffords/

And: http://www.bvblackspin.com/bloggers/boyce-watkins-phd/

Sorry I am just a little skeptical right now. I question everything. --- And please explain these links and the same text by Mr. Watkins please.

Originally posted by Eronakis

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by Eronakis

So how is this email legit? You personally got this email from Al franken? Or was this leaked via new source? Funny how people see this has a credible source. So devil do you personally know Al Franken? Like you personally know Alex Jones? Who else do you supposely personally know? I'll post evidence about a false flag even and I get ridiculed for it. When this emial with no sound source is presented people believe it.

 1. I know many people, I do not however know Al Franken, nor am I even in his district.  I do receive quite a few letters from many of our congressmen and women and other officials, you can sign up for them on their sites if you are interested in receiving them as well.  I happen to have received this email from Liberal forum.org, where I also receive many updates from different members of congress as well as blanket " thank you for getting me elected" emails when I am not even in their district. This was the email address it was sent from:  Al.Franken@liberalforum.org

Received: from lib.liberalforum.org ([174.121.227.170]) by col0-mc2-f42.Col0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675);
Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:21:07 -0800

Subject: Sarah Palin and the Tuscon Shooter
X-PHP-Script: liberalforum.org/liberalforum/index.php for 72.241.180.171
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 20:21:06 +0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: IPS PHP Mailer
From: "America's Political Chat Room" Al.Franken@liberalforum.org
 

I am omitting my personal information for my own privacy tyvm.

2. Yes, I did personally know ALex Jones. I went to school with the guy in Rockwall Texas. He regretably dated my friend Julie in School. If you would like to call in and ask him about Julie Mace, I am sure he will let you know. Though he was quite a character back then.. even moreso than now.  LOL

3. I have no idea who the original author was, all I know was I was sent this from this email address.  If you would like updates from this particular congressman you can sign up for them here: http://www.alfranken.com/

4.You  are behaving like an ass.

Well hmm. Another poster found some information that most of what was written in your email was written by someone else. Was this guy here, sent the emial as well? He said he wrote this. By Boyce Watkins PHD at Syracuse.

 

Here are the links again: http://boycewatkins.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/should-sarah-palin-be-blamed-for-the-shooting-of-congresswoman-giffords/

And: http://www.bvblackspin.com/bloggers/boyce-watkins-phd/

 

Sorry I am just a little skeptical right now. I question everything. --- And please explain these links and the same text by Mr. Watkins please.

 Have no idea who that guy is.

All I know is that this email was sent out by Al frankens site. He founded Liberal forum.org, and I would think his site is distributing this with his consent. He did not attribute it to the original author if he was  plagiarizing them. LOL

Not sure who wrote it first, but is being mass distributed by his site.

Edit: and No, I did not research whether or not it was plagiarized, it was disgusting enough to read it once. When I received this, I was floored that anyone would write such a thing in light of the terrible pain these families are enduring right now.

Originally posted by Zindaihas

Originally posted by smut

The men responsible for building the foundation of the United States had little use for Christianity, and many were strongly opposed to it. They were men of The Enlightenment, not men of Christianity. They were Deists who did not believe the Bible was true.

 Oh really?  Then I guess all those quotes are nothing but bunk.

 Try harder...

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html

Originally posted by Hekket

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Hekket

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Hekket

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Hekket

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Hekket

She's correct in saying the U.S. was founded on Christianity and I do not deny that we're indeed a christian nation, but I definetly do NOT agree with the notion that U.S. law should be based off Christian beliefs. I'm an atheist and do not wish to follow laws based off christianity, Islam or judaism. Fuck that.

That's the equivilant of Islamic Sharia of which I vehemently oppose. I never liked Palin, but I'm not going to go about wishing death upon her like these loons on the left have been doing. 

Blue:  No the US was definitely NOT founded on Christianity.  Freedom of Religion squashes any ideals that the US is a Christian nation.

Red:  You still haven't proven that statement.  You are just using your Conservative bias to automatically state that "IT'S LIBERALS!!!" rather than looking at all of the multitude of options of who these poster(s) truly are.

@ Blue: We can be a christian nation and still be a nation with Freedom of Religion. I don't know why people are incapable of acknowleding this or why it's a bad thing.

@ Red: Care to explain this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_-vLOlgC6A. Who, I wonder, could be making these death threats? Well it's certainly not Conservatives! You can't sit here and tell me with a straight face that these death threats are staged. If we're gonna use that logic, then it's completely possible that loughner was used as a puppet by the left so they'd have a reason to point fingers and say " LOOK! REPUBLICANS ARE BAD! "

See? That's dumb...and any thinking person would agree with me.

Blue:  No, the US cannot be a Christian Nation.  Freedom of Religion prohibits the US to promote one religion over another.  To claim that the US is a Christian Nation is for the US to promote Christianity over all forms of religion.  Thus, it violates the First Amendment's Feedom of Religion.

Red:  Except you have NO proof that it is not Conservatives who hate Palin.  Or Conservatives who are staging the whole thing.  Or Independents who despise Sarah Palin.  Or people who just want to whore for attention due to the anonymity of the internet.  Many possible options.  Yet you jump on the bandwagon and automatically assume that it is "Liberals."

Green:  Two major flaws in your example... there's no evidence to support it and it's easy to dig up Loughner's background due to his anonymity on the internet being destroyed because he wanted it destroyed by posting his information on his own account.

@ Blue: Sure it can. The majority of people in this country are Christian. If I were to move to a country with majority Muslims I would completely acknowledge that I'm now living in an Islamic country.

@ Red: Proof isn't a requirement when considering the english word " Obvious. "

@ Green: see above

Blue:  Just because a majority of the populace follows Christianity doesn't mean the country is a Christian country.  Especially when the First Amendment says otherwise.  And, your example of you going to another country is pointless as no other country has the US' Constitution.

Red:  No... it's not "obvious" as you claim it to be.  You are just using it as a cop-out because you can't defend your position.  Conservative bias = epic fail.

Green:  See red.

@ Blue: Sure it does.

@ Red: Prove it.

Blue:  No it doesn't.  For you to say that shows your blatant disregard for the First Amendment of the Constitution.

Red:  Sorry, but we've been through this dance before.  It is up to YOU to provide proof that it is the "LIBERALS" as you continuously claim it is.  I have already provided enough other, logical, possibilities of the agenda of the individual(s) on those twitter/facebook accounts.  You using words such as "obvious" does not excuse you from proividing proof that these individual(s) were actually Liberals as you claime they were.  Of course, I already know that you will use a cop-out statement then run and hide.  It's typical for people such as yourself.

@ Blue: Yes it does. It has nothing to do with the first amendment. There are more christiains in the united states, there for we are a christian nation whether you like it or not.

@Red: I'm just using your idiotic " Prove It " argument, so don't get mad when I use it against you. So again I say - Prove it.

Majority means absolutely nothing as the Constitution prevents the US from being a Christian Nation.  Everytime you post, you are further proving that you will ignore the Constitution.  But, I expected nothing less from a Social Conservative.

So, you consider proof as "idiotic"?  Well, that speaks massive volumes about every single one of your posts!  Thanks for that revalation.

Again, it is upon you to prove that these individual(s) are indeed "LIBERALS!!!" rather than one of the other multitude of logical possibilities, that I provided previously, that these indvidual(s) could be.  If you do not, which would not be a shock due to your posting history, you are doing nothing more than showing that you are using major league assumptions that these are "LIBERALS!!!" due to your Conservative bias.

Devil, you lied in your original post. You clearly said "he said she has blood on her hands". No where in the email did he say HE believes she has blood on her hands. He said "some would say she does". I'm sure he learned that little trick from Fox News, they use the "some people say" trick quite often.

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Hekket

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Hekket

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Hekket

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Hekket

Originally posted by Vato26

Originally posted by Hekket

She's correct in saying the U.S. was founded on Christianity and I do not deny that we're indeed a christian nation, but I definetly do NOT agree with the notion that U.S. law should be based off Christian beliefs. I'm an atheist and do not wish to follow laws based off christianity, Islam or judaism. Fuck that.

That's the equivilant of Islamic Sharia of which I vehemently oppose. I never liked Palin, but I'm not going to go about wishing death upon her like these loons on the left have been doing. 

Blue:  No the US was definitely NOT founded on Christianity.  Freedom of Religion squashes any ideals that the US is a Christian nation.

Red:  You still haven't proven that statement.  You are just using your Conservative bias to automatically state that "IT'S LIBERALS!!!" rather than looking at all of the multitude of options of who these poster(s) truly are.

@ Blue: We can be a christian nation and still be a nation with Freedom of Religion. I don't know why people are incapable of acknowleding this or why it's a bad thing.

@ Red: Care to explain this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_-vLOlgC6A. Who, I wonder, could be making these death threats? Well it's certainly not Conservatives! You can't sit here and tell me with a straight face that these death threats are staged. If we're gonna use that logic, then it's completely possible that loughner was used as a puppet by the left so they'd have a reason to point fingers and say " LOOK! REPUBLICANS ARE BAD! "

See? That's dumb...and any thinking person would agree with me.

Blue:  No, the US cannot be a Christian Nation.  Freedom of Religion prohibits the US to promote one religion over another.  To claim that the US is a Christian Nation is for the US to promote Christianity over all forms of religion.  Thus, it violates the First Amendment's Feedom of Religion.

Red:  Except you have NO proof that it is not Conservatives who hate Palin.  Or Conservatives who are staging the whole thing.  Or Independents who despise Sarah Palin.  Or people who just want to whore for attention due to the anonymity of the internet.  Many possible options.  Yet you jump on the bandwagon and automatically assume that it is "Liberals."

Green:  Two major flaws in your example... there's no evidence to support it and it's easy to dig up Loughner's background due to his anonymity on the internet being destroyed because he wanted it destroyed by posting his information on his own account.

@ Blue: Sure it can. The majority of people in this country are Christian. If I were to move to a country with majority Muslims I would completely acknowledge that I'm now living in an Islamic country.

@ Red: Proof isn't a requirement when considering the english word " Obvious. "

@ Green: see above

Blue:  Just because a majority of the populace follows Christianity doesn't mean the country is a Christian country.  Especially when the First Amendment says otherwise.  And, your example of you going to another country is pointless as no other country has the US' Constitution.

Red:  No... it's not "obvious" as you claim it to be.  You are just using it as a cop-out because you can't defend your position.  Conservative bias = epic fail.

Green:  See red.

@ Blue: Sure it does.

@ Red: Prove it.

Blue:  No it doesn't.  For you to say that shows your blatant disregard for the First Amendment of the Constitution.

Red:  Sorry, but we've been through this dance before.  It is up to YOU to provide proof that it is the "LIBERALS" as you continuously claim it is.  I have already provided enough other, logical, possibilities of the agenda of the individual(s) on those twitter/facebook accounts.  You using words such as "obvious" does not excuse you from proividing proof that these individual(s) were actually Liberals as you claime they were.  Of course, I already know that you will use a cop-out statement then run and hide.  It's typical for people such as yourself.

@ Blue: Yes it does. It has nothing to do with the first amendment. There are more christiains in the united states, there for we are a christian nation whether you like it or not.

@Red: I'm just using your idiotic " Prove It " argument, so don't get mad when I use it against you. So again I say - Prove it.

Majority means absolutely nothing as the Constitution prevents the US from being a Christian Nation.  Everytime you post, you are further proving that you will ignore the Constitution.  But, I expected nothing less from a Social Conservative.

So, you consider proof as "idiotic"?  Well, that speaks massive volumes about every single one of your posts!  Thanks for that revalation.

Again, it is upon you to prove that these individual(s) are indeed "LIBERALS!!!" rather than one of the other multitude of logical possibilities, that I provided previously, that these indvidual(s) could be.  If you do not, which would not be a shock due to your posting history, you are doing nothing more than showing that you are using major league assumptions that these are "LIBERALS!!!" due to your Conservative bias.

@ Red: Prove it!  :-)

@ Green: Prove they're not! If you can't do that then I win! Bottom line!

@ Orange: Prove it.

Originally posted by smut

Devil, you lied in your original post. You clearly said "he said she has blood on her hands". No where in the email did he say HE believes she has blood on her hands. He said "some would say she does". I'm sure he learned that little trick from Fox News, they use the "some people say" trick quite often.

 I was refering to this line from the email:

"Does Sarah Palin have blood on her hands? Some would say she does. At the very least, I am hopeful that the relatively thoughtless politician will take some time to realize that she is responsible for the words that come out of her mouth. Had the rhetoric not become what it is, the little girl who was murdered on Saturday might still be alive."

Would you care to summarize this in other words to elabortae the jest of this? Was this necessary to be included? Was this appropriate ? By saying " some would  say she does" and " had the rhetoric not become what it has, the little girl who was murdered saturday might be alive."  Yes, you are saying she has Blood on her hands in a round about way, and can be taken as such.

 You do not have to come out and bluntly say " she has blood on her hands" to tell others that is what you mean. The very sending of this letter, and including this line would show that is what you support and believe. Trying to call me a liar when this is what the person/ persons sending this letter want people to believe is ridiculous and you know that as well as I do.

Originally posted by smut

Originally posted by Zindaihas

Originally posted by smut

The men responsible for building the foundation of the United States had little use for Christianity, and many were strongly opposed to it. They were men of The Enlightenment, not men of Christianity. They were Deists who did not believe the Bible was true.

 Oh really?  Then I guess all those quotes are nothing but bunk.

 Try harder...

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html

 Try harder what?  Those are quotes from the founding fathers.  How can you do better than quoting them directly?  You're website is the one that's lacking.  Saying "the men who were responsible for building the foundation of the United States had little use for Christianity, and many were strongly opposed to it,"  does not constitute evidence.  It is merely commentary from the author of the website.

And your link misses the mark in its references as well.  For example, on the subject of George Washington, it quotes historian Barry Schwartz.  "George Washington's practice of Christianity was limited and superficial because he was not himself a Christian."  Well who the hell is Barry Schwartz?  Did he know George Washington?  Did they spend time together?  My guess is "no" since the quote is from his book in 1987.

Compare that to this website which quotes from Washington's farewell address to the nation.  "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible."  It also includes a quote from Nelly Custis-Lewis, Washington's adopted daughter.  "Is it necessary that anyone should ask, 'Did General Washington avow himself to be a believer in Christianity?'  As well may we question his patriotism, his heroic devotion to his country.  His mottos were, 'Deeds, not words,' and 'For God and My Country.'"

I'd wager Nelly Custis-Lewis knew George Washington a little better than Barry Schwartz.

Originally posted by LeKinK

Originally posted by Enigma

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by LeKinK

So.. what part of this email make people puke? Truth hurt or something?

 Which is it- are you blind or dense?

1. This attack was carried out by a  crazy guy who made you tube videos against Gifford's immigration policy ( which was the criminalization of tunnel diggers) as well as videos claiming the government was controlling people through language. It is very well known that Palin supported harsher immigration policy along with Gifford. So how would Palin be in any way responsible for this tragedy?

2. Where in this email does he mention the " truth" about the shooter? Where does it hold the shooter accountable for his actions?

3. Who exactly has a problem having a black president?

4. The person admittedly responsible and the organizations responsible for the threats and broken windows was a Anti government militant welfare recipient,  in what way would anti welfare Palin be responsible for that as well?

5. The little girl's father has already spoken out publicly against harsher gun laws, this email is an insult, not a condolence to the family.

Sure, Palin isn't all that bright- but misplacing blame for these attacks and threats does not even remotely hold the persons responsible accountable. In what way would sending out a misleading tasteless email be responsible leadership? Apporpriate leadership would have put out an email to strengthen this nation during this time of mourning rather than use these victims deaths as an excuse to use the tragedy to misinform for politcal gain. That is utterly disgusting. If you find that appropriate in the light of what has happened, then you sir are a disgusting individual as well.

 Lekink is what you call someone who lacks brain cells (or brain power). I am pretty damn liberal and what Al Franken wrote was just complete and utter bullshit.

Disagreeing with a political opponent....acting out against a plitical opponent similiar to some of those who act on these forums is just plain assanizing and disgusting.

Derp?  The only thing I see in this email is some guy opinion about a crazy, evil looking woman. Honestly look at her:

 

What I see is a crazy person who probably want to kill every non white and non christian.  And some guy I never heard of  is warning people about her.  She is the next Hitler and your country will never be the same.

How is that for vomit? Darth Vader got nothing on her!

Sarah Palin Americas Hitler?