Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

We can still have bong hits for Jesus right?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Philosoraptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:05 AM
Original message
We can still have bong hits for Jesus right?


I know the holy supreme court ruled against the kid who held up a banner in front of his highschool saying 'bong hits for Jesus', but we can all still HAVE bong hits for Jesus, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. Now, what we need to do is put this slogan EVERYWHERE.
Edited on Tue Jun-26-07 08:11 AM by IanDB1
Treat censorship as damage and route around it.

Make their act of censorship have the opposite of the intended effect.

Also, I think a key to the prosecution's argument was that "Bong Hits for Jesus" somehow encouraged drug use.

So, I propose also using the slogan, "Blowjobs for Jesus," which has absolutely nothing to do with drugs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #1
19. What if the slogan held up had been
"Fags should die"?

or

"Keep the niggers out"?

or

"Bitches are 4 fucking"?

Would everyone be rallying around the kid? Would the school be right to not let banners like that at school-sponsored events?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jojo54 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
2. Whatever happened to "free speech"?????? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. The terrorists hate us for our freedom. So, we have to get rid of as much freedom as we can...
until the terrorists love us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #2
16. Minors do not have all the same free speech
rights that adults have. Never have. Tinker is pretty clear that the speech cannot be disruptive to the education process. The kid had a 14-foot sign that made reference to drug use at a school-sponsored event. I can't believe that people are finding it difficult that a school might want to limit a student's speech about illegal drug use while that student is at a school-sponsored event.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #16
26. It was not a school-sponsored event, and the kid hadn't shown up for school that day. There is no
"educational process" occurring while people are standing around waiting for an Olympic torch parade - a *community*-sponsored event, not school-sponsored -, so the "disruptive to the education process" argument doesn't hold water.

Seems to me that such a banner held up outside, and not even on school grounds, is less disruptive to the educational process, and less powerful a political statement, than anti-war black armbands being worn to class all day, as was the case in Tinker.


Our Constitution continues to get ripped to shreds...

Schools across the country are suspending and expelling kids for things they do ON THEIR OWN TIME, which is freakin' outrageous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #26
32. Yeah it was and yeah they did.
Their teachers with them. Why would teachers accompany the students unless the students were still officially in school?
Even though Frederick was standing on a public sidewalk, school officials argue that he and other students were participating in a school-sponsored event. They had been let out of classes and were accompanied by their teachers.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/12/01/scotus.bonghits/index.html



Apparenlty FREDERICK had not been to school yet that day, but other students had. He joined his friends in this school-sponsored event. So the facts would be that school was indeed in session but the student hadn't been there yet--though he joined students who had been at school in the school-sponsored event.
Frederick, who was late for school that day, joined some friends on the sidewalk across from the high school, off of school grounds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morse_v._Frederick


And the student admits that one of the reasons for the banner was to piss off the principal. That certainly seems like the INTENT of the banner was a DISRUPTION. Seems the Principal and Frederick had had it out on several occassions before for things that I think are insane (not standing for the pledge and reading Camus) but THIS incident was meant to piss off the principal.
Frederick said he wanted to capture the attention of TV cameras -- and the ire of his principal.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2953653


Finally, it is a reference to illegal drugs at a school-sponsored event. On school grounds or off, do you really think the school should not be able to stop those kinds of references when they are sponsoring the event?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #32
35. Heaven forbid anyone should be pissed off.
Everyone should stay nicely catatonically calm, just
as our Supreme Leader and his media have commanded.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #35
43. That's not the point and you know it.
The language of Tinker says that the speech can't be a disruption to the school day. This sign was clearly INTENDED to be a disruption by the student's own admission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 06:15 AM
Response to Reply #43
55. A litte disruption now and again is good for our democracy.
Wouldn't you prefer that, for example, our Congress
were a little more disruptive occasionally?

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #55
58. Absolutely
Congress is not a high school.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #58
60. Then why do the geeks spend so much time trying to suck up...
> Congress is not a high school.

Then why do the geeks spend so much time uselessly trying
to suck up to the "cool kids"?

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #60
61. Thanks for the laugh
to get my day off to a good start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #61
63. You're welcome. ;) (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. I think YOU need to take a bong hit for Jesus
What the hell were these students supposedly learning at this event? I don't think that whatever it was that it was more important than freedom of speech.

Also schools have no business trying to be the NARC squad. Maybe you disagree. Drugs are bad? Says who, how can an inhuman institution makes subjective proclamations like that?


Every SCOTUS decision handled down this week was incorrect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #36
44. So schools cannot limit speech at all?
Is that what you are saying? This was not a discussion about the legalization of pot. If it were, I would have no problem with it. This speech is clearly within the bounds of the school to stop. The only extension this case makes is that the speech was at a school-sponsored event yet off school property.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 06:18 AM
Response to Reply #44
56. Outside the school buildings, they shouldn't be able to limit speech.
Outside the school buildings, in situations when
the student speech can't be confused as having
been spoken on behalf of the school, the schols
shouldn't be able to limit speech at all.

Inside the schools, perhaps there can be some limits
("don't talk while I'm lecturing!") but right now,
the Supreme Court has tipped the balance far to far
in favor of speech limitations.

This decision was blatantly political and wrong and
represents yet another significant erosion of our
constitutional rights. And I'm always amazed at how
quickly DUers are ready to waive their rights.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #56
59. I would agree with you
except this was a school-sponsored event. They were still technically "in school" at the time.

What if the kids had beaten the crap out of a gay kid while teachers stood by and watched? Would everyone here be OK with the actions of the teachers because they were off school property or would we have wanted the teachers to handle the situation before it got out of hand because they were still in charge at the time? This was a school-sponsored event and the school had the duty to control the situation. There have been instances where students are punished for what they do while visitors at another school for a sporting event; why does the school have control over them there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #59
62. "School sponsorship" was obviously the turning point.
"School sponsorship" was obviously the turning point
and I think the Supreme Court read a bit more into
this than actually existed. The kid wasn't "in school"
that day, he merely happened to be standing in the
same place as the out-of-school "in school" kids.

Tesha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #62
64. That's enough
He was a student at the school and even though he was absent in the morning, by being with everyone else he was at a school-sponsored event. Would he have bitched if the principal had told him to get the hell out because he wasn't at school yet?

I think people are making more of this ruling than need be. The other three were crap. This one only really makes an extension to school-sponsored event that is not on school property. It doesn't reach out to when the kid is on their own and the language, from what I have read of the opinion, does not open the door for that to happen--it is all about being under the "control" of the school and those are the times they have the ability to control speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #16
37. It wasn't a school sponsored event. School was closed for the day.
It was across the street from the school, but it wasn't on school property.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #37
42. It was a school sponsored event
and the kids were in school and they were escorted by their teachers.

The only extension of Tinker this makes is to something off school grounds yet still school-sponsored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #42
46. But, again, since the sign was held up during a friggin' parade, there was no disruption of the
educational process, so therefore no reason to limit the student's speech.
And again, the school did not sponsor the parade. The community did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. The school sponsored the attendance
The rules of the school were still in effect. The banning of references to drugs, alcohol, and sex has never been challenged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
originalpckelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:12 AM
Response to Original message
3. Like I said before, the SCOTUS has been doing bong hits for tyranny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zabet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
5. I want 7 bumper stickers...
to put on our construction crew trucks. I want it on a banner to hang off of my front porch. I want to see it on bill boards across the nation. I want to see the people of America not take this crap anymore.
Meanwhile....I will do plenty of bong hits....for whomever I please!
:smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondThePale Donating Member (895 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
6. WWJS - what would jesus smoke (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
7. Perhaps "Placidyl Popping for Prophets" would have gotten a more favorable ruling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philosoraptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Torture Muslims for Jesus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
9. I'll do one for him now
This one's for you Big J. Gurgle gurgle gurgle....whooosh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philosoraptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Cough! Cough! Hack! Hack! Holy Jesus!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
11. What is this going to do to the Fred Phelps organization?
If we can't say Bong Hits 4 Jesus, then can the Phelps's still say that God hates Fags?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philosoraptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. God Hates Bongs.
YES, you can say God hates fags, but you just can't BE one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. It's so hard to keep this "straight!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burythehatchet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #13
54. God hates DIRTY bongs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eppur_se_muova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #11
49. Apparently, there's been some confusion ... it turns out God hates FAQ's. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #49
53. Oh no! They'll be up all night at the Phelps estate.
LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
12. MEANWHILE, Justice Hypocrite Liar Roberts stated, re: Corporate political ads:
The chief justice said these ads involve ''core political speech,'' which is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. ''We give the benefit of the doubt to speech, not censorship,'' Roberts said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #12
38. Unless it involves, sex, drugs, or Jay-Zuss. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnInLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
15. Think about what poster IanDB1 said in the first comment
What if kids (and others, but mainly young people) EVERYWHERE at all events held up this same banner, indicating that they protest leaving their civil rights at the door when they become public school students. The banner message would change from a "drug" message to a "we are citizens too" message. I would like to see, somehow, kids all over the country demonstrating with this banner at every event....it would drive the RW absolutely crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
17. I'd rather have a bong hit with Jesus, but I'll settle for just a bong hit. - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philosoraptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Let Him get His own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #18
22. His bowl runnith over, so keep it on the table, not the rug. - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philosoraptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Remember His trick with the 2 fishes & loaves?
I wish He could do that with the half ounce I have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. I'd follow someone like that anywhere. At least, until I passed out. - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philosoraptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. Not to mention turning water into wine, I want Him at my party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. I think everyone did. That's how He got so popular in the first place. - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lies and propaganda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #23
40. there is a hysterical Frankie May joke about
hanging out with Jesus and having him turn his stems and seeds into pounds of kind bud ;) Indeed!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
20. Just to maintain my reputation as a nitpicker
This is not a free speech issue. It is a children's rights issue. And children do not have the same rights as adults. Especially when in school. A school can squash many of a child's rights while they are under their care. Just as a student cannot hold up a sign endorsing drug use in school they cannot hold up a sign declaring God hates fags in school.

Now if this kid were protesting outside the Westboro Baptist Church he would not have gotten into trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philosoraptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. Yeah, but we can still offer burnt offerings to Christ right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Az Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #21
34. That bit gets me every time
If you read the bible you quickly come to the conclusion that God likes the smell of burning goats and other critters. I am pretty certain he will maintain whatever odor he considers pleasant in heaven. Which of course means that Heaven is going to smell like burnt goats. And this is the good place?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #20
33. I do think it is hilarious
that the Religious Right has been shitting themselves about this issue because it might limit their kids from telling everyone that god hates fags.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
25. Hmmm.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JacquesMolay Donating Member (413 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 10:00 AM
Response to Original message
29. Hey, I'm a literalist. Jesus really had the munchies ...
... at the last supper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. and don't forget the loaves and fishes
they could have gotten by with the original amount they had but Thomas brought some of the "kind" with him that day and he smoked up the whole hill. Big J had to come up with some more goodies quick so he hit up dad for some supplies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellisonz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #31
50. DA KINE HiTS 4 JESUS!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Da_kine

I'd like to see the Supremes grapple that one.

:smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JacquesMolay Donating Member (413 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #50
57. ja, ja,
,,,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #57
66. What would we do without DA KINE?
"Ey, I no can da kine if you no like da kine, too!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
30. Just had a bad coughing session
I think I'm seeing him now. There's white lights and sparkly things anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftHander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
39. self delete
Edited on Tue Jun-26-07 02:00 PM by LeftHander


hehehe And the kid would of been hired and become a spocksman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Balbus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
41. That's just as good a reason as any to take a hit.
Sign me up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dave From Canada Donating Member (932 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
45. How about bong hits for Allah?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadowknows69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. Sure
Bonghits for Snuffelupagus for all I care. Any excuse. B-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dave From Canada Donating Member (932 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #48
51. Sweet!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philosoraptor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-26-07 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
52. Oh wow man, I was gonna type something but forgot what it wuz.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-27-07 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
65. WWJS? What would Jesus smoke?
:smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC