The last refuge of a liberal

[DarrinS]

:clap

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/26/AR2010082605233.html





Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the "bitter" people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging "to guns or religion or" -- this part is less remembered -- "antipathy toward people who aren't like them."

That's a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry. And promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking.

-- Resistance to the vast expansion of government power, intrusiveness and debt, as represented by the Tea Party movement? Why, racist resentment toward a black president.

-- Disgust and alarm with the federal government's unwillingness to curb illegal immigration, as crystallized in the Arizona law? Nativism.

-- Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? Homophobia.

-- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.

Now we know why the country has become "ungovernable," last year's excuse for the Democrats' failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, homophobic Islamophobes?

Note what connects these issues. In every one, liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion. Majorities -- often lopsided majorities -- oppose President Obama's social-democratic agenda (e.g., the stimulus, Obamacare), support the Arizona law, oppose gay marriage and reject a mosque near Ground Zero.

What's a liberal to do? Pull out the bigotry charge, the trump that preempts debate and gives no credit to the seriousness and substance of the contrary argument. The most venerable of these trumps is, of course, the race card. When the Tea Party arose, a spontaneous, leaderless and perfectly natural (and traditionally American) reaction to the vast expansion of government intrinsic to the president's proudly proclaimed transformational agenda, the liberal commentariat cast it as a mob of angry white yahoos disguising their antipathy to a black president by cleverly speaking in economic terms.

Then came Arizona and S.B. 1070. It seems impossible for the left to believe that people of good will could hold that: (a) illegal immigration should be illegal, (b) the federal government should not hold border enforcement hostage to comprehensive reform, i.e., amnesty, (c) every country has the right to determine the composition of its immigrant population.

As for Proposition 8, is it so hard to see why people might believe that a single judge overturning the will of 7 million voters is an affront to democracy? And that seeing merit in retaining the structure of the most ancient and fundamental of all social institutions is something other than an alleged hatred of gays -- particularly since the opposite-gender requirement has characterized virtually every society in all the millennia until just a few years ago?

And now the mosque near Ground Zero. The intelligentsia is near unanimous that the only possible grounds for opposition is bigotry toward Muslims. This smug attribution of bigotry to two-thirds of the population hinges on the insistence on a complete lack of connection between Islam and radical Islam, a proposition that dovetails perfectly with the Obama administration's pretense that we are at war with nothing more than "violent extremists" of inscrutable motive and indiscernible belief. Those who reject this as both ridiculous and politically correct (an admitted redundancy) are declared Islamophobes, the ad hominem du jour.

It is a measure of the corruption of liberal thought and the collapse of its self-confidence that, finding itself so widely repudiated, it resorts reflexively to the cheapest race-baiting (in a colorful variety of forms). Indeed, how can one reason with a nation of pitchfork-wielding mobs brimming with "antipathy toward people who aren't like them" -- blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims -- a nation that is, as Michelle Obama once put it succinctly, "just downright mean"?

The Democrats are going to get beaten badly in November. Not just because the economy is ailing. And not just because Obama over-read his mandate in governing too far left. But because a comeuppance is due the arrogant elites whose undisguised contempt for the great unwashed prevents them from conceding a modicum of serious thought to those who dare oppose them.

[boutons_deux]

der Kraut Hammer?

:lol a very credible guy to be cririquing liberalism, esp all the straw men and false claims he throws at it.

[Blake]

-- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.

If it's not islamophobia, then what is it?

If the majority of people want to reject a mosque being built near Ground Zero, what does he propose to do about disallowing it?

[DarrinS]

der Kraut Hammer?

:lol a very credible guy to be cririquing liberalism, esp all the straw men and false claims he throws at it.

Oh, the irony of this post.

[TeyshaBlue]

der Kraut Hammer?

:lol a very credible guy to be cririquing liberalism, esp all the straw men and false claims he throws at it.

I thought you would applaud him. He's using your M.O. afterall.

[DarrinS]

If it's not islamophobia, then what is it?




Why do you guys insist on making Krauthammer's point?

[Blake]

Why do you guys insist on making Krauthammer's point?

I'm not making his point.

He's crying that people against the mosque are being called islamophobes.

If they aren't being islamophobic about the mosque, then what is the reason they are crying about it?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

"Liberalism" has been hijacked and it's amazing people don't know what it means. The idiots that call themselves liberal and the idiots following the idiots tha make policy that are liberal. Liberal means to liberate. "To set free, as from oppression, confinement, or foreign control". Each and everyday our lawmakers take more and more of our God given freedom and liberty and try to make our minds up for us. Just wait til our economy goes tit up.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Why do you guys insist on making Krauthammer's point?

Explain to me how it is NOT Islamophobia? After all, any rational person can deduce that 9/11 wasn't the work of the Islam religion but rather extremism. So, if you CAN'T hold Islam responsible and you still insist in doing so, what do you attribute the opposition to the mosque to?

[Cane]

Another dumbass DarrinS topic.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

you know what's truly sad is that this isn't supposed to be a partisan issue. This is not a liberal vs conservative problem. I think we can all understand that people are still hurt about 9/11, but that still doesn't give them carte blanche to be irrational specially with regards to others people's right to practice their religion.

After all, it IS irrational, isn't it? Islam wasn't the culprit of 9/11 so why are these people so intent on blaming them? its a purely emotional response to a very traumatic event, and though I think everyone can empathize, it doesn't make what they are demanding, right.

[Mikesatx]

If it's not islamophobia, then what is it?

If the majority of people want to reject a mosque being built near Ground Zero, what does he propose to do about disallowing it?

There is no other word for it. The more relevant question would be if it is justified. Our country has evolved into this big glob of goo with all of its political correctness. Too many feel a certain way but don't voice it because of fear of being labeled racist. Virtually every major terrorist threat whether attempted or successfully completed with the exception of Oklahoma City had one thing in common--- Attackers faith rooted in Islam. Unfortunately Muslims don't where signs that say I want to kill you. I have friends that are Muslim and I think they are good people. If any of them were to become radicalized I am fairly certain they wouldn't give me a heads up.

That being said the mosque should be allowed for no other reason than it is what we stand for.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

There is no other word for it. The more relevant question would be if it is justified. Our country has evolved into this big glob of goo with all of its political correctness. Too many feel a certain way but don't voice it because of fear of being labeled racist. Virtually every major terrorist threat whether attempted or successfully completed with the exception of Oklahoma City had one thing in common--- Attackers faith rooted in Islam. Unfortunately Muslims don't where signs that say I want to kill you. I have friends that are Muslim and I think they are good people. If any of them were to become radicalized I am fairly certain they wouldn't give me a heads up.

Is it your contention that every Muslim out there is a racial extremist waiting to happen and in the mean time they masquerade as "good people"?

I'm not certain about this, but I think that could be the very definition of Islamophobia.


That being said the mosque should be allowed for no other reason than it is what we stand for.

That's all well and good, but without understanding why that is what you stand for, that sentence holds no meaning whatsoever.

[Mikesatx]

Is it your contention that every Muslim out there is a racial extremist waiting to happen and in the mean time they masquerade as "good people"?

Not sure how you reach that. There is no mechanism to separate a radical from a non-radical muslim so the question becomes what level of violence on US soil is acceptable in the name of freedom of religion. A WTC attack every 10 years? Does your opinion change if a major city is wiped out? What if it was just your family? In all of the examples your argument would still be valid. These acts are by only a few while the majority are peaceful. Is there any level of violence or destruction that changes your view?

I'm not certain about this, but I think that could be the very definition of Islamophobia.

Re-read the first sentence

That's all well and good, but without understanding why that is what you stand for, that sentence holds no meaning whatsoever.

Freedom of religion--- Freedom of speech--- living tolerantly

The other reply's ended up in your post somehow

[DarrinS]

Is opposition to the Ground Zero mosque Islamophobia if those opposed wouldn't mind it being built 2 miles further away?


I think it is the proximity and scale of the project that has many opposed.


I also think those in charge of development around Ground Zero can share some of the blame for taking so long to develop an appropriate site to commemorate that tragedy.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Not sure how you reach that. There is no mechanism to separate a radical from a non-radical muslim so the question becomes what level of violence on US soil is acceptable in the name of freedom of religion. A WTC attack every 10 years? Does your opinion change if a major city is wiped out? What if it was just your family? In all of the examples your argument would still be valid. These acts are by only a few while the majority are peaceful. Is there any level of violence or destruction that changes your view?


so you disregard the fact that it isn't Muslim religion that is the culprit but extremists and choose to let your irrational fear dictate actions you know are morally reprehensible, just so you feel better?

are you joking?

to answer your question, no amount of violence and destruction should excuse your trampling of another person's freedom of religion. Specially when that person isn't guilty of doing what 'caused you to be afraid in the first place.

Its not Muslim's fault that people are too stupid to tell the difference between Islam the religion and its extremists. Can you tell the difference between Catholic religion and their extremists? If so, why can't you do it with Muslims?

[Blake]

Is opposition to the Ground Zero mosque Islamophobia if those opposed wouldn't mind it being built 2 miles further away?


I think it is the proximity and scale of the project that has many opposed.

But they still mind it being built where it is supposed to be built?

If it's not Islamophobia, then what is the reason for being opposed to it?


I also think those in charge of development around Ground Zero can share some of the blame for taking so long to develop an appropriate site to commemorate that tragedy.

You are trying to pass the blame along to someone else for other people's Islamophobia? :lol

[George Gervin's Afro]

But they still mind it being built where it is supposed to be built?

If it's not Islamophobia, then what is the reason for being opposed to it?



You are trying to pass the blame along to someone else for other people's Islamophobia? :lol

Bingo

[DarrinS]

But they still mind it being built where it is supposed to be built?

If it's not Islamophobia, then what is the reason for being opposed to it?




It's too close and too big.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Is opposition to the Ground Zero mosque Islamophobia if those opposed wouldn't mind it being built 2 miles further away?


No shit, that still doesn't change things. People are willfully holding Islam responsible for what extremism did. Either because they don't understand there's a difference or because they just don't give a fuck. Either way, its not right.

I don't care if its the distance, the scale or the fucking colour. People had no right to demand anything from the builders of this mosque under the guise of fragile sensibilities since it wasn't Islam the religion the culprit of the 9/11 attacks.

[clambake]

funny how people want to drive them underground and out of sight, instead of being able to see them.

knuckledragger logic.

[Blake]

It's too close and too big.

Right, people have been Islamophobic because it's too close and too big to Ground Zero for their personal tastes.

Now what do these people propose to do about getting it shut down because of their own insecurities?

[Spurminator]

DarrinS is the very embodiment of "doth protest too much."

[George Gervin's Afro]

It's too close and too big.

Translation muslims struck on 911 and darrins doesn't want a muslim worship center near ground zero

[Spurminator]

Is opposition to the Ground Zero mosque Islamophobia if those opposed wouldn't mind it being built 2 miles further away?

You mean, like Brooklyn?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Freedom of religion. Ha. This isn't a freedom of religion issue. Pull your head out of your ass.

[Mikesatx]

so you disregard the fact that it isn't Muslim religion that is the culprit but extremists and choose to let your irrational fear dictate actions you know are morally reprehensible, just so you feel better?

What actions am I advocating? The original post asked the question if Islamaphobia is justified? I listed reasons why it is. I also ended the post saying the mosque should be built based on the great freedoms that our constitution provides.

are you joking?

to answer your question, no amount of violence and destruction should excuse your trampling of another person's freedom of religion. Specially when that person isn't guilty of doing what 'caused you to be afraid in the first place.

Congratulations on you tolerance. Assuming one can not identify the difference between the radical and non-radical--- a safe assumption considering if we could we wouldn't have any issues, you can take two positions. Err on the side of freedom and tolerance and take whatever that may bring or err on the side of intolerance and protect those closest to you. It is clear where you stand. I am not as sure.

Its not Muslim's fault that people are too stupid to tell the difference between Islam the religion and its extremists. Can you tell the difference between Catholic religion and their extremists? If so, why can't you do it with Muslims?

This alludes that you can or someone can tell the difference. Again if that is the case there is no issue.

[DarrinS]

German mosque of 9/11 hijackers shut down.

Gawt damn Islamophobes. I'm sure not every Muslim that prayed there was a terrorist.


http://www.examiner.ie/world/german-mosque-of-911-hijackers-shut-down-127419.html






GERMAN police yesterday shut down a mosque in Hamburg frequented by suicide hijackers from the September 11, 2001 attacks and suspected of recruiting jihadists, authorities said.


An affiliated cultural centre called Taiba was also banned.

"Hamburg must not become a cradle of violent Islamists," said the city-state’s chief interior affairs official, Christoph Ahlhaus.

"We closed the Taiba mosque today because young men were converted to religious fanatics there. A purported cultural association shamelessly exploited the freedoms of our democratic state under the rule of law to recruit for holy war behind the scenes". (that's interesting)

Three of the September 11 hijackers including their ringleader Mohammed Atta, who piloted the first plane into New York’s World Trade Centre, met regularly at the mosque before moving to the US.

Authorities said the prayer house, in the multiethnic Sankt Georg district, had served for several years as a recruitment centre for Islamic extremists, including accomplices of the hijackers, and offered logistical and financial assistance to militants.

Ahlhaus said Taiba had a sophisticated programme of courses, sermons, seminars and online publications to whip up hatred of "non-believers".

"We do not tolerate organisations that are levelled against the constitutional order and the idea of understanding between cultures in an aggressive, militant way," he said.

[Spurminator]

Nice! Another redirection!

So what does a mosque suspected of recruiting terrorists have to do with the lower Manhattan mosque, Darrin?

Great comparison. I can't understand why anyone would think you're an Islamaphobe.

[George Gervin's Afro]

German mosque of 9/11 hijackers shut down.

Gawt damn Islamophobes. I'm sure not every Muslim that prayed there was a terrorist.


http://www.examiner.ie/world/german-mosque-of-911-hijackers-shut-down-127419.html

We're not germany. Maybe you should move

[MaNuMaNiAc]

This alludes that you can or someone can tell the difference. Again if that is the case there is no issue.

oh that's brilliant

so because you're paranoid, Muslims should suffer the inconvenience of having to relocate to make you and people like you feel better?

Do you not see how that is wrong? you would if it was being done to you I'd bet.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Freedom of religion. Ha. This isn't a freedom of religion issue. Pull your head out of your ass.

It most definitely is. The fact you don't see that just reinforces the belief that people protesting don't understand what freedom of religion is. You don't think dictating limits to where people can privately practice their religion is a violation of their rights??

[George Gervin's Afro]

It most definitely is. The fact you don't see that just reinforces the belief that people protesting don't understand what freedom of religion is. You don't think dictating limits to where people can privately practice their religion is a violation of their rights??

Its insensitive....good enough for me

[Spurminator]

I can see how those who support its legality while still feeling it's inappropriate could say it's not a freedom of religion issue. What's funny is when they whine about being called prejudiced.

[Blake]

Authorities said the prayer house, in the multiethnic Sankt Georg district, had served for several years as a recruitment centre for Islamic extremists, including accomplices of the hijackers, and offered logistical and financial assistance to militants.


http://www.examiner.ie/world/german-mosque-of-911-hijackers-shut-down-127419.html

So is this what you and the other Islamophobes are afraid will happen in NY?

I'm not arguing......just asking. Thus the question mark at the end of the sentence.

[Winehole23]

Freedom of religion. Ha. This isn't a freedom of religion issue. Ok, property rights then.

[Parker2112]

As if Repugs aren't under siege from every direction, including the resistance of tea partiers from within the RIGHT

for everyone that boils it down to partisan lines...
http://picdump.darph.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/sisko-facepalm.jpg

[Parker2112]

how you like that snare, WH?

[Winehole23]

As if Repugs aren't under siege from every direction, including the resistance of tea partiers from within the RIGHT

Is a sentence fragment.

[Parker2112]

Is a sentence fragment.
:jack

[Winehole23]

20 pt lettering and facepalm don't make your sentence fragment any more impressive.

[Parker2112]

:rollin

[Parker2112]

20 pt lettering and facepalm don't make your sentence fragment any more impressive.

it does need to be any more impressive than it is.

The 20 pt. font just draws attention to the truth :king

[Parker2112]

the point is, both parties have fucked the American public. If you want to bash the opposing political party you might as well be this guy
http://www.allfunnypictures.com/images2/shortshorts.jpg

[Parker2112]

the point is, both parties have fucked the American public. If you want to bash the opposing political party you might as well be this guy, DarrinS...
http://www.allfunnypictures.com/images2/shortshorts.jpg

[Winehole23]

If they don't agree, gaybait em.

[Winehole23]

That's class, m8

[Parker2112]

the point is, DarrinS is this guy
http://www.allfunnypictures.com/images2/shortshorts.jpg

[Parker2112]

If they don't agree, gaybait em.


:lmao

Whatever gets the message out, hoss...

http://www.williamsmith.org/Hoss%201.jpg

[Winehole23]

How bush. It's moments like this that have me convinced you're only 8-12 years old.

[Parker2112]

How bush. It's moments like this that have me convinced you're only 8-12 years old.

Im in an extremely good mood sir. Gaybaits to all :toast

[Winehole23]

Fuck your day.

[Parker2112]

Fuck your day.

Parker seal of "Thanks"
:sleep

[Winehole23]

No doubt, trolldoll.

[DarrinS]

Keith Olbermann has the "last refuge of a liberal" down to an art form:

"In Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, tea bagging supporter of violence against women and against politicians with whom he disagrees."

[Winehole23]

Too bad it's your first resort.

[DarrinS]

Too bad it's your first resort.

I may disagree with you politically, but I don't think you're a biggot, racist, homophobe, Islamophobe, xenophobe, etc.

See, it's not that hard.

[DMX7]

It's not our fault you Repugs are bigots. What's ironic is that many of you homophobic Repugs are closet homosexuals... lol Ken Mehlman.

[balli]

Too bad it's your first resort.

:tu

[Winehole23]

I habitually accuse others of being biggot, racist, homophobe, Islamophobe, xenophobe, etc.

See, it's not that hard.Fify.

[Parker2112]

http://www.allfunnypictures.com/images2/shortshorts.jpg

pull em out DarrinS! :rollin

[DarrinS]

Fify.


Can you link one example where I accuse someone of being a racist?

I'll wait.

[Winehole23]

It wasn't funny the first time and certainly does not bear repeated viewing. Please stop milking your own post, Parker.

[Parker2112]

Can you link one example where I accuse someone of being a racist?

I'll wait.

comeonyoucantbeserious.

[Spurminator]

Look, if it bothers you so much then quit having racist, anti-gay and Islamophobic positions on everything.

[Parker2112]

It wasn't funny the first time and certainly does not bear repeated viewing. Please stop milking your own post, Parker.

thats about as serious as DarrinS needs to be taken. Im sorry you feel the need to debate this guy, but I would rather make a joke of him myself...even moreso than is already the case. :downspin:

[DarrinS]

It's not our fault you Repugs are bigots. What's ironic is that many of you homophobic Repugs are closet homosexuals... lol Ken Mehlman.


Yeah, there's a really big uproar about Ken Mehlman's "outing". :rolleyes

Even the New York Times admits as much.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/us/politics/27mehlman.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

[Parker2112]

It wasn't funny the first time and certainly does not bear repeated viewing. Please stop milking your own post, Parker.

that shit is REAL FUGGIN FUNNY, sir :lol

[Winehole23]

Can you link one example where I accuse someone of being a racist?

I'll wait.If you lack the self-awareness, I think I'd rather deny you the satisfaction of having it spelled out for you.

[DarrinS]

Im sorry you feel the need to debate this guy, but I would rather make a joke of myself...even moreso than is already the case. :downspin:

Fify

[Winehole23]

You are ST's #1 racebaiter. It wasn't even a contest.

[DarrinS]

If you lack the self-awareness, I think I'd rather deny you the satisfaction of having it spelled out for you.


Can't find one, can you?

[DarrinS]

You are ST's #1 racebaiter. It's wasn't even a contest.


Calling out race-baiters doen't a race-baiter make.

[Winehole23]

I'll stand by what I said.

[Parker2112]

Can't find one, can you?

ohshitthisdudeisawasteofgoodoxygenwhydoesWHcontinu eengagingtheguywhowearsteenietinyshorties

[Winehole23]

Can't find one, can you?Haven't bothered to look yet.

[Winehole23]

Calling out race-baiters doen't a race-baiter make.You introduce it where it isn't really germane. With regularity.

[boutons_deux]

"Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed."

stars off with false bullshit right there. Who is siege-ing liberalism?

> Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people.

says who? WTF is he talking about?


> That's a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry.

Repugs and conservatives and wealthy are genetically bigots. What's the problem? :lol


>> Resistance to the vast expansion of government power, intrusiveness and debt, as represented by the Tea Party movement? Why, racist resentment toward a black president.

yes, the Tea Party is effectively old, male, WHITE, and it reeks of racism and bigotry.


> Disgust and alarm with the federal government's unwillingness to curb illegal immigration, as crystallized in the Arizona law? Nativism.

seems like there wasn't any disgust and alarm for 8 years while the Repugs/conservatives did nothing about illegal immigration. Could professional/financed agitators be using illegal immigration to rouse the rabble, the racist/xenophoic bubbas? nah, never.

> Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? Homophobia.

yes, homophobia. absolutely no other explanation.


>> Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.

would 1 story be acceptable? :lol Yes, blatant Islamaphobia by "Christian" haters, again stirred up by Repugs and Fox Repug Propaganda network as mid-term campaign tactic.

> Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, homophobic Islamophobes?

--- it's fucking hard, thanks to obstructionist/"destructivist" Repugs and the VRWC.

Note what connects these issues. In every one, liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion.

> stimulus

Repugs hated it, but claim credit for it, absolutely love it, when the $$$ falls in their states, districts, and balance their budgets

> support the Arizona law

the law is illegal and will be struck down. the public doesn't make laws or judge laws.

> oppose gay marriage

most Americans don't care anymore, and more support it than oppose it.


> reject a mosque near Ground Zero.

it's not a mosque. It's a prayer room in a communtiy center. CK is part of the right-wing lying megaphone.

> The Democrats are going to get beaten badly in November. Not just because the economy is ailing.

Liar. The Repugs have done everything they can to keep the most number of Americans in the most economic pain for the Repugs electoral advantage. "It's The Economy, Stupid"

[Parker2112]

http://zef.me/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/funny-cat.jpg

nothing to see here...

[Winehole23]

http://www.odeasauctionroom.nfld.net/nov2006/Antique%20hobby%20horse.JPG

[Parker2112]

http://www.dailyblush.com/images/embarrassing_boner.jpg

"in 'da bone zone..."

[rjv]

thanks for the post on how not to ever present an argument. it can be presented to a 101 philosophy class so that they can all take turns picking out the few sentences that are not fallacies (which would be a quicker task than identifying each and every one of them)

[Parker2112]

http://www.dailyblush.com/images/embarrassing_boner.jpg

"in 'da bone zone..."

:rollin

[Winehole23]

an edit to the OP would've been more elegant. instead you just keep milking it.

[Parker2112]

an edit to the OP would've been more elegant. instead you just keep milking it.

call it my recurring ridicule of the OP'er and the premise of the OP. :wakeup

some things dont rise to the level of requiring debate. in such cases they get kittens and boners. :hat

[Winehole23]

call it my recurring ridicule of the OP'er and the premise of the OP. :wakeupJust don't recur the images please. Trust me, it's a turn off. Try to rest content with just posting them in the first place.

[Winehole23]

Fuck your day, Parker.

[Parker2112]

the OP is about as valid as a career senator turning to a welfare recipient and telling them "your bankrupting our nation."

pot calling the kettle, and all that.

and to argue the point just provides it undue cred.

Enjoy!
http://pure-essence.net/stuff/ICHC/funny-pictures-15-cents-stop.jpg

[Parker2112]

Fuck your day, Parker.

this presumes that your typing words into a forum thread can affect my mood or my day.

Neither of which can you do sir.

You are Better of doing this exercise:
- At Lunch Time, Sit In Your Parked Car With Sunglasses on and Focus on Passing Cars. See If They Slow Down.

[Winehole23]

Your OP brainiac. The first time you posted the boner pic? The one you milked? Member?

[Winehole23]

this presumes that your typing words into a forum thread can affect my mood or my day.

Neither of which can you do sir.I meant: (You) fuck your day. You're fucking your day.


You are Better of doing this exercise:
- At Lunch Time, Sit In Your Parked Car With Sunglasses on and Focus on Passing Cars. See If They Slow Down.I'm sitting in front of this monitor with sunglasses on. I'm clearly better at this exercise.

[Parker2112]

The first time you posted the boner pic?

dont remind me :lmao

[Winehole23]

Why not? You loved it so much you had to post it twice.

[Parker2112]

I meant: (You) fuck your day. You're fucking your day..

Ive had a blast. funny pics on the internet are always a gas.


I'm sitting in front of this monitor with sunglasses on. I'm clearly better at this exercise.

You didnt slow my car...I stopped to get traffic moving again.

nothing to see here.:wakeup

[Parker2112]

Why not? You loved it so much you had to post it twice.

Yes indeed, and now the thread is littered with boners.





























:lmao

[Blake]

God please let it end somewhere.

[Winehole23]

You didnt slow my car...I stopped to get traffic moving again.

nothing to see here.:wakeupNo, I didn't:

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/trial_balloon/car%20cubes.jpg


Traffic jam

[Parker2112]

No, I didn't:

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/trial_balloon/car%20cubes.jpg

can anyone spot the boner here?

[Winehole23]

@Blake:

Oh what a difference a day makes! :lol:toast

[Parker2112]

hope everyone got a kick out of the net humor.

[DarrinS]

Tea Party Spells KKK, Rights Leader Says

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/tea-party-compared-kkk-rev-walter-fauntroy/story?id=11489233&page=2




A civil rights activist and former congressman equated the Tea Party with the Ku Klux Klan today as he blasted a conservative rally planned in Washington, D.C., this weekend.

The Rev. Walter Fauntroy, the non-voting delegate who represented the District of Columbia from 1971 to 1991, called on African-Americans to organize a "new coalition of conscience" to rebut the rally scheduled for Saturday at the Lincoln Memorial featuring Fox News pundit Glenn Beck and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

"We are going to take on the barbarism of war, the decadence of racism, and the scourge of poverty, that the Ku Klux -- I meant to say the Tea Party," Fauntroy told a news conference today at the National Press Club. "You all forgive me, but I -- you have to use them interchangeably."

Fauntroy attempted to explain the comparison to white supremacists by saying that organizers behind the "Restoring Honor" rally are the same people who cut audio cables from a sound system the night before the historic March on Washington and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech at the Lincoln Memorial.

"The same people who cut the cables on the night before the march, that we paid $66,000 for a sound system, they cut it," Fauntroy said. "Now from Fox News and elsewhere, they are seeking to turn the world back."

Fauntroy, who is credited as one of the chief organizers of the March on Washington, remembers Aug. 28, 1963, as the "most important date of the 20th century."

The "Restoring Honor" rally, organized by the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, coincides with the anniversary of the historic March on Washington and the "I Have a Dream" speech. Organizers have said the conflicting date was a coincidence and not a deliberate display of disrespect.

Fauntroy said right-wing conservatives have "declared war on the civil rights movement of the 1960s" that brought together a Coalition of Conscience for a march on jobs and freedom in 1963. He called for a new Coalition of Conscience rally on the Mall in August 2012.

"I don't want you to think I'm angry," Fauntroy said. "[But] when this right-wing conservative exclusionary group comes to highjack our movement, we have got to respond. And I'm looking forward to that Coalition of Conscience, in defense of jobs and freedom for women."

Fauntroy is the pastor emeritus of New Bethel Baptist Church in Washington. He's also a founding member and early chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus. He also ran for the Democratic nomination for president in 1972 and 1976, although he only competed in the D.C. primary, winning in 1972 and losing to Jimmy Carter in 1976.

The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice -- composed of African-America leaders in religion, civil rights, law, medicine and women's health -- addressed at today's news conference what it called "baseless and inflammatory assertions" about reproductive health services in black communities.

The coalition says a growing billboard campaign targeting black women sparked outrage among the African-American leaders for claiming that black children are an "endangered species" because of high rates of unintended pregnancies, teen births, HIV-AIDS infections and abortions.

"[The campaign] jeopardizes the health of women who use these services, insults the intelligence and guidance of African-Americans and is offensive to women who make conscious, moral decisions about pregnancy," the Rev. Carlton Veazey, coalition president, said.

"Right-to-life and other right-wing organizations started this irresponsible and offensive campaign to make inroads into African-American communities to promote their own agenda and ultimately overturn Roe v. Wade," the 1973 landmark Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

The Rev. Timothy McDonald, pastor of the First Iconium Baptist Church in Atlanta, said it is imperative that black communities not allow "the radical religious right to try to rewrite history and redefine history and redefine the freedom movement.

"To use this weekend when we remember that great March on Washington in 1963 as a pretense to give credence to their cause and their agenda is insulting," McDonald said. "Some of us were there. We were there. And we walked the walk and talked the talk and we will not sit idly by and allow any -- in the name of Dr. King -- to become historical distractions."

[ChumpDumper]

Who?

[Winehole23]

The tea party tag is misleading. Fauntroy more takes offense at Glenn Beck's appropriation of MLK imagery.

[DarrinS]

The tea party tag is misleading. Fauntroy more takes offense at Glenn Beck's appropriation of MLK imagery.





"We are going to take on the barbarism of war, the decadence of racism, and the scourge of poverty, that the Ku Klux -- I meant to say the Tea Party," Fauntroy told a news conference today at the National Press Club. "You all forgive me, but I -- you have to use them interchangeably."

[Winehole23]

That's the cry to arms here: Glenn Beck has likened the significance of his Washington DC event this month, to a number of things including...MLK.

Ghandi was in there somewhere. Who else?

[ChumpDumper]

I had never heard of this guy before Darrin posted an article.

I doubt Darrin ever had either.

[Winehole23]

Fair enough, D. It would seem I am less familiar with Fauntroy than yourself.

[ChumpDumper]

That's the cry to arms here: Glenn Beck has likened the significance of his Washington DC event this month, to a number of things including...MLK.

Ghandi was in there somewhere. Who else?Jesus and that guy from Network.

[Blake]

We are going to take on the barbarism of war, the decadence of racism, and the scourge of poverty, that the Ku Klux -- I meant to say the Tea Party," Fauntroy told a news conference today at the National Press Club. "You all forgive me, but I -- you have to use them interchangeably."

Fauntroy attempted to explain the comparison to white supremacists by saying that organizers behind the "Restoring Honor" rally are the same people who cut audio cables from a sound system the night before the historic March on Washington and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech at the Lincoln Memorial.

"The same people who cut the cables on the night before the march, that we paid $66,000 for a sound system, they cut it," Fauntroy said. "Now from Fox News and elsewhere, they are seeking to turn the world back."


No wonder Darrin appreciates this story. It comes complete with a strawman.

[Winehole23]

He seems to take a very broad view of who his enemy is, much like you, D.

[Winehole23]

Jesus and that guy from Network.Howard Beale.

[rjv]

so the inference darrin has made is that one civil rights leader equals liberalism, which is hanging on the precipe of desperation because they have been reduced to the use of broad generalizations such as the ones this 'leader' has made . maybe darrin really does not believe that generalizations about an ideological group based on specious reasoning is all that egregious after all.

hmmmm...

[DarrinS]

No wonder Darrin appreciates this story. It comes complete with a strawman.

How so?

[DarrinS]

so the inference darrin has made is that one civil rights leader equals liberalism, which is hanging on the precipe of desperation because they have been reduced to the use of broad generalizations such as the ones this 'leader' has made . maybe darrin really does not believe that generalizations about an ideological group based on specious reasoning is all that egregious after all.

hmmmm...



Yeah, the entire thread is about ONE person playing the race card. :rolleyes

[FromWayDowntown]

Surely the author isn't a constitutionalist in any sense, given his willingness to subjugate the exercise of constitutionally-protected rights to the whim of majority votes.

[Parker2112]

How bout them Spurs!

:lobt2:

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, the entire thread is about ONE person playing the race card. :rolleyesYes, that person is DarrinS.

[Winehole23]

(burp)

[DarrinS]

Yes, that person is DarrinS.


It must be frustrating to keep throwing that shit, hoping in vain that it will stick. It's the same frustration that the left must be feeling by continually throwing out charges of biggotry, whilst the economy collapses and The One's approval and party crumbles.

[DarrinS]

Surely the author isn't a constitutionalist in any sense, given his willingness to subjugate the exercise of constitutionally-protected rights to the whim of majority votes.


First intelligent post in this thread.

[Blake]

How so?

it might be a loose strawman, but the reverend propped up the organizers of the Tea Party (whoever that might be), Fox News and elsewhere (wherever that might be) as being bad guys.

Apparently to him, they are the same ones that cut the cord on Dr. King's $66k sound system and are seeking to turn the world back.

[Winehole23]

(burp)

[rjv]

Yeah, the entire thread is about ONE person playing the race card. :rolleyes

the title of your thread is about an ideological group becoming desperate to the point that they have been reduced to making generalizations regarding other ideological groups based on random samples. and then you go on to offer articles guilty of the very same habit.

the entire thread is just one big generalization.

[Blake]

Yeah, the entire thread is about ONE person playing the race card. :rolleyes

In addition to you, who else do you think is palying the race card

[Winehole23]

First intelligent post in this thread.Only dummies say shit like that. But I salute your balls for insulting the intelligence of all the other posters in this thread beside FWD, all at once. :toast

[Winehole23]

You're a bs propagator, Darrin. Now you wanna be the umpire for the whole conversation. Hilarious.

[DarrinS]

In addition to you,

That's still not working.




who else do you think is palying the race card

Seriously? In the last two years, you haven't heard anyone on the left using charges of biggotry to smear their political opponents? Have you been living under a rock?

[Parker2112]

:deadhorse

[Parker2112]

and the horse is DarrinS.

[Winehole23]

Still not talking to the only guy who had anything intelligent to say. Why am i not surprised?

[DarrinS]

Only dummies say shit like that. But I salute your balls for insulting the intelligence of all the other posters in this thread beside FWD, all at once. :toast

Well, so far, all responses have either

a) reinforced Krauthammer's thesis
b) accuse me of playing the race card
c) retarded photos that have no relation to the OP

[Blake]

That's still not working.

What's not working?


Seriously? In the last two years, you haven't heard anyone on the left using charges of biggotry to smear their political opponents? Have you been living under a rock?

in. this. thread.

who is playing race cards?

[Parker2112]

...
c) retarded photos that contribute some value to this worthless thread, even if that value is limited to a chuckle

:toast

[Parker2112]

glad I could help!

[Winehole23]

(burp)

[DarrinS]

What's not working?


You're accusing me race baiting.




in. this. thread.

who is playing race cards?


Krauthammer's OpEd is not about people in this thread. Or, did I misinterpret it?

[Parker2112]

XFRgZjviGA8

worth the watch!

[ChumpDumper]

It must be frustrating to keep throwing that shit, hoping in vain that it will stick.Nah, it sticks. You play the race card.


It's the same frustration that the left must be feeling by continually throwing out charges of biggotry, whilst the economy collapses and The One's approval and party crumbles.Well, you have proved yourself a bigot as well.

I don't give much of a crap about the Democratic party or Obama's approval rating. Sorry to disappoint you.

And the economy "collapsed" a couple of years ago. Thanks for noticing.

[Blackjack]

Krauthammer's both right and wrong.

Right in that the lemmings result to name-calling and dismissing an opposing viewpoint, whilst claiming to be liberal, open-minded thinkers; wrong in believeing the mosque/community center shouldn't be built.

You should never do the right thing for the wrong reasons.

You allow the mosque to be built because it's the right thing to do. They have a right to build it. And even if that allows Islamic extremists to claim some kind of victory or puff out their chests as a good ol' F-U to the States, it's still the right thing to do. And you certainly don't allow it to be built on account of some kind of feared potential perception from the outside world -- the US may lead and need to set the standard but make no mistake, America does still lead and provide the freest most tolerant country there is. Last I checked, America wasn't stoning people and punishing crimes (including homosexuality, promiscuity and religious "failings") eye-for-an-eye or withholding the most basic rights for women and minorities.

One's personal morals/values/insensitivities don't always coincide with doing the right thing. The right thing is always the right thing, regardless of repercussion or consequence. But at the same time, just as morals/values/insensitivities don't always fall on the "right" side, neither do legal ones. Neither legality or morality can be lumped into the "right" category. There are always exceptions.

But this comes to what this country was founded on and the reason for the initial colonization: freedom of religion; freedom period.

If all the legal measures have been taken and met qualification for the mosque/community center, then it stands to reason they should have the right to build.

You don't have to like it or believe it's not in poor taste ... but it is the "right" thing to do.

[Blake]

piece that includes race baiting, homosexual baiting, and Islamophobe baiting:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/26/AR2010082605233.html


:clap

[ChumpDumper]

lol "whilst"

[DarrinS]

Krauthammer's both right and wrong.

Right in that the lemmings result to name-calling and dismissing an opposing viewpoint, whilst claiming to be liberal, open-minded thinkers; wrong in believeing the mosque/community center shouldn't be built.

You should never do the right thing for the wrong reasons.

You allow the mosque to be built because it's the right thing to do. They have a right to build it. And even if that allows Islamic extremists to claim some kind of victory or puff out their chests as a good ol' F-U to the States, it's still the right thing to do. And you certainly don't allow it to be built on account of some kind of feared potential perception from the outside world -- the US may lead and need to set the standard but make no mistake, America does still lead and provide the freest most tolerant country there is. Last I checked, America wasn't stoning people and punishing crimes (including homosexuality, promiscuity and religious "failings") eye-for-an-eye or withholding the most basic rights for women and minorities.

One's personal morals/values/insensitivities don't always coincide with doing the right thing. The right thing is always the right thing, regardless of repercussion or consequence. But at the same time, just as morals/values/insensitivities don't always fall on the "right" side, neither do legal ones. Neither legality or morality can be lumped into the "right" category. There are always exceptions.

But this comes to what this country was founded on and the reason for the initial colonization: freedom of religion; freedom period.

If all the legal measures have been taken and met qualification for the mosque/community center, then it stands to reason they should have the right to build.

You don't have to like it or believe it's not in poor taste ... but it is the "right" thing to do.

:toast

[Blake]

Krauthammer's both right and wrong.

Right in that the lemmings result to name-calling and dismissing an opposing viewpoint, whilst claiming to be liberal, open-minded thinkers; wrong in believeing the mosque/community center shouldn't be built.


what do you personally think the reason is that people don't want the mosque to be built near Ground Zero?

[DarrinS]

lol "whilst"

lol ChumpDumper

[boutons_deux]

Yahoo! News, August 12, 2010:

A new CNN poll has found that most Americans think gays and lesbians should have a constitutional right to get married. . . . As polling-statistics blogger Nate Silver points out, the margin of error [as well as the poll's status as the first to find majority approval] means we can't assume that a majority of Americans support gay marriage, but it is "no longer safe to say that opposition to same-sex marriage is the majority position . . . . "

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/27/krauthammer/index.html

====

(at least one) Big Lie from Krauthammer

[Parker2112]

lol kitten sommersaults!

[rjv]

Krauthammer's both right and wrong.

Right in that the lemmings result to name-calling and dismissing an opposing viewpoint, whilst claiming to be liberal, open-minded thinkers;

so then they are just lemmings. since, darrin saluted your post he should rename this thread : "the last refuge of a lemming"

[DarrinS]

Yahoo! News, August 12, 2010:

A new CNN poll has found that most Americans think gays and lesbians should have a constitutional right to get married. . . . As polling-statistics blogger Nate Silver points out, the margin of error [as well as the poll's status as the first to find majority approval] means we can't assume that a majority of Americans support gay marriage, but it is "no longer safe to say that opposition to same-sex marriage is the majority position . . . . "

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/08/27/krauthammer/index.html

====

(at least one) Big Lie from Krauthammer



It would be a lie if Krauthammer actually said that.



As for Proposition 8, is it so hard to see why people might believe that a single judge overturning the will of 7 million voters is an affront to democracy? And that seeing merit in retaining the structure of the most ancient and fundamental of all social institutions is something other than an alleged hatred of gays -- particularly since the opposite-gender requirement has characterized virtually every society in all the millennia until just a few years ago?

[Blake]

so then they are just lemmings.

apparently Blackjack "results" to name-calling as well.

[LnGrrrR]

It's too close and too big.

You damn Muslims aren't a real religion, like Christianity.

Now, if you want to build a proper Christian church, go ahead. Make it as big as you want. This is God's country after all.

[DarrinS]

You damn Muslims aren't a real religion, like Christianity.

Now, if you want to build a proper Christian church, go ahead. Make it as big as you want. This is God's country after all.

:rolleyes

[Blake]

You damn Muslims aren't a real religion, like Christianity.


Those damn Muslims are a scary religion, unlike peaceful Christianity.

[LnGrrrR]

German mosque of 9/11 hijackers shut down.

Gawt damn Islamophobes. I'm sure not every Muslim that prayed there was a terrorist.


http://www.examiner.ie/world/german-mosque-of-911-hijackers-shut-down-127419.html


"We closed the Taiba mosque today because young men were converted to religious fanatics there. A purported cultural association shamelessly exploited the freedoms of our democratic state under the rule of law to recruit for holy war behind the scenes". (that's interesting)

This makes sense. DarrinS is afraid of terrorists, so he thinks it better to just remove their liberty to have a mosque, just in case. He's just a pussy. I understand better now.

[LnGrrrR]

:rolleyes

Well, you wouldn't have a problem with a big ol' Christian church, right?

[Winehole23]

apparently Blackjack "results" to name-calling as well.Blackjack, eh?

[Blake]

Blackjack, eh?

I do it too for sure. I just wanted to point out the irony in BJ's post. It's so good.

[LnGrrrR]

Well, so far, all responses have either

a) reinforced Krauthammer's thesis
b) accuse me of playing the race card
c) retarded photos that have no relation to the OP

Nothing can reinforce Krauthammer because his articles are always logical failures. This very sentence...



As for Proposition 8, is it so hard to see why people might believe that a single judge overturning the will of 7 million voters is an affront to democracy?


...goes to show how dumb Krauthammer is, or at least, pretends to be. I'm sure he knows that we have a democratic republic, and not a straight democracy. But he plays up the "democracy" angle instead.

And given what he says in the article, one can only conclude that America is at war not with radicals or extremists but all of Islam. Only a fool would conclude this. Krauthammer is a fool.

[Winehole23]

To Darrin, he is a hero.

[LnGrrrR]

I mean, look at this sentence.


But because a comeuppance is due the arrogant elites whose undisguised contempt for the great unwashed prevents them from conceding a modicum of serious thought to those who dare oppose them.

"arrogant elites" "undisguised contempt" "great unwashed" "serious thought" "dare oppose"... .could you fit more trite political tropes/cliches into one sentence?

[Winehole23]

That's an area of relative mastery, cramming in all that horseflop.

[DarrinS]

I mean, look at this sentence.

"arrogant elites" "undisguised contempt" "great unwashed" "serious thought" "dare oppose"... .could you fit more trite political tropes/cliches into one sentence?


I get it. You don't like Krauthammer. But this is beneath you.

[Blackjack]

lol "whilst"

F U (grammar) Nazi!


what do you personally think the reason is that people don't want the mosque to be built near Ground Zero?

I personally believe it's an emotional issue, one that tends to devolve in a moral issue, or just the belief that anything having a hint of insensitivity to the victims of 9-11 or would be seen as a slap in the face to Americans at large, would be better off built elsewhere.

It's hard to reconcile -- with some -- that even a minority of a faith or religion that perpetrated such a crime could stand to gain any kind of boost or benefit from such a project. That's the crux for most I believe, even if they don't exactly have the ability or willingness to explore their thoughts. It's just and emotional and even sometimes, guttural, reaction.

You can't paint emotion with the same broad brush, as their are legitimate and illegitimate reasons for all involved, so to dismiss all that oppose as racists or Islamaphobes is -- at best -- disingenuous.


so then they are just lemmings. since, darrin saluted your post he should rename this thread : "the last refuge of a lemming"

Maybe.


apparently Blackjack "results" to name-calling as well.

If you are one to claim you're a liberal and open-minded thinker but dismiss any opposing viewpoint with name-calling, race-baiting or any other fifth-grade retort, then you, sir, are a lemming.

If not ... then you're not.

[ChumpDumper]

F U (grammar) Nazi!I think your usage was correct. It was just cute seeing it used so often today.

[Blackjack]

I do it too for sure. I just wanted to point out the irony in BJ's post. It's so good.

So you are?

[LnGrrrR]

I get it. You don't like Krauthammer. But this is beneath you.

I don't like the fact that Krauthammer still has a job. He's a political hack, and makes his living because no one in the MSM calls him out on his multiple failed predictions, or his faulty logical reasoning.

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2009/08/the-trouble-with-charles-krauthammer.html

Go ahead, read up on the stuff he says. He's like a walking fail.

[Blackjack]

I think your usage was correct. It was just cute seeing it used so often today.

TBH, I wasn't sure. Don't really use it all that often, may have been one of those subliminal things with today's upped usage. :lol

[Viva Las Espuelas]

It most definitely is. The fact you don't see that just reinforces the belief that people protesting don't understand what freedom of religion is. You don't think dictating limits to where people can privately practice their religion is a violation of their rights??

So you must be steamed that people can no longer pray in schools. That they have to go down the street around the corner from anyones sight in order to do their God given right to pray. Huh?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Ok, property rights then.

Are people saying you can't practice Islam?

[Winehole23]

I thought you wanted to talk about something else.

Don't remember the "pull your head out of your ... if you think it has anything to do with freedom of religion" speech you gave us earlier?

:dizzy

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Hmmm. Is that a rrrrrrrreally long "yes" or a rrrrrrrreally long "no"?




I'll just wait.

Maybe you can make a complete sentence by then as well

[ChumpDumper]

So you must be steamed that people can no longer pray in schools. That they have to go down the street around the corner from anyones sight in order to do their God given right to pray. Huh?I would have to see the court ruling prescribing those conditions before getting steamed.

[Winehole23]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161375

[Winehole23]

Freedom of religion. Ha. This isn't a freedom of religion issue. Pull your head out of your ass.

[Winehole23]

You dodged my direct reply, attempting to redirect me to the very issue you waved off as a non-issue at the very beginning of this thread. Change your tune much?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

It's not a freedom of religion issue.

Hence my question that you still haven't answered.

[Blake]

I personally believe it's an emotional issue, one that tends to devolve in a moral issue

what's the moral issue?


or just the belief that anything having a hint of insensitivity to the victims of 9-11 or would be seen as a slap in the face to Americans at large, would be better off built elsewhere.

It's insensitive because it's a Muslim mosque?

If it's a YMCA, I'm very sure there is no outcry.

What else is it but racist?


It's hard to reconcile -- with some -- that even a minority of a faith or religion that perpetrated such a crime could stand to gain any kind of boost or benefit from such a project. That's the crux for most I believe, even if they don't exactly have the ability or willingness to explore their thoughts. It's just and emotional and even sometimes, guttural, reaction.

right, and from the information we have so far, apparently these guttural reactions are based on Islamophobia and/or racism.


You can't paint emotion with the same broad brush, as their are legitimate and illegitimate reasons for all involved, so to dismiss all that oppose as racists or Islamaphobes is -- at best -- disingenuous.


So the question again is, what are the legitmate reasons for getting butthurt about a mosque near ground zero?

[Winehole23]

It's not a freedom of religion issue.

Hence my question that you still haven't answered.Property rights. Please catch up.

[Blake]

So you are?

Blake.

Posters' names are in the upper left hand corner of the posts.

[Winehole23]

It's their property. They can do as they damn well please with it.

[Yonivore]

It's their property. They can do as they damn well please with it.
Really? Then why can't the Greek Orthodox church, flattened by one of the Trade Center Towers, rebuild?

Why can't Israelis build in Jerusalem?

It's their property, they should be able to do as they damn well please with it, no?

[DarrinS]

It's their property. They can do as they damn well please with it.


No one disputes its legality, that I know of.

And I'm sure it will really help the nice Imam achieve his so-called mission. It's really just a giant olive branch.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

darrins won't man up and admit that because the terrorists were muslims he doesn't want a muslim place of worship near ground zero.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Property rights. Please catch up.

I'll catch up when you do the same with my question. We can move the goal posts after that happens, if you'd like.

[Blake]

Really? Then why can't the Greek Orthodox church, flattened by one of the Trade Center Towers, rebuild?

I wasn't aware they can't. Why can't they?


Why can't Israelis build in Jerusalem?

It's their property, they should be able to do as they damn well please with it, no?

Is Jerusalem a suburb of New York?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Really? Then why can't the Greek Orthodox church, flattened by one of the Trade Center Towers, rebuild?

Why can't Israelis build in Jerusalem?

It's their property, they should be able to do as they damn well please with it, no?

Did any of those churches buy the building that Mosque will use?

[Winehole23]

Really? Then why can't the Greek Orthodox church, flattened by one of the Trade Center Towers, rebuild?

Why can't Israelis build in Jerusalem?

It's their property, they should be able to do as they damn well please with it, no?Municipal compliance is a bitch.

Cordoba Center is slightly more with it than the Greek Orthodox Church it would appear. Thems the breaks. Nobody ever said it was fair.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I'll catch up when you do the same with my question. We can move the goal posts after that happens, if you'd like.

It's simple, you tie the mosque(Islam) to the terrorists. Just man up and admit it... either that explain exactly what is insensitive about a place of worship being built there..

[Blake]

I'll catch up when you do the same with my question. We can move the goal posts after that happens, if you'd like.

It seems to be a religious issue for the Islamophobes. Not a property rights issue at all.

What was your point again?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Oh goody. Now pedophiles can buy a big plot of land and do whatever they damn well please there. Maybe KkK groups will run with wineholes logic.



It's their property. They can do as they damn well please with it.

[Winehole23]

I'll catch up when you do the same with my question. We can move the goal posts after that happens, if you'd like.If you just want to pretend to have a conversation I would assure you two can play that game. Carry on.

[George Gervin's Afro]

It seems to be a religious issue for the Islamophobes. Not a property rights issue at all.

What was your point again?

They are not Islamaphobes, they just don't want a Muslim place of worship there because Muslims caused the problem...

[George Gervin's Afro]

Oh goody. Now pedophiles can buy a big plot of land and do whatever they damn well please there. Maybe KkK groups will run with wineholes logic.

they can buy land and do what they want with it..

[Winehole23]

Oh goody. Now pedophiles can buy a big plot of land and do whatever they damn well please there. Maybe KkK groups will run with wineholes logic.We're talking about the Cordoba Center ok? The building at the center of this furore.

'member?

[Winehole23]

http://www.ourstorypublications.com/images/frontpage%20downloads/Sassy__Polka_dot_rattle.jpg

[George Gervin's Afro]

We're talking about the Cordoba Center ok? The building at the center of this furore.

'member?


actually your logic is simple, if they can legally build there they should be able to.

[Blake]

Oh goody. Now pedophiles can buy a big plot of land and do whatever they damn well please there. Maybe KkK groups will run with wineholes logic.

Yes, pedophiles can buy a big plot of land and do whatever they damn well please within city zoning codes.

Oh goody for you!

[Viva Las Espuelas]

It seems to be a religious issue for the Islamophobes. Not a property rights issue at all.

What was your point again?

If you read what I've posted you'd know what my point is. Really don't have a point. Just stating this is not a freedom of religion issue. Is that hard to comprehend? If you have a gotch question then feel free and fire away.

[George Gervin's Afro]

If you read what I've posted you'd know what my point is. Really don't have a point. Just stating this is not a freedom of religion issue. Is that hard to comprehend? If you have a gotch question then feel free and fire away.


They are not Islamaphobes, they just don't want a Muslim place of worship there because Muslims caused the problem...

we know what your position is

[balli]

Viva is an idiot. Molesting little boys is a crime, on private property or otherwise. Worshipping Allah and playing basketball is not. The lengths of stupidity you idiots will go to, in order to justify your open racism, is heartbreaking. Fat, dumb and bigoted is no way to go through life, sons.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

We're talking about the Cordoba Center ok? The building at the center of this furore.

'member?

You stated "property". Not "cordoba center". Or does that ruin your logic?

[Blake]

They are not Islamaphobes, they just don't want a Muslim place of worship there because Muslims caused the problem...

I'm not afraid of Muslims......I'm just concerned they might harm me both physically and emotionally.

[Blackjack]

what's the moral issue?

It's not mine, it's theirs -- some might believe it morally wrong to allow the building of something that could be seen as some kind feather-in-the-cap of the extremists that perpetrated the act.


It's insensitive because it's a Muslim mosque?

See last answer


If it's a YMCA, I'm very sure there is no outcry.

Were the terrorists who perpetrated the act YMCA card-carrying members looking to bomb 24-Hour Fitnesses?


What else is it but racist?

What is it called when you can only think to call someone a racist or biggot when knowing nothing of what the other feels?

Ignorance. The same thing.


right, and from the information we have so far, apparently these guttural reactions are based on Islamophobia and/or racism.

Already addressed this ...


So the question again is, what are the legitmate reasons for getting butthurt about a mosque near ground zero?

and this.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

All you idiots that think I'm pro-pedophile are pretty stupid. Just sayin'.

I think winehole said "catch up"

[Winehole23]

Ruin my logic?

Not at all. Cordoba Center(sic?) is a relevant example. The most relevant, one might say in terms of this thread.

[balli]

All you idiots that think I'm pro-pedophile are pretty stupid. Just sayin'.

I think winehole said "catch up"

I don't think you're pro-pedophile. I think you're a dumbass that equated a gym run by muslims with a bunch of pedophiles getting together to 'do whatever they want' to their victims.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

They are not Islamaphobes, they just don't want a Muslim place of worship there because Muslims caused the problem...

What "problem" are you speaking of?

[Winehole23]

Within the law the proprietors can do whatever they like.

[Blake]

If you read what I've posted you'd know what my point is. Really don't have a point.

Your point is that you don't have a point. Oh goody.


Just stating this is not a freedom of religion issue. Is that hard to comprehend? If you have a gotch question then feel free and fire away.

It's harder to comprehend why someone would post a statement with no point in a debate thread. Usually posts with no point are reserved for places like the Club.

[Blackjack]

This ...


So you are?

... was in regards to this, Blake

If you are one to claim you're a liberal and open-minded thinker but dismiss any opposing viewpoint with name-calling, race-baiting or any other fifth-grade retort, then you, sir, are a lemming.

If not ... then you're not.



Blake.

Posters' names are in the upper left hand corner of the posts.

But you learn something new every day. :tu

[George Gervin's Afro]

What "problem" are you speaking of?

the bombings of the twin towers..the act of terrorism, the murdering of 2800 people..that problem

[Winehole23]

Your point is that you don't have a point. Oh goody.:lol




It's harder to comprehend why someone would post a statement with no point in a debate thread. Usually posts with no point are reserved for places like the Club.Disagree strongly. Posts with no point at all are a striking majority in this forum.

[ChumpDumper]

Really? Then why can't the Greek Orthodox church, flattened by one of the Trade Center Towers, rebuild?They are free to rebuild the church on their property. They want to build a bigger cathedral on a different piece of property.


Why can't Israelis build in Jerusalem?As much as you might wish it so, Jerusalem is not a part of the United States.

[Blake]

It's not mine, it's theirs -- some might believe it morally wrong to allow the building of something that could be seen as some kind feather-in-the-cap of the extremists that perpetrated the act.

the question has been brought up ad nauseum with no answer:

How is it morally wrong?


See last answer

I did. Please clarify.


Were the terrorists who perpetrated the act YMCA card-carrying members looking to bomb 24-Hour Fitnesses?

No, but they were also licensed pilots.

Would you or anyone else have moral problems if someone tried to open a flight school there?


What is it called when you can only think to call someone a racist or biggot when knowing nothing of what the other feels?

Ignorance. The same thing.

Fine. Then what else is it if it's not racism or Islamophobia?


Already addressed this ...

poorly, which is why I'm having to ask you the same question over and over.


and this.

right, and I addressed your address to it with my follow up question:

What else is it if it's not racism or Islamophobia?

to which you did not answer clearly.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Your point is that you don't have a point. Oh goody.



It's harder to comprehend why someone would post a statement with no point in a debate thread. Usually posts with no point are reserved for places like the Club.

Um, read post 16 then 26 and you'll know why I posted my freedom of religion statement. Can't help with your comprehension. Yes it probably has no "point" in the grand scheme of things in this thread but it did to what I was responding to

[Blake]

This ...

... was in regards to this, Blake

But you learn something new every day. :tu

Am I what?

[Blake]

Um, read post 16 then 26 and you'll know why I posted my freedom of religion statement. Can't help with your comprehension. Yes it probably has no "point" in the grand scheme of things in this thread but it did to what I was responding to

I asked you straight up what your reason for posting is and you clearly stated "I have no point."

Can't help you if you can't comprehend your own posts.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

the bombings of the twin towers..the act of terrorism, the murdering of 2800 people..that problem

Hmmm. I call 2800+ innocent deaths a tragedy. Clearly we don't see eye to eye with that "problem" so there's really no use talking to you about it. Might as well offer a BLT to the people in the mosque

[Blackjack]

the question has been brought up ad nauseum with no answer:

How is it morally wrong?

There's obviously no response to ignorance and/or nonsense.




I did. Please clarify.

No you didn't. I did.


No, but they were also licensed pilots.

Would you or anyone else have moral problems if someone tried to open a flight school there?

Was that school looking to fly planes into its competitors?


Fine. Then what else is it if it's not racism or Islamophobia?

Define racism.


poorly, which is why I'm having to ask you the same question over and over.

You didn't have to do or say anything. It probably would've have been a wiser move given your response.


right, and I addressed your address to it with my follow up question:

What else is it if it's not racism or Islamophobia?

Repetition ain't my fave.


to which you did not answer clearly.

Didn't I?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I asked you straight up what your reason for posting is and you clearly stated "I have no point."

Can't help you if you can't comprehend your own posts.

Yes it probably has no "point" in the grand scheme of things in this thread but it did to what I was responding to

Echo echo

You're one dense idiot.

[balli]

Hmmm. I call 2800+ innocent deaths a tragedy. Clearly we don't see eye to eye with that "problem" so there's really no use talking to you about it.
Spouting off a bunch of racist bullshit and then haggling over semantics like they make your bigoted positions so much less immoral? :jack

[Blackjack]

Am I what?


If you are one to claim you're a liberal and open-minded thinker but dismiss any opposing viewpoint with name-calling, race-baiting or any other fifth-grade retort, then you, sir, are a lemming.

If not ... then you're not.

You seemed to take offense, so I was left to ask if you were.

[Winehole23]

if they can legally build there they should be able to.FnA.

[Blake]

There's obviously no response to ignorance and/or nonsense.

That doesn't answer my question.

You brought up the moral issue. Again, how is it morally wrong?


No you didn't. I did.

No you didn't but is it really that difficult for you to clarify again upon request?

Please clarify [again].


Was that school looking to fly planes into its competitors?

No, I don't think so.

Is the mosque that is being built looking to terrorize the United States?


Define racism.


rac·ism   /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ Show Spelled[rey-siz-uhm]
–noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.


What else is it if it's not racism or Islamophobia?


You didn't have to do or say anything. It probably would've have been a wiser move given your response.

I'm not making any argument. I'm trying to become wiser like you apparently think you are by asking a question.


What else is it if it's not racism or Islamophobia?


Repetition ain't my fave.

Then make it easy on yourself and asnwer the question.


What else is it if it's not racism or Islamophobia?


Didn't I?

Nope, but please do so at any given time.


What else is it if it's not racism or Islamophobia?

[Winehole23]

Phony baloney media-assisted outrage doesn't trump property rights. Yet.

[Blake]

Echo echo

You're one dense idiot.


Um, read post 16 then 26 and you'll know why I posted my freedom of religion statement. Can't help with your comprehension. Yes it probably has no "point" in the grand scheme of things in this thread but it did to what I was responding to

You say two different things in just 3 sentences.

Make up your mind, dumbfuck.

[Blake]

You seemed to take offense, so I was left to ask if you were.

How did you come to that assumption?

I was laughing at the irony in your post. It's what I do when there is irony in a post.

[DarrinS]

I personally believe it's an emotional issue, one that tends to devolve in a moral issue, or just the belief that anything having a hint of insensitivity to the victims of 9-11 or would be seen as a slap in the face to Americans at large, would be better off built elsewhere.

It's hard to reconcile -- with some -- that even a minority of a faith or religion that perpetrated such a crime could stand to gain any kind of boost or benefit from such a project. That's the crux for most I believe, even if they don't exactly have the ability or willingness to explore their thoughts. It's just and emotional and even sometimes, guttural, reaction.

You can't paint emotion with the same broad brush, as their are legitimate and illegitimate reasons for all involved, so to dismiss all that oppose as racists or Islamaphobes is -- at best -- disingenuous.




Someone gets it.

[DarrinS]

Phony baloney media-assisted outrage doesn't trump property rights. Yet.


Phony baloney outrage felt by 70% of Americans.

[Winehole23]

(burp)

[Winehole23]

Phony baloney outrage felt by 70% of Americans.Why not? Is there some law that says the majority can't be wrong?

[Winehole23]

Your own conduct nominates you for the abuse you receive here, Darrin.

You keep putting yourself out there for it, all the while soliciting sympathy for your hurt feelings and insulted personal character.

/crocodile tears

[rjv]

Someone gets it.

yes, but is just as disingenous to infer that all of those who are against this opposition have illegitimate or erroneous reasons for their stance against that opposition. it is equally disingenous to assert that those who argue against these opponents have categorized the former in one specific set defined by racism or islamophobia.

[DarrinS]

Your own conduct nominates you for the abuse you receive here, Darrin.

You keep putting yourself out there for it, all the while soliciting sympathy for your hurt feelings and insulted personal character.

/crocodile tears


:lmao

Thanks, Dad.

[DarrinS]

yes, but is just as disingenous to infer that all of those who are against this opposition have illegitimate or erroneous reasons for their stance against that opposition. it is equally disingenous to assert that those who argue against these opponents have categorized the former in one specific set defined by racism or islamophobia.


Who thinks that? I totally understand where the other side is coming from.

[rjv]

Who thinks that? I totally understand where the other side is coming from.

who posted this :



Keith Olbermann has the "last refuge of a liberal" down to an art form:

"In Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, tea bagging supporter of violence against women and against politicians with whom he disagrees."


this indicates that you agree with the premise of the article that you posted and have repeatedly defended.

so how is it you understand where the 'other side' is coming from? and exactly what ideological group populates this side? (lemmings?)

[Spurminator]

This whole time I didn't realize we were debating a Charles Krauthammer article. I feel like I've wasted a lot of time now. Somebody warn me next time.

[DarrinS]

who posted this :

this indicates that you agree with the premise of the article that you posted and have repeatedly defended.

so how is it you understand where the 'other side' is coming from? and exactly what ideological group populates this side? (lemmings?)



The thesis of the article isn't that the left doesn't have any valid arguments with respect to the issues -- it's that they completely DISREGARD the other sides' arguments as the crazy rants of racists, homophobes, Islamophobes, xenophobes, etc.

The fact that you don't understand that, says something about you, not me.

[ChumpDumper]

The thesis of the article isn't that the left doesn't have any valid arguments with respect to the issues -- it's that they completely DISREGARD the other sides' arguments as the crazy rants of racists, homophobes, Islamophobes, xenophobes, etc.

The fact that you don't understand that, says something about you, not me.We gave you a chance to prove your position had nothing to do with Islamophobia when you were asked to explain the difference between Rauf's and Beck statements. You couldn't

Others may not be motivated by Islamophobia, but you most certainly are.

[clambake]

muslim extremists from saudi arabia.

thats a mindfuck for the gop.

[DarrinS]

We gave you a chance to prove your position had nothing to do with Islamophobia when you were asked to explain the difference between Rauf's and Beck statements. You couldn't

Others may not be motivated by Islamophobia, but you most certainly are.


See what I mean. Krauthammer is right.


Probably 90% of the posts in this thread reinforce Krauthammer's OpEd.

[ChumpDumper]

See what I mean. Krauthammer is right.


Probably 90% of the posts in this thread reinforce Krauthammer OpEd.What is the difference between Rauf's and Beck statements again?

You might want to read your response.

[LnGrrrR]

It most definitely is. The fact you don't see that just reinforces the belief that people protesting don't understand what freedom of religion is. You don't think dictating limits to where people can privately practice their religion is a violation of their rights??


So you must be steamed that people can no longer pray in schools. That they have to go down the street around the corner from anyones sight in order to do their God given right to pray. Huh?

Did they stop allowing prayer in private schools Viva?

[DarrinS]

Others may not be motivated by Islamophobia, but you most certainly are.


Since the OP is not about ME (I know you are obsessed with me, but get over it), please tell me what YOU think motivates "others" that oppose the Ground Zero mosque.

[DarrinS]

What is the difference between Rauf's and Beck statements again?


Nothing.


Is Beck building a 15-story mosque at Ground Zero?

[LnGrrrR]

The thesis of the article isn't that the left doesn't have any valid arguments with respect to the issues -- it's that they completely DISREGARD the other sides' arguments as the crazy rants of racists, homophobes, Islamophobes, xenophobes, etc.

The fact that you don't understand that, says something about you, not me.

So what is the argument then? Feel free to lay it out. I mean other than, "Some people who practice Islam caused 9/11, therefore, we should not build this mosque here".

[ChumpDumper]

Since the OP is not about ME (I know you are obsessed with me, but get over it), please tell me what YOU think motivates "others" that oppose the Ground Zero mosque.I think many people have many reasons.

Yours is Islamophobia.

I'm sure others share your Islamophobia, so you can feel good about that.

[DarrinS]

I think many people have many reasons.

Yours is Islamophobia.

I'm sure others share your Islamophobia, so you can feel good about that.


What might their reasons be?

[ChumpDumper]

What might their reasons be?I don't know. If you really want to know, you should ask every American.

I wanted to know your reason.

And now I know.

Your reason is Islamophobia.

[LnGrrrR]

Nothing.

Is Beck building a 15-story mosque at Ground Zero?

So your argument is that, because Rauf said some (possibly) unpatriotic statements, he should morally decide to not build a mosque there.

But what do his statements have to do with it being a mosque? I mean, would you oppose the building if it were, say, a church? If you think it shouldn't be built because he opposes America or something similar, you would then oppose any building he wanted there, right?

[DarrinS]

So what is the argument then? Feel free to lay it out. I mean other than, "Some people who practice Islam caused 9/11, therefore, we should not build this mosque here".


A VERY large scale mosque being built VERY near to where 3000 Americans were killed in the name of Islam (not necessarily by Islam) seems in poor taste to some. But, they have every right to build it. Move it a couple miles away and I don't see a problem with it.