Michelle got to kiss the president. And hug him and touch him for like....30 WHOLE SECONDS!!!
Check it out this cool video...
http://wcco.com/topstories/local_story_024193038.html
She is such a little hottie...gawd, I wish I were her. My daddy says she is the best. She does all the right things like when those people...like in our capital and stuff....those bad guys that now run things....when they tried to take my daddy's money away and give it to the spics and niggers, she voted against it. I don't see why they can't buy what they need for the 5 dollars an hour daddy pays them. Besides, how am I going to get my Mercedes for graduation and stuff?Plus, daddy says that my home girl is going to make sure that all those people that shake around like a spaz and stuff just die off. How could anyone want to kill those cutie wutie babies so some retard can be normal. As if they would be normal anyway..
I still can't...y'know....believe it. She is so lucky...look at her...she is totally macking his shit and I don't get to...ah well, maybe someday....a girl can dream, right?
I gotta go...otherwise I'm gonna be late for Ms. Stuple's social studies class. Daddys says that her class em--emhance---em-somethings....I don't know but she loves terrorists and stuff.
Gotta go!
XXXOOO
Brettahny
42 comments:
Quote from the linked article:"It's pretty commonplace for" ... "the ladies to get kisses, and to receive autographs," said Frederickson.
I think it's inappropriate and unprofessional! I'm embarrassed, once again, by a Minnesotan Politician.
I need to call the janitor and have them come and clean my cube. I have never laughed so hard in my life, Mark, without a doubt the best thing you have ever written. Completely appropiate.
An absolutely embarrassing display by Bachmann. No question. But you really need to lay off the ridiculous, over-the-top mischaracterizations of political issues. While apparently entertaining to some, it really calls into question your credibility with anybody hoping to have a reasonably intelligent discourse. I'm certain you'll pass this posting off as "obvious satire", but understand that from my perspective this same arrogance and disdain permeates most of the stances that you post on this blog. Frankly, there's a hint of truth to what HMHC says: you fall back on this approach when unable to rebuff an argument or reconcile a deficiency. It's hard to take anybody seriously, whether they be liberal or conservative, when they utilize such tools. I'm certainly not in position to give anybody lessons on discourse or debate, but I thought it might be beneficial to give one man's perspective on why you can never seem to agree with some of us. How can you possibly hope that I'll agree with your positions when the counter-position that you offer mocks my beliefs as wanting to deny the "spics and niggers"?
It was meant as satire. I am not trying to rebuff anything Crab says at all. There is no way that anyone of my arguments are going to change his mind so I don't really "fall back" on anything.
And I don't think you are racist, although we are all are racist to a certain extent. I can see your point about good2beme's business to a certain extent but in the end, 5 dollars an hour is just insane. And just plain wrong.
Other than mark's need to resort to vulgarity, I enjoyed every word of this. PL, I didn't view it as a mischaracterization at all. Millions of Americans think like this and it is sad.
Michelle Bachman is an embarassment to Congress. I believe that she is mentally ill and I don't understand how anyone could elect her. Then again, I can't understand why a buffoon like Peter Roskam could beat Tammy Duckworth in my district.
Michelle Bachman is a moron. Anyone that thinks that global warming isn't happening, as she has said, is living in a fantasy land.
George Bush is a moron and I really don't care if the people that post here think I am a being mean or whatever. I started reading this blog about two months ago. A friend of mine recommneded it to me. I don't understand where this ultra sensitivity comes from. Call a spade a spade. Bush and Bachman are stupid, stupid people who are ruining our state and government.
Regarding James Baker (from the last discussion), one of the wise men you speak of...so is he part of the solution or part of the problem?
http://www.michaelmoore.com/warroom/index.php?id=19
From that link, he seems to fit the profile of everything you are against. Now you're "going with his policies"? So the solution is to show up to the table with Iran in the hopes that we get a symbolic gesture of "No, we won't help you" from the leaders of Iran. Boy, once that happens Iraq will start stabilizing immediately.
Glad to see you have figured out that you aren't going to change my mind - that can also be referred to as "Accepting people for who they are".
Real world examples are put right in front of your face my good2beme and you still haven't changed your mind about the minimum wage...and you still expect everyone else to change their mind about issues? In your time writing this blog, have YOU changed YOUR mind about anything?
Regarding conservative women...you write columns when they are too uptight (Mrs. Brenny and her billboard) and you wrote columns when they are too affectionate (this column). You really can't lose on here can you?
Speaking of reading, Frank Luntz (one of the pollsters from those talking head shows) has a new book out that talks about the difference between what people say and what the people listening to them actually hear. Sounds like that is what is going on here - there are points being made but people are reacting to the vitriol and not the points being made.
PL, the reason he does the over-the-top technique is because it links a person, or idea, to a negative symbol (in this case, Michelle Bachmann and the word "nigger"). The person who uses this technique hopes that the readers will simply reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative symbol. What better way to attempt to get your opponent back in line, make a claim that they are racist or intolerant and get them to backpedal. Again, it's a subtle way of muzzling people. You take your opponents argument to the most extreme conclusion possible in the hopes that the readers on here will see that any arguments in favor of Michelle Bachmann can be applied to achieve an end that is racist.
Hey truthgirl...
Having worked with the mentally ill for over 30 years, I know the mentally ill and Bachman's not mentally ill...okay bad paraphrase...you do a disservice to all of the people with mental illness by putting Bachman in with them...
..,she may be pathologic among all of the other characteristics listed above. The people with mental illness have enough stigma and challenges to deal with, don't heap her on them too.
Gang Bang,
James Baker was one of 10 people in the ISG so this was bipartisan support for a problem. Bipartisan support is something we have enjoyed a lot of in the last few weeks as many Republicans have finally started listening to the American people. You might find this hard to believe but I don't agree with everything Michael Moore says....only the things that are blatantly obvious.
I have admitted on several occasions how wrong I was to support the War in Iraq. I was bitter, angry, narrow minded, and filled with fear. The facts and actions that have presented themselves since that time have caused me to look at the big picture, not the monochromatic one you are currently viewing.
I find it hilarious that you accuse me of not accpeting people for who they are. You paint yourself as a very tolerant person on this blog but we both know that you are, politically speaking, completely intolerant. I challenge you to look within yourself and tell me how my satire is not indicative of some of the things you have said and meant in the past.
Y'know, it's funny but I had a wonderful thought the other day.
Karma.
Gang Bang, you spend a lot of time on this blog defending religious conservatives. Some day, and there is no doubt in my mind about this, you are going to bit in the ass by them...big time. They are completely against many of the things that you currently enjoy in your life and they are working very hard to make them go away. You don't want to see this because you have difficulty admitting when you are wrong.
It's going to happen. Mark my words and then you will see what I have been talking about for the last seven years.
Anonymous, first of all, pick a name. Even a fake one. One of the few things PL and I agree on. It is irratating. Second, all apologies to the mentally challenged. You are right. They don't need anymore weight on their shoulders, especially those of Michelle Bachman's ilk.
Markadelphia and Gang Bang, if you are intersted in my opinion ( and I know you are :) ) here is how I would grade you as far as tolerance goes.
Markadelphia (C+), with marks off for vulgarity, name calling, and offensive vitriol. I also don't like some of the sexual remarks you make at times.
Gang Bang (F), to begin with, your name is offensive to me, as a woman, which shows that you clearly have little respect for us. You also seem to have little time for people that are non white, at least based on your posts here, and I disagree with markadelphia when he says that you come off as being tolerant.
So, both of you could really use some work.
Well, what is blatantly obvious from that link is that James Baker is a major part of the Carlyle Group and the Carlyle Group is one of the major players in the Military Industrial Complex, people you often describe as evil.
The war in Iraq is only one of the issues we have discussed on this blog.
I'm not inolerant when it coems to politics...I simply disagree with you. That fact alone does not make somebody intolerant. I accept the fact that there are alternative perspectives to my views of things. You on the other hand have stated yourself on this very blog at the end of one of the comment sections "I don't see, based on all the evidence, how anyone could have another viewpoint about Bush Co." and that's where many of your arguments are predicated from - your view.
Look in this thread and tell me where I've defended Michelle Bachmann. I could care less about her...I don't live in her district so I couldn't vote for her. She could have given GWB a titty-twister for all I care. The fact that she is in the US house (in the minority party nonetheless) does not affect my life in any way.
I don't think I'll be bit in the ass by them simply because they are religious conservatives. In my opinion, Christianity points the way to truth and salvation for those who choose to believe...it does not mean that everyone that believes is a saint. If somebody bites me in the ass, I view that as a reflection of that person as an individual, the fact that they are a religious conservative has nothing to do with it...if I were bitten in the ass by a black person and based the ass-biting solely on the fact that they were different than me (the fact they they were black), I'd probably be accused of being racist right? The logic you are using is axactly the same here.
I don't categorize my friends based on their differences (like saying "my gay friends, my black friends, my conservative friends, my female friends, my religious friends) where differences are the first thing noticed. I view the people in my circle of friends as individuals and there are good and bad people in all those groups I mentioned.
Truthgirl,
I know Gang Bang personally and his name fits him perfectly.
VHeights - to be clear, at least from me perspective. If you want to call a spade a spade, then be clear about what my issue with Markadelphia and his postings is. I couldn't care less if he thinks Michelle Bachmann is stupid or GWB is evil. I think he's horribly wrong on one of those counts, so I'm happy to debate him on any issue he wishes to raise as long as he's willing to stay within the vicinity of the issues. If you view guarding against the use of baseless accusation and derision as "ultra sensitivity" then I take the same exception to you as I do to him. It's particularly irritating from those claiming to be open and accepting.
Lillies that fester smell far worse than weeds
WS
Truthgirl, you only give marks off to Markadelphia for his name calling and offensive remarks? Have you not read any of his postings about how stupid people are down south? Or how people who vote conservative are mouth-breathing idiots? That's tolerance to you? We have very different definitions of that term, you and I.
Lastly, for what it's worth, I apparently misunderstood HMHC's new name. I took it to be a self-deprecating name. Apparently I was mistaken. Can one of the literati clarify for me what it means?
First of all, no more phone numbers. That is a bad idea.
Second, I really don't want to get in between the truthgirl and gangbang/HCMC/Crab fight but I do want to make a comment about some of his earlier posts. And pose a question. It is my hope that PL and Vheights will then see why I say the things I say.
It is not out of lacking a "firm ground" or lacking facts or being unwilling to admit that I am liberal or any other ludicrous thing that is said about me that I say the things I say. It is mainly out of the unfathomable frustration of what I see as right and wrong.
To me, a "liberal cause" revolves around the betterment of mankind. Let's take a look at some:
1. A cleaner environment.
2. Equal rights for non whites, women, and GLBTs.
3. Health Care for everyone
4. A more equal distribution of wealth.
Based on the postings of "conservatives" on this blog I would say that their chief cause is:
1. Don't take my fucking money, bitch.
Please correct me if I am wrong but it seems to me that that is the most common reason why you are conservative. There is no human element in this at all. The so called "liberal" causes listed above are all viewed with such cynicism by conservatives that the main theme is forgotten: people. It is about making people's lives better and, as far as I can see, the only reason why conservatives are against the four items listed above is due to their petty greed.
So, it is out of this frustration and the unbelievable clarity with I see conservatives as the cause of most of our problems (this week's topic btw) that I make the comments I make.
We need to take serious action on the above listed items. These problems are real and need to be addressed....not looked upon as being partisan. Thankfully, many Republicans have started to get the message and are saying the same things that Democrats are saying. In some ways, the tide is turning but some people need to wake up.
I was speaking more in terms of a comment awhile back from blk when he/she said that markadelphia shouldn't call people stupid because that's what conservatives do.
I am a school teacher in a Twin Cities suburb and am extremly tired of stupid people running our government. They are not smart. I don't think I am being mean either. I think I am stating the obvious.
The last six years seem like a bad dream of people dancing with glee at how unintelligent our leaders have become. I am offended by this as someone who thinks that everyone should have a desire to learn.
Hey, wait just a minute. Gang Bang is the same person as Crabmaster Scratch?
Mark,
Re: your 4&1 assessment.
L1. Conceptually, couldn't agree more.
L2. Conceptually, couldn't agree more.
L3. I agree in principle and with limits.
L4. Couldn't disagree more.
C1. I am a firm believer in the "don't take my fucking money, bitch" mantra, in principle and with limits.
As we have discussed before, there is not one particular issue that makes or breaks a political platform for me, so it is not accurate that taxes/wealth is the singular issue. I am aligned in belief on the conservative side of many issues. But C1 is absolutely what, for the most part, makes me travel in conservative circles.
If the only reason you see for being against L1 thru L4 is "petty greed" then you truly have not been reading what HMHC and I have been posting these past few years. (Oddly enough, that's exactly what we "accuse" you of doing.)
You dissect everything that our current leadership does or says, offering each statement or action that runs counter to your beliefs as proof of either some vast conspiracy of evil or proof of sheer idiocy. Yet you explain away what I find to be consistently and constantly disturbing statements from both yourself and those you support as if the explanation of "frustration" is supposed to assuage the fear that your cause is every bit as evil or idiotic, if not more so, than the one you decry. All the while apparently not hearing, or perhaps conveniently ignoring, reasoned counter-arguments to the issues that you cite as being patently obvious. If this is what you term "serious action" then I'm all for a continuation of partisan bickering, because then at least we have some protection from making rash decisions with significant unintended consequences.
VHeights - if your position is truly that you believe our current leadership is "obviously" stupid and doesn't have a desire to learn (your words) then I truly believe that it's unfortunate it has reached that point. And, for what it's worth, I would hold forth that position as just as much a root cause of political discord today as any other factor. It's going to be hard to find middle ground on very complex issues when one side continues to foster such opinions.
RIP Barbaro
Yes, I am Crabmaster.
The new name is indeed an attempt at self-depricating humor. Think of it in terms of "Things just aren't going your way". Kind of like showing up to a gang bang and finding out you are last in line. (For the record - I've never been to a gang bang.)
1. Yes I want a clean envoronment.
2. You know that I don't care if 2 gay people get married.
3. There are downsides to Universal health care. Ever hear of a 6-month wait for certain procedures? That is a reality in Canada and the UK. Working for a healthcare company, I have a view of things on the inside and I would support universal healthcare for basic services only with an added option where people can add and pay for more coverage as they see fit for themselves and their families. The fact is that anymore, the practitioners I talk to every single day love medicare patients.
4. I'm not for a more equal distribution of wealth...that has already been tried and I've pointed out the results already on this blog. You're focusing on your intentions again and not focusing on the results of the legislation (which failed miserably...unless you want to tout the successes of the welfare system in your next reply) that has been enacted to acheive this ideal you speak of. As I said before regarding this subject - in my opinion, the only thing people are owed is the opportunity to better themselves. Whether they take advantage of the opportunities is up to them.
When I think of "people" and "others", the last thing that comes to mind of forced taxation by the government. The words Taxes and Charity aren't even in the same hemisphere in my book. They are mutually exclusive.
Despite my personal views on the subjects you mentioned, you have said on this blog and in person that I am intolerant because I vote republican and, in your view, republican politicians are intolerant. I can't believe some libs (2 of them on here) think someone can be an intolerant racist simply because they think tax cuts help the economy and vote on that fact. But whenever someone tries to hold you to the same standard that you hold me to (read - "the people you vote for"), you say you're not a democrat, get mad because someone changed the subject, and move on. You do not hold yourself to the same standard that you hold me to. You endorsed pretty much every democrat but 1 in the last Minnesota election. Care to tell us, honestly, how you think Keith Ellison will vote on gay marriage? You endorsed him.
Hey Truthgirl, if you take my name literally then you need to relax. You mean you take that name literally? It's a joke.
You know nothing about me.
This fall, Markadelphia will be meeting my 2 best friends from Illinois...their names are Chad Hernandez and Gabriel Nevarez, sure sounds like I'm keeping it white doesn't it?
Feel free to call them... Aks them anything you want about their best buddy who now lives in Minnesota.
Fuck you.
First of all, I removed the comment with the phone numbers in it but kept the rest of the words intact and reprinted them above...this was all done with the authors permission.
Working backwards, I think Keith Ellison will vote against any gay marriage ban if he wants a job in two years. His constituency is made up of one of the biggest gay populations in the country. I know the campaign manager for Keith Ellison and I can tell you that much of what you believe about him is just plain wrong.
Stay tuned for the column on charities and taxation....it will come from a source far more knowlegeable on the subject than you or I.
There has never been true communism on this planet so to dismiss the system outright for past perversions of it (Russia, China, North Korea) is premature. People in this country are greedy. This is a fact. People in this country are racist. That is a fact. As long as those things exist, there will be people out there (many of which you loathe and decry as "race mongers") to combat them. Again, this touches on the topic for this week so I won't go into it more here.
PL, I know you agree with me on my points. That was never in question. The people who you defend and sometimes support do not agree with these issues and go out of their way to prevent them from happening. The question is: why? The answer is simple: it threatens their way of life....their livelihood. The people currently in power benefit from having the grossly unfair system we currently have. They will stop at nothing to maintain it; lie, cheat, steal and kill.
All of this is painfully obvious to me so, again, that is where my frustration comes from. There is no looking at "the other side" when the other side is doing everything in its power to continue slavery in one form or another.
With on the Barbaro thing...it is always a sad day when such a beautiful creature has to go...
Since you know the campaign manager, ask him if Ellison believes the separation of church and state applies to Muslims just as naturally as it does to members of other faiths.
To my knowledge, there is no significant branch of Islam that recognizes anything like a separation of church and state. On the contrary, Sharia, or Islamic law, is integral to the religion.
So one would think that it might occur to someone, anyone to ask Ellison: what variety of Muslim are you? What mosque do you attend? Where does your branch of Islam stand on Sharia? What do your imams preach?
Surely one of these days someone will ask Ellison what branch of Islam he adheres to in reconciling Islam with the Democratic platform on abortion rights, homosexual rights, the rights of women and the like. Perhaps someone might then ask a question or two about how Ellison's branch of Islam views the legal equality of Muslims and infidels and the supremacy of the United States Constitution over Sharia law.
Nice choice of words - "what you believe"...there's a lot we already know and even more that we don't know.
I wonder if you would hold the same level of scrutiny to a Christian conservative.
In just about every way, conservative chrisitans and fanatical muslims are identiical.
Gang bang,
You're just pissed off at Ellison because he made all you righties look like a bunch of fools when used the Koran owned by Thomas Jefferson. Didn't really have anywhere to go after that did you?
Chuckle.
I could care less that he took the oath on the koran. Find anywhere on this blog where I mentioned anything about that.
Here I have simply posed a few questions for him and the reaction of you and Markadelphia is that I'm "going after" him. Another nice choice of words.
Markadelphia truly could care less if I have the same level of scrutiny. I'm not out there telling all my friends who to vote for and he knows that to be true.
I'm not pissed off at all.
I personally think Ellison's a jackass for swearing-in using the Koran. Particularly one that belonged to Thomas Jefferson. Reveals a significant character flaw, if you ask me.
M,
In the same way that you won't condemn Communism based on the perverted implementations of other nations, I won't condemn one side or the other of the US political aisle based on the perverted views of a handful. (There are plenty of perverted views of both sides of the aisle, that's for sure.)
It is human nature that people will benefit another's misfortune. You may believe that it's not your nature to do so...that's fine. I don't believe it for a second, but you are welcome to your opinion. I have no problem admitting that I benefit from other's misfortunes every day. It's the nature of life, and it frankly goes both ways. I'm certainly not going to support political views or platforms that offer the false hope that such inequity can be eliminated. It's just not realistic. Just like I'm not going to support political views or platforms that are based on religion. It's just not realistic.
Like I said before, it's easy being the person that stands on the platform of "equality, healthcare, money for everybody" because those that argue against that platform come across looking like callous pricks. (Just like those of us who actually are callous pricks.) But that doesn't change the fact that there are perfectly realistic perspectives that make those ideals Quixotic at best. I don't like greed or racism any more than you do. But rejecting political positions out-of-hand simply because they are represented by people who are greedy and racist, or because you can identify somebody or some people who benefit from such positions, doesn't make much sense to me.
Speaking of "looking like a bunch of fools", notice that what I did was ask a few questions of Keith Ellisons positions on the issues of the day.
Here's how the liberals on here treated Michelle Bachmann IN THIS THREAD ALONE...
"they tried to take my daddys money to give to the spics and niggers"
"Millions of Americans think like this and it is sad"
"Michelle Bachman is an embarassment to Congress. I believe that she is mentally ill and I don't understand how anyone could elect her."
"Michelle Bachman is a moron...is living in a fantasy land"
"Bush and Bachman are stupid"
"you do a disservice to all of the people with mental illness by putting Bachman in with them.."
"all apologies to the mentally challenged. You are right. They don't need anymore weight on their shoulders, especially those of Michelle Bachman's ilk."
"religious conservatives. Some day, and there is no doubt in my mind about this, you are going to bit in the ass by them...big time."
(this one is toward me)"as a woman, which shows that you clearly have little respect for us. You also seem to have little time for people that are non white"
"There is no looking at "the other side" when the other side is doing everything in its power to continue slavery in one form or another."
"In just about every way, conservative chrisitans and fanatical muslims are identiical"
...and I'M the mean one that's pissed off?
So do you liberals not see the brick walls you run into or do you slam into them head first on purpose?
Gang Bang,
Yes. All you did was ask a few questions. Really, stop trying to kid yourself. You told me to fuck off.
Markadelphia said something above about you calling people "race mongers." Is it true that you have said that? If so, what is a "race monger.?"
Please define exactly what brick wall I am running into. George Bush is stupid. Michele Bachmann is stupid. Tell me how they are smart.
I did tell you to fuck off because you accused me of being a racist without any proof whatsoever. You'd be suprised to know that Markadelphia was accused of the exact same thing (being racist) by his friend Charlie just a couple years ago. It's a typical pattern of liberals...it's their way of muzzling people...just throw the charge of racism around. Say I'm wrong about something on here, say I should re-think my position on a certain issue, whatever but when you start making accusations of intolerance and racism don't be suprised if you get hit back.
I'm guessing you didn't bother to call my friends. Facts can be a bitch can't they? Go get your shinebox.
Markadelphia says a lot of things...he even said that the Bush Administration was planting child porn on the computers of their political opponents, then he refused to tell any of us where he read it (all that in a column devoted to "facts").
I haven't called anybody a race monger in this thread but for those of us who aren't blinded by political correctness, race mongers are easy to spot.
Let's take a look at the Duke rape case. I saw video of the black panther party calling one of the accused a "supremist" while chanting for "justice" as the accused was walking into the courtroom. Jesse Jackson shows up on the scene and offers the girl a free scholarship to college.
Then we have Duke University deserting its own students based on the allegations alone and not the evidence of the case. College administrators often speak of community. Isn’t it an essential part of community to defend one’s community against unfounded attacks?
Then you have Al Sharpton and the Tawana Brawley case. I don't need to say anything more about that case.
Then you ahve the NAACP, a once-great civil rights organization, who is now devoting itself to extorting money from corporations whose predecessors it thinks can be tied, in some fashion, to slavery. The money will come from shareholders who had nothing to do with slavery and whose ancestors probably didn't either. In many cases, the ancestors weren't even in this country during the time of slavery, and themselves suffered from various forms of discrimination when they arrived here.
The money will benefit individuals who were never slaves and whose parents and grandparents weren't either. These individuals cannot show that they are worse off today than they would have been if, for example, a southern bank had not owned 100 slaves for a time as collateral on a loan.
Just look at how many in the NAACP reacted to Bill Cosby.
The brick wall is you calling me "pissed off" and saying that I'm "upset" while seeming to completely ignoring the comments made about Michelle Bachmann in here. Based on the quotes put forth, I think it's obvious who is "pissed off" and "upset" on here. I simply put forth a few questions, I didn't call anyone racist, mentally ill, stupid, or accuse anyone of slavery.
VH,
Yale and Harvard Business School educated. He's a man who has battled and overcome alcoholism. He has had successful and failed business ventures. He has progressed further in public service than you (I would presume) or I ever could hope to do. And, if you buy what Markadelphia is selling, he has orchestrated several stolen elections, manipulated the entire country to suit his whim, and possibly even had a hand in 9/11. Not sure how any of that qualifies GWB as "stupid". At least not any more stupid than, say, FDR, who has a strikingly similar background to GWB and who history views quite favorably.
Michelle Bachmann could be stupid. I don't know and I don't care. What I do believe to be true is that the label of "stupid" in the blogosphere is about as meaningful as the term "legacy" in the business world. It gets used all the time, and as more people start to use it, the more they start to look like it.
But let me end it this way. As far as I'm concerned, any politician (R/D/I) who blindly toes a party line qualifies as mildly stupid. But that goes back to the discussion of many moons ago regarding the need for additional political choices. If my choices are to vote my conscience against party line, and thereby risking political endorsement, or to vote the party line and secure my position, am I stupid for voting my conscience or stupid for voting the party line?
Don't post here much but I always enjoy reading the comments.Gang Bang, you are in serious need of some anger management and the line "Methinks thou dost protest too much" comes to mind in regards to your posts.
Correct me if I am wrong but isn't it inherently racist for you to say that Middle Eastern culture, which is a wide swath of peoples, only understands violence? I have travelled to the Middle East on several occasions for my business and have encountered the same mix of people, violence wise, that I encounter here. Markadelphia is correct in stating that there is no difference between conservative Christians and conservative Muslims. They are both so blind by their beliefs that they resort to violence, in one form or another.
For the record, I am a white male and an atheist so I suppose I have an inherent bias against religion. I see Michele Bachman, who this post was about, as being a symptom of this fanaticism and I really don't think you can put Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson in the same category as her. Your anger towards them and your complete mis-representation of facts in the cases you mention demonstrate an inherent racism.
"Complete misrepresentation of facts"? Wow. Are you sure you are not Markadelphia posting under a different name?
You are right about one thing, though. You cannot put Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson in the same category as Michelle Bachmann. They are in a much worse bucket.
Charlie was right when he said I was a racist. I have a bias against Muslim men that is hard for me to get past. Of course, the first step is admitting you have a problem.
I suppose, on one level or another, we are all racist. How many times have we gotten nervous when a black man in baggy jeans and a cell phone is walking behind us down the street? That is racist.
I am extremly ashamed of myself and some of things that I wrote about Muslims years ago when I was filled with anger and fear. I see things differently now and feel stronger for it, although according to neocons I am now weaker.
I would rather defeat any enemy by outsmarting them and taking away their raison d'etre the by lashing out in a blind rage.
No, that's not me...although I agree with everything he says...accept the atheism. I don't get that at all.
There's a blatant misrepresentation of fact right there. You claim that neocons view you as "weaker" because you no longer lash out in rage at Muslims. (or something to that effect) Granted, there are some/many neocons who would claim this. However, the actual fact of the matter is that a great many neocons would label you as weaker because the alternatives and policies that you now support don't have a realistic chance of solving the problem or keeping people safe. The connection between no longer lashing out and being labeled weak is partially a construct of your intellect and largely an extension of what a vocal few say. In the end, though, it's unfair to rationalize a rejection of a school of thought on the basis of that filter.
Re: defeating an enemy by outsmarting them....sounds like a great plan. I'm all for it. What do you propose to do in scenarios where the enemy is beyond rationale?
I don't see how the alternatives that I am proposing keep people less safe. Our current policy is not keeping anyone safe at all. I shudder at the fact that my children are going to have to live with that hatred of us that could've been avoided if Bush Co had actually engaged people in that region after 9-11 rather than attack Iraq. While not everyone in the Middle East loved us, we had a large group of people there and around the world that viewed us as victims and we could've used that to run the table over there.
Make no mistake about it, it was the right move to go into Afghanistan and is still the right move to pursue Al Qadea there. We need to do this with increased vigilance now. That would be step one in my plan. Step two would be to get out of Iraq. Staying there makes things more dangerous for us and does not "keep us safe." It's a civil war between peoples tht had nothing to do with 9-11. Don't believe the lies that they are telling you about that.
Bush lost the war. Period. It's over. It's time to re-deploy our troops to Al Qaeda hot spots around the world and start looking at new ways to gather intelligence on potential attacks, which would be step three. This is done by good old fahsioned police work, as Great Britain did last summer when they stopped the airplane-chemical hijackings. They didn't torture anyone or racially profile anyone...they used simple thought and intelligence and stopped a major attack.
Syria and Iran provided us with much intelligence in the months after 9-11 that lead to the capture of Al Qaeda agents. Granted, this was before Achmenijad took power but we still have to try. It's a game of chess and it involves more than just military moves. We can't just go off into a corner, pout, and look tough.
PL< How dare you think I am Mark? I have made more money in this month alone at my firm than he has made in the last two years?
jk, mc :)
Besides, where do you think he got that "misrepresentation of facts" line from?
What's wrong with being an atheist?
Torch,
take a look at what I said about Keith Ellison in this thread.
Then take a look at what people on here said about Michelle Bachmann (which I summarized).
See any differences?
If you want to only focus on me lashing out at someone who tells me that I "don't have time for non-white people" when my 2 best friends back in Illinois are Hispanic...then it's pretty safe to say that I wouldn't piss on her if she were on fire.
I didn't put Jesse and Al in the same category at anyone and I'm not angry at them - I disagree with their tactics and I think there are other things they should be focusing on (sounds familiar). Uninformedgirl asked me what a race monger was so I told her. I didn't compare them to Michelle Bachmann at all.
I'm sure the people of Iran are very nice. The leaders of that nation are not very nice. Just like there are a couple of question I wish Keith would have answered, there are a few questions I'd like to ask Ahmadinejad...
Would Osama Bin Laden be a welcome guest in your country?
Should Muslims living in Western nations be allowed to apply sharia law within their communities, or must they follow the laws of their country?
Do you believe that western countries in regions once occupied by Muslims, Spain for example, should be returned to "the House of Islam"?
You say you love all people. What would your reaction be if one of your daughters married a Jew?
What would be the proper punishment for anyone who drew a cartoon of the prophet Mohammed?
Are Sunni Muslims pure Muslims or do they practise a bastardized version of Islam?
Will the United States of America exist in 10 years time?
I wasn't referring anyones racism in general (I don't think mc is a racist), I was referring to the debate tactic of throwing out the racism charge.
For the record - there is nothing wrong with being an atheist but I'd like for them to answer a few questions for me as I have a few observations about Atheism. Perhaps in a future discussion.
I think atheism is flawed because it does not leave open the possibility for anything other than the material world. There are so many things beyond what our simple life is here that it is hard to say "That's it."
And if you truly understand Jesus for the shaman that he is and Mary M for the goddess that she is, then it is hard to view them as simple humans who had a nice message.
Post a Comment