Democrats & Liberals Archives

Will we abandon our principles over the Fort Hood massacre?

If a white man had perpetrated the horrible crime at Fort Hood the media and many Americans would readily blame video games or bullying, but since the man was Muslim now we have to start worrying about American Muslims? This man may in fact be a terrorist, even aligned to a terrorist organization or not, but we cannot link his actions with all Muslim Americans.

I’m the last person on the planet to defend religion but this is just another example of Americans immediately blaming the broad institution of Islam for the actions of one individual or a segment of the whole. Why is it that we continually fear non-white Christian groups of people? We hated the Chinese despite their single-handed building of our railroads. We hated the Irish because they were Catholic. Everyone hates the Jews so we just continued that tradition. Our historical disdain of brown people is documented. And now we have identified our newest favorite scapegoat, brown non-Christians, better known as Muslims.

I’m in no way diminishing 9/11, but the hysteria over American Muslims speaks volumes about our willingness to throw an ethnic group under the bus as soon as it becomes convenient and necessary to have a scapegoat to blame for all our ills. Now with the Fort Hood massacre we’re openly talking about screening American Muslims willing to join the military. What’s next, internment camps the likes of which we so readily forced tax-paying Japanese-American citizens into during WWII?

And the kicker here is that we continually ignore the threat of domestic white terrorism. It’s easy for most Americans to accept a brown non-Christian killing Americans, but shouldn’t an alarm be raised at the growing rate of proud Neo-Nazis and white supremacists joining our military and becoming more mainstream than ever? Has our need for endless crusading allowed us to so readily forget that there are plenty of white, non-Muslim organizations growing fertile on American soil that pose a threat? Why do we so readily accept Neo-Nazis and white supremacists in our midst but call for a witch hunt against all Muslim Americans when one does something horrible?

In the year since Barrack Obama was elected president we have seen a dramatic increase in pervasive subtle violence, or at least the preparedness of violence. While gun sales have increased the numbers are not nearly as alarming as the shocking volume of ammunition being stockpiled, in many cases even selling out suppliers. Honestly, how much automatic rifle ammunition does one person need? People, and by that I mean white Americans, seem to be preparing for a race war. Could this have something to do with our brown Muslim socialist Nazi president? I’d say so. And white America has already become uneasy of actual Muslims since 9/11. The Fort Hood massacre can only fuel the fire. If we start requiring Muslim Americans to undergo “special” consideration before joining the military what’s next, special waiting periods for mortgages? Waiting lists for entrance to universities and schools?

What happened at Fort Hood was horrible but it isn’t so easily broken down to its component parts for anyone to be able to point a finger in any direction. We can’t always rationalize tragedy by placing blame and pretending atrocity does not come in all shapes, colors, and creeds. There isn’t always an easy way to grieve. Sometimes we have to accept what happened and not lose our minds. At the minimum we try and figure out what went wrong with the hope of preventing any further such incidents, but we cannot start the cycle of ethnocentrism and racism that inevitably leads us to abandon our principles as Americans for the sake of perceived safety.

Posted by Michael Falino at November 9, 2009 5:17 PM
Comments
Comment #290513

In just the same way that we should not be painting all Muslims as terrorist because of a percentaged view who have extremist views and a few may be prone to violence, so should we not be doing the same to conservatives or liberals in the same regard…

Unfortunately, that hasn’t been the situation for the past few weeks, especially on these boards.

I find it sad that for all the fear that the ‘right wing’ was going to start shooting and killing people, it was an anti-war Muslim that made the decision to cause so much violence.

I will fight with my dying breath the lumping of people into groups like has been done recently by the left and is being feared of happening to the Muslim community by the right. They are the same fear-based attacks to target people as suspect who are not guilty of anything and both are just as wrong.

I just with everyone would be willing to do the same. I might still be on speaking terms with more people, some of whom I used to respect…

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 9, 2009 6:44 PM
Comment #290514

RH,

Oh, you mean the talk of ‘death panels’, ‘killing granny’, ‘pistol packing tea-baggers’, etc.? Yeah them lefties are sure advocating violence…along with them terrorists…err…did you just say what I thought you just said?

Posted by: Marysdude at November 9, 2009 7:04 PM
Comment #290515

PS:

Is the talk of banning military service to Muslims coming from the left?

Posted by: Marysdude at November 9, 2009 7:05 PM
Comment #290520

I believe it might be a good idea for all of us to wait until we know all the facts before making any unwarranted statements about this tragedy. Can we at least finish the mourning before we begin the finger pointing?

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 9, 2009 8:16 PM
Comment #290521

Finger pointing begins even before something like this happens. Events like this are the “proof” preemptive finger pointers thirst for.

Posted by: Mike Falino at November 9, 2009 8:26 PM
Comment #290523
If a white man had perpetrated the horrible crime at Fort Hood the media and many Americans would readily blame video games or bullying…

In point of fact, when a white man commits a terrorist act, aren’t we supposed to blame Rush Limbaugh? I know that’s what Bill Clinton after Oklahoma City. More recently I’ve heard a lot preemptive blaming about supposed violent intentions toward Obama being directed at talk radio and Glenn Beck.

Video games and bullying? That’s reserved for teenagers who shoot up their high schools. I’ve never heard it said about a “man,” whether he’s white or any other color.

And whenever there’s been an abortion doctor killing, isn’t that the doing of the Christian right? Or would that be Rush Limbaugh again? It’s all so confusing. It seems to me that there was quite a discussion about just this not long ago in the blue column.

Like clockwork, every time there’s a terrorist act linked to Muslims, we can expect people to sagely step forth to remind us that we shouldn’t be blaming all Muslim-Americans and to express grave concern about their safety and well-being. The only thing that seems to be missing is any significant number of people who are actually blaming all Muslim-Americans.

If somebody does genuinely post something to that effect on some backwater blog, the ferocity of resulting moral indignation from all quarters would make you think that Muslims are being rounded up into concentration camps.

Posted by: Paul at November 9, 2009 10:29 PM
Comment #290526

Paul,

That would be next…

Posted by: Marysdude at November 9, 2009 11:10 PM
Comment #290528

I agree with what you’re saying, but it mustn’t be understated that all those groups you mentioned, likewise with the Fort Hood killer, were more often than not acting on ideologies particular to each case. The Fort Hood killer may very well have been enacting his view of extreme Islam, but so are abortion doctor killers and any other member of a group known to produce extremists.

I’m simply implying that, as with any of the groups you mentioned, the entire membership cannot be blamed. I don’t blame all Christians when some extremist kills an abortion doctor, but that group is in some way responsible for shaping his/her mind. Same with an extremist Muslim. Their affiliations have lead them to their actions, but it is not always the case that all fellow members would ever act the same.

Not all Muslims are potential terrorists, nor are all Christians. We mustn’t forget the network of belief that lead them to their decisions but we cannot lay that blame where it isn’t always due.

Posted by: Mike Falino at November 10, 2009 12:35 AM
Comment #290529

I left this out, but I wanted to comment on your point that there really isn’t much outcry against Muslim Americans. That’s a good thing. So long as the media doesn’t get hold of it and start promoting the nonsense of fringe groups, it won’t be a problem. But things have a way of spreading like a plague. Let’s hope reason keeps this contained!

Posted by: Mike Falino at November 10, 2009 12:37 AM
Comment #290530

Everyone should take a step back and play our favorite drinking game, The Richard Hofstadter Drinking Game!

It is a great way to spend the weekend: watch the weekend news shows and read the op ed pages. Just make sure in those states that won’t let you buy alcohol on Sunday that you have a pretty good stock ahead of time, you may find yourself going through more than you could ever imagine.

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 10, 2009 12:50 AM
Comment #290531
But things have a way of spreading like a plague. Let’s hope reason keeps this contained!

In this case, so far it has. In regards to the left’s use of this type of fear baiting, they have swallowed it hook line and sinker.

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 10, 2009 12:52 AM
Comment #290532

BTW, a great example of my point…

http://reason.com/archives/2009/09/15/the-paranoid-center

We’ve heard ample warnings about extremist paranoia in the months since Barack Obama became president, and we’re sure to hear many more throughout his term. But we’ve heard almost nothing about the paranoia of the political center. When mainstream commentators treat a small group of unconnected crimes as a grand, malevolent movement, they unwittingly echo the very conspiracy theories they denounce. Both brands of connect-the-dots fantasy reflect the tellers’ anxieties much more than any order actually emerging in the world.

When such a story is directed at those who oppose the politicians in power, it has an additional effect. The list of dangerous forces that need to be marginalized inevitably expands to include peaceful, legitimate critics.

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 10, 2009 1:00 AM
Comment #290542

>Not all Muslims are potential terrorists, nor are all Christians. We mustn’t forget the network of belief that lead them to their decisions but we cannot lay that blame where it isn’t always due.
Posted by: Mike Falino at November 10, 2009 12:35 AM

Mike,

I know you did not intend this statement the way you typed it…all peoples are a potential everything. The potential is there for you to become a serial killer, or the next President. The sociopathic bent may not be there for the first, nor the political acumen for the second…but the potential is surely there.

Definition: 1. possible but as yet not actual: having a latent possibility or likelihood of occurring, or of doing or becoming something posed a potential danger a potential investor


2. expressing possibility: describes a verb or verb form that expresses possibility, e.g. “may” or “might” in English


noun (plural po·ten·tials)

Definition:

1. capacity for development: a capacity to develop, succeed, or become something
has the potential to be profitable
unable to use her expertise to its full potential


2. potential verb form: a verb or verb form that expresses possibility, e.g. “may” or “might” in English

From Encarta

Posted by: Marysdude at November 10, 2009 9:25 AM
Comment #290546

This is the sort of thinking that escalates this sort of incident into something more…

Posted by: mike falino at November 10, 2009 12:05 PM
Comment #290547

Marysdude, you are not entirely correct. Not everyone has the potential to become anything. People generally do not become serial killers, they are most always born. This can be seen in tracing their childhood. I do not have the potential to become a religious terrorist because I do not hold anything so ultimate and unyieldling that I will kill for its principles.

To a lesser extent nobody can be certain of what circumstances might change their lives in drastic ways, but what you are hinting at here is that every Muslim has the potential to become a terrorist, or every Christian. This simply isn’t true.

Unless you are talkign specifically about people taking early on in life and trained to become something, such as terrorist in the Middle East do, but that does not require that every American Muslim has the potential to become a terrorist. Does every German have it in them to hate Jews?

Posted by: mike falino at November 10, 2009 12:08 PM
Comment #290551

From the CBS site linked by mike fallino:

12:25PM: President Obama and Michelle Obama arrive in Killeen, Texas
12:50PM: President Obama and Michelle Obama meet with families of the fallen
1:20PM: President Obama and Michelle Obama meet with wounded soldiers and their families
2:00PM: President Obama addresses the Fort Hood community
3:25PM: President Obama and Michelle Obama meet with wounded soldiers
All times are EDT.

Killeen is a pretty unfortunate name for a town. Two of the families of the fallen are from near here in Chicago
( Francheska Velez 21, recently returned from Iraq)
and suburban Bolingbrook( Michael Pearson, 21, training to deactivate bombs ).
I don’t know how many of their families will actually be in Texas.

Posted by: ohrealy at November 10, 2009 1:05 PM
Comment #290552

What are you talking about? isn’t that a link to an article on Pat Robertson?

Posted by: mike falino at November 10, 2009 2:34 PM
Comment #290553

i have to tell muslim americans, look out. this kind of talk leads to enslavement, encampment, and slaughter. historically speaking.

btw, the new drinking game is “objection”, jobloss, and deficit. cheers.

Posted by: bluebuss at November 10, 2009 3:15 PM
Comment #290555

Here’s a great chart for you, bluebuss…

http://www.rhinehold.org/obamajobs.jpg

HTH

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 10, 2009 3:44 PM
Comment #290556

In all of this, at some point you have to make a distinction between making critical remarks about Islam and its adherents and disturbing rhetoric that is inciting violence or persecution.

It seems to me that many are refusing to make any such distinctions and are in effect trying to carve out an exception and dispensation for Muslims that does not exist for any other group.

In the West, we have a long and time-honored tradition of being extremely critical of all our institutions, including religious institutions, and Christianity in particular has been subjected to a great deal of very harsh questioning. Christians don’t always like it, but there are ways in which it has actually been good for Christianity, a religion which has gone through many reformations and adjustments which have led it to its becoming more compatible with modernity.

If someone verbally criticizes Islam and its adherents, there is nothing wrong with that—those who disagree can always participate in the debate. We cannot and should not say that such debates are off limits. Until certain lines are crossed, and the only lines I can think of are direct incitements of violence, this is all part of the free and open exchange of ideas that is supposed to be part of modern civilization.

Posted by: Paul at November 10, 2009 4:11 PM
Comment #290559

Just wondering…is this heinous crime covered under the new “hate crime” legislation.

I find it hard to understand how some crimes are “love crimes” and others are “hate crimes.”

I can think of a rare instance when a spouse kills his/her spouse out of compassion (and after agreement with the afflicted spouse) for the suffering being experienced with disease. Perhaps this could be called a “love crime”. Perhaps some would consider abortion of certain types of fetuses as love…but since the fetus is never consulted, I don’t know how that could be.

I have heard both liberals and conservatives decry anyone who places religion above country. Well, I am a Christian first and American second so I don’t agree with those positions. Since we have within our military, many, many members who represent all major religions, I would assume that this is accepted and those who kill in the name of religion are the exceptions.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 10, 2009 4:42 PM
Comment #290563

“isn’t that a link to an article on Pat Robertson? ” In your article, you linked to a CBS page and a Huffington page. The Thinkprogress link was in a later post about Pat Robertson. That’s a pretty odd forum where comments can apparently be voted out. Watchblog became unavailable after I posted before. I tried 3 browers and they all said the site lost connection to server. Robertson’s opinions on Islam aren’t anything new. There have also been complaints from non-religious people about Christian infiltration into the command structure of the military.

Posted by: ohrealy at November 10, 2009 6:06 PM
Comment #290566

Being religious or not being religious does not indicate an affinity for terrorism or becoming a serial killer either. Flush is a Christian, who places his religious belief above his love and duty to his country. I am an atheist, so I am not so conflicted. It has always been country first for me. Flush and I live in the same world, in the same nation, and will likely never show violence one to the other. But, religion does sometimes lead one to zealotry, and zealotry leads easily to violence. I cannot even imagine an atheist with that sort of fervor, so…Flush, maybe you should reconsider your priorities? Atheism’s cool, dude!

Posted by: Marysdude at November 10, 2009 6:13 PM
Comment #290569

You’re right Marysdude…you and I will never do violence to each other or anyone else except in self defense or the defense of innocents. For me, there is no conflict between my religious beliefs and love of country. I was drafted into the Army in 1963 and was trained to kill the enemy of our country. No problem with that either. While in the Army I regularly attended church services on the various post at which I served. There was no requirement or reward for being religious or not being religious. That is the way it should be.

My country defined my duty as a member of the military and I served my country. We were told to obey all lawful orders and I did. I was never placed in a position where my orders conflicted with my religious beliefs. And, that is the way it should be.

Had a conflict ever occurred I would have obeyed my moral and ethical beliefs as would you I expect. My country comes first in all but my religious life. That life requires allegiance to my higher power but not to the exclusion of my duty and love for country.

I would expect that country comes first for you also and I would anticipate that you would also place your moral and ethical convictions above the love of country if circumstances justified it in your own mind.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 10, 2009 6:37 PM
Comment #290570

I find myself in a strange position with incidents such as this. I am completely non-religious and have very strong opinions about religion. In fact, I never excuse a religion for anything, but I do have to uphold the belief that not everyone falls under broader labels when making observations and judgments about a group or belief system.

Posted by: Mike Falino at November 10, 2009 7:46 PM
Comment #290571
But, religion does sometimes lead one to zealotry, and zealotry leads easily to violence. I cannot even imagine an atheist with that sort of fervor

Religion can lead to zealotry, but even an atheist must acknowledge that it also (and no matter what religion we’re talking about) acts as a check on people’s behaviors. Fear of eternal punishment can have that effect on you. For every zealot willing to commit violence in the name of a religon, there are probably hundreds if not thousands willing to seek peace in the name of that same religion.

As for atheists never being zealots, you only need to look at the followers of Mao, Lenin, and Stalin. Zealotry can be the result of extreme and rigid adherence to any ideology, not just religious ideology.

Where you see religious zealotry, you can often look below the surface a little and see many completely non-religious factors. Islamic terrorism, for instance, is very much tied up with all sorts of other economic and political factors. The more stable and prosperous a Muslim community/state is, the fewer people it seems to produce who want to wage jihad against the infidels. When you have things like educational opportunities, a good job, or a nice home, the idea of blowing yourself up to kill non-believers loses much of its appeal.

Posted by: Paul at November 10, 2009 8:49 PM
Comment #290575

Paul-
The stereotypes are worse than useless for dealing with this. They validate Bin Laden’s vision of fight between Islam and the West. We need to undermine that vision, because that’s how people like him motivate their foot soldiers.

Moreover, this is supposed to be a country where suspicion falls on those who give reason for suspicion through their actions, not on those who simply look like somebody who did, or who share some of their affiliations in a loose way.

We seek after and punish the guilty, and let everybody else get on with their mild-mannered lives. millions of Arab Americans and millions of Muslims in this country did not walk into an Army base and open fire. As such, they should not be treated like they did.

You should not be singled out for your name, your religion, or your parentage. If you have done wrong, you should be punished for it. In America we can’t simply declare somebody wrong for who they are. That’s not how it works.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 10, 2009 10:14 PM
Comment #290577

When a cop in Massachusetts arrested a black professor, our president jumped to the conclusion that it was racism. When a nut case shot an abortion doctor, the PC crowd blamed his Christian religion and Bill O’Reilly. There is a lot of jumping.

In the Ft Hood incident we have a man who gave speeches about how Islam struggled, said that Muslim soldiers should be excused from duty, tried to contact members of Al Qaida and yelled Allah Akbar as he shot at a crowd of unarmed people who had done him no harm.

There is no doubt that the killed was crazy. It is unlikely he was part of an international conspiracy, but he did strongly identify himself as Islamic.

I was brought up Catholic. It is not my fault nor an indictment of the whole church that a few priests are perverts. Yet I feel a little twinge of shame for being associated with them. It is illogical, but I expect good Muslims must feel bad about having a guy like this murderer claiming to act in the name of his religion.

Islam indeed does not accept that sort of behavior. If the man had read his Koran more carefully, he would know that he had committed a grave sin and will go to hell for it, at least by the faith he purports to hold dear.

He also betrayed his comrades and his country. I hope that we arrange for his punishment on earth and assume that his God will punish him in the next.

Good Muslims and good people in general condemn this act. He is a bad man who did an evil thing. He broke the laws of God and man. He is not acting in the name of Islam or any other religion worthy of the name.

Posted by: Christine at November 10, 2009 10:32 PM
Comment #290579

Paul,

The brethren you named off were called atheist all right, but they did nothing because of their atheism, or in the name of atheism. Actually they may or may not have been atheists anyway, as they all saw religion as an obstacle to the power they sought. They wanted to be worshiped in their own right, and did not want the competition. The very act of seeking that worship for themselves belies atheism.

Anyway, I bandy the word atheist around mostly to keep Christians on their toes…atheism takes too much energy, I’m more of a ‘don’t give a rat’s arse’ than anything else. I truly don’t care if there is a God or not, if He exists He will understand my lack of regard, or if He doesn’t accept me the way He built me, He is not someone I’d like to spend eternity with. If He doesn’t exist, I’ve lost nothing.

But, in any case, a ‘vent’ in this morning’s AJC was about how this fellow liked Fox News best, because the ‘liberal’ media did not discuss the killer’s being an Islamist as much. I watched parts of most national coverage, and his being a Muslim was mentioned regularly. This fellow apparently wanted or needed encouragement to foment his hatred, and Fox was the only place he could get it. Is that what you were talking about, Mike?

Posted by: Marysdude at November 10, 2009 10:58 PM
Comment #290580
millions of Arab Americans and millions of Muslims in this country did not walk into an Army base and open fire. As such, they should not be treated like they did.

And nobody is treating them like they did. Pleasing high-minded rhetoric is good and fine, but it’s meaningless to any person who would actually lash out at all Muslims for something like this. Such a person would have to be as deranged as Hasan, and all of this Chicken Soup for the Soul would leave make no impression on them.

For the rest of us, we’re being spoken to like children. We might as well be told that we shouldn’t lash out at all bipeds with opposable thumbs because the Fort Hood shooter was a biped with opposable thumbs.

At the same time, it would also be childish to pretend that his religion had nothing to do with his actions. Acknowledging this is not to blame everyone with the same religion, to say that there’s anything inherently wrong with the religion, or even to say that his religion was the only factor. Looking at the totality of the facts requires first and foremost looking at the totality of the facts and not leaving some out because certain groups might be uncomfortable with them.

Posted by: Paul at November 10, 2009 11:02 PM
Comment #290584

Christine:

Islam indeed does not accept that sort of behavior. If the man had read his Koran more carefully, he would know that he had committed a grave sin and will go to hell for it, at least by the faith he purports to hold dear.
He also betrayed his comrades and his country. I hope that we arrange for his punishment on earth and assume that his God will punish him in the next.
Good Muslims and good people in general condemn this act. He is a bad man who did an evil thing. He broke the laws of God and man. He is not acting in the name of Islam or any other religion worthy of the name.

As you said, you were brought up Catholic, and I am sure you are familiar with past Catholics knowledge of the bible. It wasn’t until the last few decades, Catholics were even allowed to own a bible or encouraged to read it. If a Catholic wanted to know what the bible said, they were to ask the priest. The purpose of catechism classes was to teach Catholics the principles and traditions of the church and not necessarily the teachings of scripture. Now we can apply this to Islam as well. Islam allows the believer to read the Koran, but the interpretation of the Koran is left up to the religious leaders. This is the reason Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds all read the same Koran, but interpret it differently. The Muslim who killed 13 people and wounded thirty-some attended the same mosque as two of those involved in the twin towers attack. Now the question is, if the Koran teaches peace and love (which I do not believe), then what was being taught in this particular mosque? If the Koran teaches peace and love and if the majority of Muslims in America believe it teaches peace and love, then why hasn’t there been a cry of anger from Muslims over the violence committed by a few. Instead of denouncing the horrendous crimes of violence, the Muslims who have spoken up tried to justify themselves as being good American citizens. Example, when Hasan committed the shootings, his relatives allowed themselves to be interviewed by the media and told that he was a great American. He was not a great American; he was a traitor and a murderer. The media as well as many others, including Obama, immediately called for us to not make judgment until all the facts were revealed. First, Obama did not do that when he condemned not only Massachusetts’s police, but also all police, when he accused them of racism. Second, when Hasan cried out to the praise of Allah when he began to cut people down, it became a religious terrorist attack. It’s not hard to figure that out. I want to know why Obama is so fast to condemn Americans and so eager to justify Muslims? If Islam “does not accept that sort of behavior”, them why is it the most violent religion in the world? Why are thousands killed everyday around the world by Muslims, in the name of Allah. If killing innocent people is such a “grave sin”, with the punishment of “hell”, then why do Muslims strap grenades to their children and send them on school buses to blow up themselves and others? Why do the religious leaders promise those who commit terror, 72 virgins and an eternity in heaven?

For a westerner or a Christian to try to understand Islam, is like trying to apply logic to a liberal.

Posted by: propitiation at November 11, 2009 12:31 AM
Comment #290588

propitiation,

For a westerner or a Christian to try to understand Islam, is like trying to apply logic to a liberal.

So much hate is in that sentence, one hardly knows how to respond.

All I can say is, it takes true arrogance to believe such a thing.

Posted by: gergle at November 11, 2009 5:44 AM
Comment #290589

Yehweh, God Almighty, Allah…all are the God of Abraham…yep, the very same guy. You Christians, are brothers under the skin with Islamics and Jews, because you worship the very same God…hmmm…you don’t worship in the same way, probably because your way is best. But since God wrote the Bible, the Koran, and the Torah…until the new ‘conservative’ version of the Bible comes out…who knows who is writing it, but rest assured it won’t be a supreme being…so how can you be so SURE your way is best?

Posted by: Marysdude at November 11, 2009 7:00 AM
Comment #290590

See, it’s the priest’s fault for being dark skinned…

This is the same thing when I hear people “suspect” a Sikh or Hindu on a train. I wonder if there is an undercurrent of thought that good patriotic Ameicans should be expected to act outside the law when they “suspect” a terrorist. Now we take the law into our own hands? And while I do not know the details of this story I will even give this man the benefit of the doubt and presume his actions were honorable. But that doesn’t justify singling out brownish people and taking the law into your own hands.

Posted by: mike falino at November 11, 2009 7:29 AM
Comment #290593

Gergle:

So the only thing you read in my statement to Christine was, “For a westerner or a Christian to try to understand Islam, is like trying to apply logic to a liberal”?

“So much hate is in that sentence, one hardly knows how to respond.
All I can say is, it takes true arrogance to believe such a thing.”

Hate is an emotion and being illogical is also based on emotion. Your statement proves my point that a liberal’s thinking is illogical and is based on emotion. What part of my statement is false? IMO, a westerner or Christian cannot understand the mind of a Muslim. Hasan’s own statement, that we “fear death and Muslims welcome it” is totally illogical and foreign to westerners. So this part of the statement is true. Now, is it possible to apply logic to a “Liberals” thinking? No because liberals base their thinking on emotion and not on logic. How can I prove this? What liberal program is not argued from “the poor, the downtrodden, the minority, the weak, the illegal alien and their suffering, the rich, the haves and the have-nots”? These are all emotion based.

Marydud:

I guess you could say, we are all brothers, being the sons of Adam, who was the first man created by God. We (conservative Christians)already have the conservative bible; it is called the King James. Actually, God did not write the bible: (2Pe 1:20) “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.” (2Pe 1:21) “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” and also (2Ti 3:16) “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

Meaning, men who were inspired by God, wrote it.

I don’t believe “my way” is right any more, than any other religious person, including an atheist or agnostic, believes his or her way is right. Your statement is illogical, because any person who has personal religious beliefs; believes his way is right. Perhaps you can provide me proof of a person who has personal religious beliefs, who does not believe his beliefs, but believes someone else’s totally different beliefs? See how illogical this sounds?

mike falino:

If this marine is found guilty of beating this man then he should be punished. Of course, I am sure, you haven’t pre-judged this man, since he is presumed innocent until proven guilty, right? I don’t think any logical thinking person would believe in vigilantly justice.

“I wonder if there is an undercurrent of thought that good patriotic Ameicans should be expected to act outside the law when they “suspect” a terrorist. Now we take the law into our own hands?”

Do you have proof of this statement, or is it simply based on emotion?

Posted by: propitiation at November 11, 2009 9:35 AM
Comment #290595
Marydud:

I guess you could say, we are all brothers, being the sons of Adam Actually, God did not write the bible…men who were inspired by God, wrote it.


Posted by: propitiation at November 11, 2009 09:35 AM

propohooligan,

Then those Muslims and Jews who wrote the other two were also inspired by the same God? And the ones who are currently writing the ‘new and improved’ conservative version are also so inspired…I feel an inspiration coming on, perhaps I should write a Bible…hmmm…logic to follow.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 11, 2009 10:11 AM
Comment #290596

Mike,

The American Family Association has already called for discontinuance of Muslims in our military…and the weirdness just continues to build…it has a life of its own…a life nurtured in ignorance and fed by hate…mostly Christion hate…logic to follow (propohooligan thinks the rest of us are illogical, so I’m hoping I for one catch some of it before he uses it all up).

Posted by: Marysdude at November 11, 2009 10:18 AM
Comment #290597

propitiation - where did you get this garbage? Catholics not being allowed to own a bible or encouraged to read it? Uh … wrong. I was raised Catholic, went to a Catholic school, my aunt is a nun. We have always had a bible in our house, never have I once been discouraged from reading it. What is your basis for that statement? I am an atheist so I don’t really care but this is just wrong.

Second, what does the arrest of a black professor for being in his own home have to do with a mass murder? Apparently you have jumped to a conclusion in the absence of facts since we still do not know the reasons Hasan did this not do we know if there are accomplices to this horrendous crime. Because a few things get leaked in the press doesn’t make them so. That is why we have a court system.

Finally, saying that it is impossible for Christian to understand Islam is also wrong. It is even possible for an atheist to understand why people do this kind of thing in the name of their invisible superman. Christians do it, Muslims do it, all religious zealots are prone to this because they believe they are righteous and that the end justifies the means. It is that simple it doesn’t take understanding the Koran or understanding the Bible, or whatever religious work to understand why people commit violence in the name of their religion. It is the same reason why Christians kill abortion doctors and why Catholics and protestants killed each other. When you believe that there is an afterlife and that if you sacrifice yourself for you perception of what your god wants then you lose respect for life, your own and others and it leads you to treat life as disposable.

Logic has nothing to do with religion because it is based on faith.

Posted by: tcsned at November 11, 2009 10:21 AM
Comment #290598
And while I do not know the details of this story I will even give this man the benefit of the doubt and presume his actions were honorable. But that doesn’t justify singling out brownish people and taking the law into your own hands.

Part of why you don’t have the details of the story is that you got it from ThinkProgress…

The person in question was a roided-up cowboy looking for a fight wherever it may come. He has made claims that the priest grabbed his crotch…

This event would have happened irregardless of Fort Hood because he was looking for it. The rage he fed his body (seriously, read about his website dedicated to the joy of steroids) is more of the reason why this occurred than anything else.

But leave it to ThinkProgress to try to paint a different picture for their own agenda, that is what they do. Misrepresent and push that agenda, 24 hours a day.

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 11, 2009 10:49 AM
Comment #290599

“King James. Actually, God did not write the b..” No William Tyndale did c 1534, which is what gay KJ, buggerer of boys Bacon, and the ecclesiastical commission based their work on. That version was corrected by the Geneva b.. c 1570, which was the version used by “Shake-speare” and our forefathers. KJ liked the earlier Tyndale because it was more monarchist. The 1530s language was archaic even in 1611. Check letters written at the time.

I’m waiting for more details on the marine in Tampa, but I’m guessing drunk and stupid may have played a bigger part in that story than ranters.

Posted by: ohrealy at November 11, 2009 10:52 AM
Comment #290605

propitiation, no I’m no prejudging him. And if he took the law into his own hands he should be punished. i’m just saying that anti-American Muslim hysteria could bring about bad actions even from those trying to do good.

Posted by: mike falino at November 11, 2009 12:09 PM
Comment #290614

marysdud:

Actually the “Christian” accepts the Jewish written Old Testament as God inspired. I’m not sure about the Koran, but do Muslims claim the Koran to be inspired by Allah? Does it actually say in the Koran that it is god inspired?

tcsned:

Might I suggest you read “Fifty Years in the Church of Rome”, by Charles Chiniquy. Written in 1886, found at Amazon for $14.95. When you finish, I can recommend a few other books.

The irony of Obama’s call for restraint in coming to conclusions about that murderous Hasan coming from the same clown who jumped to conclusions by calling the police racist in MA.

Finally, in your much wisdom as an atheist, perhaps you can explain to me why Muslims strap bombs to their children and tell them to commit suicide? Perhaps you could also tell me why their religious leaders promote jihad; the art of attacking and killing infidels. Do you call these acts, logical? I must admit, I have never heard this preached from the pulpit of a Christian church. Do you have evidence of Christians killing abortion doctors? And you stated doctors (plural). Or are you blanketing all Christians by the act of one murderer. According to the bible, no murderer shall enter into heaven, so from a logical point of view, if a person is a murderer, he cannot be a Christian. So it is illogical for you to accuse a Christian of being a murderer.

ohrealy:

I have no idea what you are talking about!!! I simply answered marysdud’s question about a conservative bible, that I already had one, the King James. But you impressed the crap out of me with your ramblings about Tyndale, Geneva, and Shake Spear.

Posted by: propitiation at November 11, 2009 2:16 PM
Comment #290615

Propitiation,

The Qur’an is really just a version Old Testament with some added books from their main prophet, Muhammad.

Muslims believe the Qur’an to be the book of divine guidance and direction for mankind, and consider the original Arabic text to be the final revelation of God.

These started, according to Islamic belief, with the messages revealed to Adam, regarded in Islam as the first prophet, and continued with the Suhuf Ibrahim (Scrolls of Abraham), the Tawrat (Torah or Pentateuch), the Zabur (Tehillim or Book of Psalms), and the Injeel (Christian Gospel). The Qur’an assumes familiarity with major narratives recounted in Jewish and Christian scriptures, summarizing some, dwelling at length on others, and, in some cases, presenting alternative accounts and interpretations of events.

This information is pretty easily available…

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 11, 2009 2:24 PM
Comment #290616

Rhinehold:

I am not that familiar with Islam and you seem to have a grasp of it. What do you know about the 12th Imam? Do you have any credible links? Just for self study.

Posted by: propitiation at November 11, 2009 2:33 PM
Comment #290617

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12th_imam has some pretty good information for a start to any study into the topic…

Muhammad al-Māhdī also known as Hujjat ibn al-Hasan (15th Sha‘bān 255 AH - present; approximately July 29, 869 - unknown date) is the individual believed by Twelver Shī‘a Muslims to be the Māhdī, the ultimate savior of humankind and the final Imām of the Twelve Imams. Twelver Shī‘a believe that al-Māhdī was born in 869 and did not die but rather was hidden by God (this is referred to as the Occultation) and will later emerge with Jesus in order to fulfill their mission of bringing peace and justice to the world. He assumed the Imamate at 5 years of age. Sunnīs and other Shī‘ah schools do not consider ibn-al-Hasan to be the Māhdī.
Posted by: Rhinehold at November 11, 2009 2:40 PM
Comment #290620

Thanks, I will study it. It seems to be an interesting topic.

Posted by: propitiation at November 11, 2009 2:50 PM
Comment #290622

propitiation -

I am somewhat familiar with Chinquy - I have an MA in history and studied Civil War history under renown scholar James I Robertson. Chinquay came up under conspiracy theorists about the war which he claimed was started by the Vatican in support of the southern states and that they assassinated Lincoln. That guy is a whack-job and thought that the Catholic Church was pagan and a bunch of other crazy stuff. I am no defender of the Vatican but that guy’s claims are ludicrous. As to Christians who killed in the name of their religious beliefs, how about Scott Roeder murder of Dr. George Tiller and the response of Randall Terry, another believer in the invisible superman, who said “George Tiller was a mass-murderer. We grieve for him that he did not have time to properly prepare his soul to face God. I am more concerned that the Obama Administration will use Tiller’s killing to intimidate pro-lifers into surrendering our most effective rhetoric and actions.” That’s how supposed Christians treated another human being and reacted to his murder. How is that any different than killing someone in the name of Islam or any other religion? Anyone who kills in the name of their religion is a twisted individual no matter what religion and what reason they decide to kill or how many people they kill.

here is a list of abortion doctors murdered by supposed Christians:
* March 10, 1993: Dr. David Gunn of Pensacola, Florida was fatally shot during a protest. He had been the subject of wanted-style posters distributed by Operation Rescue in the summer of 1992. Michael F. Griffin was found guilty of Dr. Gunn’s murder and was sentenced to life in prison.
* July 29, 1994: Dr. John Britton and James Barrett, a clinic escort, were both shot to death outside of another facility in Pensacola. Rev. Paul Jennings Hill was charged with the killings. Hill received a death sentence and was executed September 3, 2003.
* December 30, 1994: Two receptionists, Shannon Lowney and Lee Ann Nichols, were killed in two clinic attacks in Brookline, Massachusetts. John Salvi, who prior to his arrest was distributing pamphlets from Human Life International,[6] was arrested and confessed to the killings. He died in prison and guards found his body under his bed with a plastic garbage bag tied around his head. Salvi had also confessed to a non-lethal attack in Norfolk, Virginia days before the Brookline killings.
* January 29, 1998: Robert Sanderson, an off-duty police officer who worked as a security guard at an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama, was killed when his workplace was bombed. Eric Robert Rudolph, who was also responsible for the 1996 Centennial Olympic Park bombing, was charged with the crime and received two life sentences as a result.
* October 23, 1998: Dr. Barnett Slepian was shot to death at his home in Amherst, New York. His was the last in a series of similar shootings against providers in Canada and northern New York state which were all likely committed by James Kopp. Kopp was convicted of Dr. Slepian’s murder after finally being apprehended in France in 2001.

I don’t know what is illogical about accusing these supposed Christians of murder. You are not making sense.

As to why Islamic people kill in the name of their religion I say it is the same reason the above criminals did - because they are self-righteous crusaders mistakenly thinking that they are on some holy mission to kill people who think differently from them. Put simply, they are crazy. This has been fueled by poverty and hopelessness in the Middle East which hands more gullible young men and women into the hands of monsters that would use them in their holy wars.

Posted by: tcsned at November 11, 2009 3:28 PM
Comment #290624

tcsned,

Well placed and well said…thank you.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 11, 2009 4:18 PM
Comment #290625

Sociopathic crazies do bad stuff…religion guarantees it.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 11, 2009 4:20 PM
Comment #290626

tcsned said, “I don’t know what is illogical about accusing these supposed Christians of murder.”

So are they “supposed” christians or are they really christians? You base your statement about muslims, “As to why Islamic people kill in the name of their religion I say it is the same reason the above criminals did - because they are self-righteous crusaders mistakenly thinking that they are on some holy mission to kill people who think differently from them”, on what christians do. By your first statement, you never proved the murderers were christians.

I think these muslims are terrorists and I believe there is a whole bunch of them. And I think there is such a hatred of christians by the left, that they are willing to identify all christians with terrorists.

Posted by: dembs at November 11, 2009 5:28 PM
Comment #290627

Christine-
He didn’t jump to the conclusion that it was racist. He just said it was stupid to arrest somebody for breaking into their own home. He later made peace between the two sides, but was pilloried in the Conservative press for doing so.

I agree that somebody should have been looking into Ft Hood shooter’s behavior deeper, but not because of his religion. It isn’t religion that brings people to this, it’s that they turn off, for one reason or another, their sense of empathy towards others. Timothy McVeigh was a former soldier, and he killed hundreds, including children. The Olympic Park Bomber, Eric Rudolph, Ted Kaczynkzi, and others all either turned this ability to empathize off, or they never had it to begin with.

I think, though, that in this case, he turned it off. Something affected him about the events of the last few years, that turned him from a man who approached an imam to thank him for his speech against the Terrorists who committed 9/11 to the brutal fratricidal killer who betrayed the trust accorded him as an officer and supposedly killed in the name of Islam.

Such men we should pity, not exclusive of our condemnation of them, for their actions have solved nothing, and would likely be seen as counterproductive, if what set them off was abuse from fellow soldier and horror at what’s happening in Iraq. The devil has tempted them with power and given them less than nothing to gain in the bargain.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 11, 2009 6:12 PM
Comment #290643

tcsned said, “I don’t know what is illogical about accusing these supposed Christians of murder.”

dembs,

Re-reading the statement might help…supposed Christians are those who PROFESS Christianity, but ACT pathological. It’s the same with that Major at FT Hood…he PROFESSES to be Islamic, but ACTED pathological. Neither Christianity not Islam teach this sort of behavior, but all religions teach that everyone but them is evil, corrupt or slated for hell. Religion is the root cause, no matter which one you belong to.

Mike, I think by reading the many posts to your thread, we may have already forfeited our national principles.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 11, 2009 11:18 PM
Comment #290649

propitiation,

It’s sad that you seem to aver that hate speech is logic. That you cannot see your own rage is telling and speaks to your own lack of even an apparent rudimentary understanding of the word logic.

Posted by: gergle at November 12, 2009 1:15 AM
Comment #290652

I agree with Stephen that they should have looked into this guy’s behavior more closely. However, just having the profile of someone who does insane things like this doesn’t mean they all act. My university suffered the worst school shooting ever a few years ago. The guy who did it gave off tons of warning signs that he might snap. The problem is there were probably 500 people on this campus that had similar if not worse profiles and they did not act. What do you do? Put people in jail because they might act in the future? Put them in mental institutions for life? Just because someone has a certain profile doesn’t mean that they will be anything other than productive citizens. I’m sure the US military has thousands of people who have similar profiles to Hasan (who regretfully also came from VA Tech) that will be good soldiers and do their jobs. I just don’t see how profiling folks stops this problem or doesn’t catch a bunch of harmless people in it’s net.

dembs & Marysdude - md - you are correct - I said supposed Christians because whoever this Jesus figure was, I don’t think he ever said that killing anyone for any reason was ok. I should have also said “supposed Muslims” too. i think people are way too caught up on the religious beliefs of those in the Middle East and are missing the root causes of why fundamentalism is popular and it goes back to poverty and oppression, not religion. If the people in the Middle East had a middle class, jobs, and hope they would not be susceptible to these crazy clerics and zealots - they would be working and raising their families. We have those lunatics in this country like David Koresh and Jim Jones even Randall Terry but most people are too busy living their lives to give them much attention. A few fringe people who are on the edge follow that stuff but not enough to really cause the problems they have in the Middle East. If we had that kind of poverty and oppression then there would be Christian versions of Al Qaeda training camps in the mountains that surround my town, and a lot of towns.

Posted by: tcsned at November 12, 2009 8:53 AM
Comment #290656

michael

you said:
“In the year since Barrack Obama was elected president we have seen a dramatic increase in pervasive subtle violence, or at least the preparedness of violence. While gun sales have increased the numbers are not nearly as alarming as the shocking volume of ammunition being stockpiled, in many cases even selling out suppliers. Honestly, how much automatic rifle ammunition does one person need? People, and by that I mean white Americans, seem to be preparing for a race war. Could this have something to do with our brown Muslim socialist Nazi president? I’d say so. And white America has already become uneasy of actual Muslims since 9/11. The Fort Hood massacre can only fuel the fire. If we start requiring Muslim Americans to undergo “special” consideration before joining the military what’s next, special waiting periods for mortgages? Waiting lists for entrance to universities and schools?”

talk about fear mongering, and painting with a broad brush. JEEEEEZ !

Posted by: dbs at November 12, 2009 10:37 AM
Comment #290667

dbs,

It’s the new mindset apparently. I seem to remember many who are expressing this mindset complaining about the fear-mongering and broad brush strokes of the right after 9/11, you would think that they would be the first to denounce that type of behavior having been the victims of it, but that doesn’t appear to be the case.

Perhaps my article ‘The Otiosity of Fear’ is more appropriate now than it was last year…

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 12, 2009 3:23 PM
Comment #290668

that’s why i said this kind of talk leads to encampments, etc.

so, if we take religion out of the mix, that means 15 saudi’s attacked us on 9/11. and we are fighting 2 wars, and not against that country. kind of my point.

george w declared war on terrorism. not a fight for anything such as freedom, but war on terrorism. so, many of color, certain garb, and dialect are going to be discriminated against. i mean, this is america right?

i mean, christine, you really don’t think that race had anything to do w/the old professor and the white cop? you are naive. pictures of himself in HIS house. that started off racist, and ended in a black man in jail. what a shocker.

and as far as catholics not owning bibles?!? what? now i have known a lot of booze soaked catholics, but they have always owned bibles. you are wrong. i know a family who is catholic and they have a generational bible. meaning, it’s been around like 150 years.

ppl who kill others in the name of God, always seem to have a deeper motive. oil, land, gold. none of the real motives turn out to be truly God related. in this country and in others. that goes for killing for virgins too. can you imagine 72 13 year olds running around? i mean does that sound like heaven to anyone?

and, God instructed the writing of the bible.

Posted by: bluebuss at November 12, 2009 3:36 PM
Comment #290696

there is so much wrong w/the comments, it is hard to find a starting spot.

guesswho - do you still own guns, and ammo? was there someone knocking at your door demanding to return them? no.

democrats are illogical? really. so those crazy town hollers are dems? the gun toting nut bags are democrats? no. those are enlightened republicans. why do they always need to comb their hair. gop needs to start passing out combs before these photo op meetings.

Posted by: bluebuss at November 13, 2009 9:13 AM
Comment #290700

bluebuss,

Most people can see the writing on the wall. With the healthcare plans being offered, simply owning a gun puts you in a ‘high risk’ category and causes extra scrutiny by the health and human services department. You can call people paranoid, but there are signs that people see that worry them…

I’m not personally worried myself, but I’m also not scared about defending my rights. Most people really don’t want to go against their government and are willing to give some of the rights up when push comes to shove.

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 13, 2009 10:18 AM
Comment #290701

bluebuss

the point is we need to stop the fear mongering on both sides of the aisle, and do what needs to be done, rather than using fear to convince people to surrender even more liberties to the gov’t.

there were signs that all was not right with this guy, but nothing was done for fear of being accused of racial profiling, or law suits. so tell me just what has political correctness, and the desire not to offend anyone gotten us? the last i checked there was no constitutional right not to be offended.

as far as stockpiling guns, and ammunition. look at the make up of the current administration and his appointees, many if not all rabidly anti second amendment. people are reacting to what they see as a threat to thier freedom, and preparing for the worst. if you thought there was going to be a shortage of food, water, or anything else would you stock up? whats the difference?

Posted by: dbs at November 13, 2009 10:22 AM
Comment #290708

i guess i am missing the signs that my gov’t hates me, and is after me, my insurance, my guns, my grandma, and my bible.

you are being lead (way too easily) that america is now socialist, lead by a man not born of this country, and gasp, black.

this man is trying to unify. he’s proud to be american. he has risen up from food stamps to be leader of the free world. he has worked w/the poor, and has been poor. he wants to improve the poor’s health care situation, extended unemployment benefits, and handed out billions to states to help them fiscally. why how dare him - socialist bastard.

get real. the only person who is a threat to americans right now is rupert murdock. see my post as of today on glenn beckian rant - it can extend to this column too.

Posted by: bluebuss at November 13, 2009 11:53 AM
Comment #290709

bluebuss,

What a leap of ‘logic’ to go from being concerned about individual rights under assault from both parties to ‘being led that america is now socialist, lead by a man not born of this country, and gasp, black.’

It’s one of the more disgusting arguments I see, that if you are not WITH this president completely you must be an ignorant racist…

You seem to forget that all that money he is handing out his not HIS to hand out, it is ours, and some of us feel that we have a say in how that is done. Putting a gun to someone’s head to help someone out doesn’t help anyone, but by your standards we should be beating up the forgotten man so that we can all ‘feel better’.

Talk about ‘rants’… jeeesh.

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 13, 2009 11:58 AM
Comment #290712

bluebuss;

“this man is trying to unify. he’s proud to be american.”

Everytime he opens his mouth on TV, which is at least once every day, he causes more devision in tis country. He is a divider and not a unifier.

The second part of your statement is a joke. I want you to post just one quote by Obama, when he has spoken in a foreign country, where he says he is proud of anything about america. I say speeches on foreign soil because he has had more to say in foreign countries than any place else. Just show me one quote of pride in america. If he is what you say, then it shouldn’t be hard to do. I suggest he is not only in perpetual campaign mode; he has made it his personal quest to apologize for america and everything we have done in history, to every nation in the world.

And yes, he is a socialist, and he surrounds himself with socialists. The sad thing is that we are a nation that has no leader; we have no president. We are leaderless. We have a campaigner living in the WH, and two radicals running the congress.

Posted by: dembs at November 13, 2009 12:23 PM
Comment #290714

Dembs,

From Obama’s speech in Cairo:

America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire.

We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words – within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: “Out of many, one.”

You need to look at more than the soundbytes found in right wing media.

Posted by: Warped Reality at November 13, 2009 12:59 PM
Comment #290723

d-day normandy.

Posted by: bluebuss at November 13, 2009 2:06 PM
Comment #290740

News Flash:

William Jefferson, former congressman from Louisiana was just sentenced to 13 years in prison. I’m sure all of you liberals who were defended him in the past are experiencing depression at this time. Now all we have to do is get Franks, Dodd, and Rangel. There is a God and the rule of law triumphs.

Posted by: dembs at November 13, 2009 6:42 PM
Comment #290743

dembs,

Please cite those who defended Jefferson. Some may have said wait for some proofs, the frozen monies might belong to someone else, but defend that crook? Not on this blog site. And especially not the way Cunningham, DeLay, Abramoff et al were defended by the right. And Cheney/Bush, the prisoner torturer, CIA agent outer, war mongering liar, etc., etc. is even yet being defended by some righties, even when the others are trying to distance themselves from him and the pack that act as apologists for him. Many used-to-be-staunch Republicans are so embarrassed by Cheney/Bush’s record of corruption that they now talk middle-of-the-road conservatism and even claim third party status. I don’t blame them…I would too, were I in their shoes.

Thank YOU for remaining the fringe guy we can depend on to make our points for us.

Posted by: Marysdude at November 13, 2009 7:13 PM
Comment #290747

dembs, you posted the same thing in the Indy Column, which I already responded to. BTW, Franks is the last name of a GOP representative from Arizona’s 2nd Congressional district. I haven’t heard anything about him breaking any laws, but I’m glad you kept your bashing bipartisian.

Posted by: Warped Reality at November 13, 2009 7:36 PM
Comment #290775

I’m wondering if Obama got more or less that 54 warnings saying, “Husan determined to strike at Fort Hood.” The right wing is saying that this is a terrorist attack “on his watch,” and if we want to hold true to our principles we should attack Australia where there is bound to be at least one al Qaeda cell.
Whilst we’re talking politics in this vein then let’s find out the political party of the majority of military officers and F.B.I. agents.

Posted by: Stephen Hines at November 14, 2009 7:40 PM
Comment #296241

The catholic church is pagan in its origin. Rome chose various pagan religions as the official state religion from time to time. Rome then chose and mandated Christianity as the official state religion and co-opted pagan beliefs in the process. For example christmas is a re-branded pagan holiday that was celebrated by pre-christian Romans (in the form of Saturnalia and the like). There are also many forms of symbolism and motifs that descend from pre-christian beliefs (specifically) in the western roman empire that are seen most visibly in Western Christianity and the Catholic church. The ring in “christian” marriage ceremonies for example was adopted from pagan marriage ceremonies and so on.

Posted by: ron at February 25, 2010 11:57 AM
Comment #380616

bad, choosing mulberry a stylish case can reebok shoes also be juicy couture outlet a great mcm handbags option. louboutin Thin insanity workout rubberized cases oakley sunglasses can provide salvatore ferragamo a fun splash soccer shoes of color, mont blanc or north face outlet eye-catching design to your device. These items will valentino shoes allow you to express asics running your personality herve leger through true religion jeans your polo ralph phone and converse shoes also nfl jerseys can be used lululemon outlet in ghd hair keeping chanel handbags your louboutin phone clean and bottega veneta free supra shoes from burberry cosmetic defects. Furthermore, in birkin bag such michael kors outlet cases, tory burch outlet an additional amount is added to marc jacobs the coach purses device.



This phone is one of the karen millen most versatile options coach outlet store when coach factory outlet it longchamp outlet comes to coach outlet modern louboutin Smartphone. However, this coach outlet device can longchamp be louis vuitton handbags improved ray ban outlet by adding louis vuitton outlet online appropriate chi hair straighteners accessories. longchamp Choosing hollister the soccer jerseys right toms shoes accessories true religion outlet is the true religion perfect way to get the best new balance shoes experience with any ralph lauren Smartphone.

prada handbags

Posted by: korsu001 at July 6, 2014 11:49 PM
Post a comment