funny that........I haven't heard a word about the folks who are beheading their fellow citizens as fast as they can line them up.......in LD's mind it's those nasty unloving Christians who have caused them to be like that.....but oh well....what's a few lives in the big struggle for allah?
LD says "Some Christians are less than loving"
- Thread starter Snow Sled Baby
- Start date
Is he ordering air strikes on Christians?
Because he sure is on the folks who are beheading their fellow citizens.
Maybe you haven't heard about that.
Because he sure is on the folks who are beheading their fellow citizens.
Maybe you haven't heard about that.
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."
But apparently the future DOES belong to all those who mock the Bible (including the President himself).
If you cannot observe the rampant double standards via the constant oratory condemnation then you are either the dumbest person on the planet or the most disingenuous.
But apparently the future DOES belong to all those who mock the Bible (including the President himself).
If you cannot observe the rampant double standards via the constant oratory condemnation then you are either the dumbest person on the planet or the most disingenuous.
Re: "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."
From the same speech, the future does not belong to those who slaughter Coptic Christians in Egypt. Put your quoted text in the context of that speech at the UN. That's like saying Rowdy Roddy said he was there to chew bubble gum when he went into the bank.
From the same speech, the future does not belong to those who slaughter Coptic Christians in Egypt. Put your quoted text in the context of that speech at the UN. That's like saying Rowdy Roddy said he was there to chew bubble gum when he went into the bank.
The comment was from September 25, 2012.
The Coptic Christians were slaughtered on February 15, 2015.
He had a passing comment (which had to be painful for him) on that day in '12 and by passing statement I refer to the passing of gas.
The Coptic Christians were slaughtered on February 15, 2015.
He had a passing comment (which had to be painful for him) on that day in '12 and by passing statement I refer to the passing of gas.
I always get a kick out of the ignorant buffoons who say stuff like this
insinuating, somehow, that the President is biased toward Islam. The fact is, all Presidents need to assuage the world's islamic costituency for political expediency. After all, we need some of those muslims to help us....Saudia Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar immediately come to mind. And we have a vested interest in a couple of other islamic countries where we've spilled blood-Afghanistan and Iraq. Obama isn't the only President who understands this. But you ignorant jackasses have your agenda. And the Fox's and Rush's give you your read meat on a regualr basis. Shocking you lap it up oblivious to reality.
Here's a fun quiz....which President said these things-W or Obama....
"Ours is a war not against a religion, not against the Muslim faith. But ours is a war against individuals who absolutely hate what America stands for.""They're terrorists. And we are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam.""Our war is not against Islam, or against faith practiced by the Muslim people. Our war is a war against evil.""Our enemy doesn't follow the great traditions of Islam. They've hijacked a great religion.""Given the nature of the enemy - which is not a traditional army - this work takes time, and will require vigilance and resilience.""The terrorists do not speak for over a billion Muslims who reject their hateful ideology.""The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself.""How do we, as people of faith, reconcile these realities - the profound good the compassion and love that can flow from all of our faiths, operating alongside those who seek to hijack religious for their own murderous ends?""There are thousands of Muslims who proudly call themselves Americans, and they know what I know - that the Muslim faith is based upon peace and love and compassion.""This great religion in the hands of a few extremists has been distorted to justify violence."
Answers: Answers to Bush-Obama language quiz: 1-Bush, 2-Obama, 3-Bush, 4-Bush, 5-Obama, 6-Obama, 7-Bush, 8-Obama, 9-Bush, 10-Obama)
insinuating, somehow, that the President is biased toward Islam. The fact is, all Presidents need to assuage the world's islamic costituency for political expediency. After all, we need some of those muslims to help us....Saudia Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar immediately come to mind. And we have a vested interest in a couple of other islamic countries where we've spilled blood-Afghanistan and Iraq. Obama isn't the only President who understands this. But you ignorant jackasses have your agenda. And the Fox's and Rush's give you your read meat on a regualr basis. Shocking you lap it up oblivious to reality.
Here's a fun quiz....which President said these things-W or Obama....
"Ours is a war not against a religion, not against the Muslim faith. But ours is a war against individuals who absolutely hate what America stands for.""They're terrorists. And we are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam.""Our war is not against Islam, or against faith practiced by the Muslim people. Our war is a war against evil.""Our enemy doesn't follow the great traditions of Islam. They've hijacked a great religion.""Given the nature of the enemy - which is not a traditional army - this work takes time, and will require vigilance and resilience.""The terrorists do not speak for over a billion Muslims who reject their hateful ideology.""The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself.""How do we, as people of faith, reconcile these realities - the profound good the compassion and love that can flow from all of our faiths, operating alongside those who seek to hijack religious for their own murderous ends?""There are thousands of Muslims who proudly call themselves Americans, and they know what I know - that the Muslim faith is based upon peace and love and compassion.""This great religion in the hands of a few extremists has been distorted to justify violence."
Answers: Answers to Bush-Obama language quiz: 1-Bush, 2-Obama, 3-Bush, 4-Bush, 5-Obama, 6-Obama, 7-Bush, 8-Obama, 9-Bush, 10-Obama)
Why would I care what Bush said?
I hated that bastard as well.
This post was edited on 4/8 9:52 AM by Wolf J. Flywheel
I hated that bastard as well.
This post was edited on 4/8 9:52 AM by Wolf J. Flywheel
He does indeed ...... and that is sooooooo gay.
But I will make everything alright by agreeing to bake a cake for him.
But I will make everything alright by agreeing to bake a cake for him.
Re: The comment was from September 25, 2012.
I was quoting from memory, but the word was target instead of slaughter. Regardless, your Muslim comment is entirely out of context.
speech link
I was quoting from memory, but the word was target instead of slaughter. Regardless, your Muslim comment is entirely out of context.
speech link
You are absolutely right.
He's done nothing to marginalize the blood lust of Islamic terrorism.
Nothing like referring to DOMESTIC TERRORISTS as a bigger threat to this country than radical fundamentalists.
It would have just been easier to say "Honkeys who cling to guns and religion."
Wait a minute ........... he DID say that ......... only he left out honkeys, much to the chagrin of Al Sharpton and all those selling Michael Brown T-shirts.
It's odd ... I know of a group that DOES cling to guns and religion. Yup, I know of one. In my best theatrical tailer voice: COMING TO A MOSQUE NEAR YOU!!
This post was edited on 4/8 10:02 AM by Wolf J. Flywheel
He's done nothing to marginalize the blood lust of Islamic terrorism.
Nothing like referring to DOMESTIC TERRORISTS as a bigger threat to this country than radical fundamentalists.
It would have just been easier to say "Honkeys who cling to guns and religion."
Wait a minute ........... he DID say that ......... only he left out honkeys, much to the chagrin of Al Sharpton and all those selling Michael Brown T-shirts.
It's odd ... I know of a group that DOES cling to guns and religion. Yup, I know of one. In my best theatrical tailer voice: COMING TO A MOSQUE NEAR YOU!!
This post was edited on 4/8 10:02 AM by Wolf J. Flywheel
I am neither of the two
Would you argue that there AREN'T some self-proclaimed Christians that aren't very loving?
If so, then you are either the dumbest person on the planet or the most disingenuous.
Would you argue that there AREN'T some self-proclaimed Christians that aren't very loving?
If so, then you are either the dumbest person on the planet or the most disingenuous.
A LARGE portion of Christians aren't loving.
And I am happy to not wear their 'colors" per say.
Only difference is while those Christians may not be baking cakes for gay couples and embark on hypocrisy deluxe, at least they are not throwing gay men (tied to chairs) off of 8-story buildings and then stoning them because somehow the fall did not get the job done. And all the "good Muslims" across the world who sit quietly by and watch it unfold may as well be on the roof with them. Where's the mass outrage over GENOCIDE? We're not taking about cakes here. At least you have some "Christian" groups saying they will not discriminate because the gay & lesbian community is still their brothers and sisters.
If you are going to compare the extreme elements of these two "religions" then you are indeed the dumbest person on the planet. Thanks for playing.
Tell him what he's won, Johnny!
JOHNNY: [/B]He's won a new burka. Yes, a shiny new burka. Because nothing says love than going verse by verse on the Koran as it regards to infidels and women knowing their role ..... which is usually out in public with a relative while being wrapped up tighter than a dong in Daytona.
This post was edited on 4/8 10:13 AM by Wolf J. Flywheel
And I am happy to not wear their 'colors" per say.
Only difference is while those Christians may not be baking cakes for gay couples and embark on hypocrisy deluxe, at least they are not throwing gay men (tied to chairs) off of 8-story buildings and then stoning them because somehow the fall did not get the job done. And all the "good Muslims" across the world who sit quietly by and watch it unfold may as well be on the roof with them. Where's the mass outrage over GENOCIDE? We're not taking about cakes here. At least you have some "Christian" groups saying they will not discriminate because the gay & lesbian community is still their brothers and sisters.
If you are going to compare the extreme elements of these two "religions" then you are indeed the dumbest person on the planet. Thanks for playing.
Tell him what he's won, Johnny!
JOHNNY: [/B]He's won a new burka. Yes, a shiny new burka. Because nothing says love than going verse by verse on the Koran as it regards to infidels and women knowing their role ..... which is usually out in public with a relative while being wrapped up tighter than a dong in Daytona.
This post was edited on 4/8 10:13 AM by Wolf J. Flywheel
No, you tried desperately to place me in the same retarded partisan .......
................ vacuum that you and your choads of chum reside in.
It's abundantly clear that you think Obama and the Democrats do no wrong (that much is VERY clear) just as there are plenty of these so called "Conservatives" (does that mean they ration water?) who think that Rush Limbaugh, the Bush family, Cheney, Rove, and those other muttonheads are teflon dons.
Partisanship is for the weak and banal ............ which 90% of our society is.
Just because I don't adhere to policies that drip of Marxism or "liberalism" does not mean there is any love for the other side of the aisle. I have expressed countless times that both parties are collectivists and that makes me an ENEMY of the state ...... or any political party for that matter.
Why are people so weak-minded that they to feel they have to run in a pack? Is it some high school-ish longing for acceptance or is it just plain fear?
Pussies.
................ vacuum that you and your choads of chum reside in.
It's abundantly clear that you think Obama and the Democrats do no wrong (that much is VERY clear) just as there are plenty of these so called "Conservatives" (does that mean they ration water?) who think that Rush Limbaugh, the Bush family, Cheney, Rove, and those other muttonheads are teflon dons.
Partisanship is for the weak and banal ............ which 90% of our society is.
Just because I don't adhere to policies that drip of Marxism or "liberalism" does not mean there is any love for the other side of the aisle. I have expressed countless times that both parties are collectivists and that makes me an ENEMY of the state ...... or any political party for that matter.
Why are people so weak-minded that they to feel they have to run in a pack? Is it some high school-ish longing for acceptance or is it just plain fear?
Pussies.
Out of context? 6 years of pandering to radical Islam ..........
............ with constant pot-shots at "Christians".
No, it was very much IN context.
But hey, maybe we can cover up more crosses along the way.
............ with constant pot-shots at "Christians".
No, it was very much IN context.
But hey, maybe we can cover up more crosses along the way.
Damn skippy!
I cannot believe in the year 2015 that we still have grown men who actually believe their government is there to "serve the public" and there is some stark difference between political parties ethically, morally, or philosophically.
I cannot believe in the year 2015 that we still have grown men who actually believe their government is there to "serve the public" and there is some stark difference between political parties ethically, morally, or philosophically.
As someone else stated, bombing is not pandering ...
And cherry picking one line out of about 10 lines about who the future does not belong to IS taking a quote out of context. You are free to like or dislike who you choose, but your basis for that should be applied fairly across the board. Of coarse I'm assuming that you don't take absolutely everything out of context.
And cherry picking one line out of about 10 lines about who the future does not belong to IS taking a quote out of context. You are free to like or dislike who you choose, but your basis for that should be applied fairly across the board. Of coarse I'm assuming that you don't take absolutely everything out of context.
You cite a bombing campaign? That's odd .........
.............. didn't I see the other side of the aisle claiming that pulling troops out created a vacuum that begat this entire mess in the Middle East that is even extreme by their standards and would have eliminated said need for any type of bombing campaign?
Was I dreaming or didn't I read that?
It seems to me that many people will just as easily conclude that the current mess was aided by underestimating ISIS (JV Squad, anyone?) and the chaos that would ensue once the U.S. and Allied on-ground presence was removed ............. not that I personally like the thought of Billy Higginbotham from Clear Creek, Kentucky or Sally May Zucker from Port Poontang, Washington being over there in harm's way, but I digress.
Maybe that ditzy Harf was right.
Screw the drones ............ just give them blue smocks and send them to work at Lowe's.
.............. didn't I see the other side of the aisle claiming that pulling troops out created a vacuum that begat this entire mess in the Middle East that is even extreme by their standards and would have eliminated said need for any type of bombing campaign?
Was I dreaming or didn't I read that?
It seems to me that many people will just as easily conclude that the current mess was aided by underestimating ISIS (JV Squad, anyone?) and the chaos that would ensue once the U.S. and Allied on-ground presence was removed ............. not that I personally like the thought of Billy Higginbotham from Clear Creek, Kentucky or Sally May Zucker from Port Poontang, Washington being over there in harm's way, but I digress.
Maybe that ditzy Harf was right.
Screw the drones ............ just give them blue smocks and send them to work at Lowe's.
90% of people will agree or disagree simply based on who said it
You could post all of the Bush quotes, and identify them as Bush quotes and many on this board would agree and say he's absolutely right, and then many others would say it's stupid.
Then you could post all of the Obama quotes (many of which are virtually identical to the Bush quotes obviously) and the roles of who agrees and who doesn't would be the reciprocal of the way things fell on the Bush quotes.
It is simultaneously amusing and disturbing.
You could post all of the Bush quotes, and identify them as Bush quotes and many on this board would agree and say he's absolutely right, and then many others would say it's stupid.
Then you could post all of the Obama quotes (many of which are virtually identical to the Bush quotes obviously) and the roles of who agrees and who doesn't would be the reciprocal of the way things fell on the Bush quotes.
It is simultaneously amusing and disturbing.
And people absolutely follow blindly. Lunacy at the altar of proclivity.
In 2008 Obama was railing (and to standing ovations) about how marriage was between a man and woman and now suddenly, he cares so deeply about the issue? WTF????
His supporters will claim "Hey, it's politics" to which I will reply ......... "AND?????"
So in other words they support a bunch of men & women who get up every day with the objective of deceiving you and lining their nests?
And I am the one who is crazy for not being partisan and supporting these people?
In 2008 Obama was railing (and to standing ovations) about how marriage was between a man and woman and now suddenly, he cares so deeply about the issue? WTF????
His supporters will claim "Hey, it's politics" to which I will reply ......... "AND?????"
So in other words they support a bunch of men & women who get up every day with the objective of deceiving you and lining their nests?
And I am the one who is crazy for not being partisan and supporting these people?
You're grasping for straws ...
If your argument is that the troop withdrawal from Iraq according to standing agreements between the US and Iraq wa an motivated by Obama's love for the Muslim. It kind of gets shot in the foot when you consider that he extended our stay in Afghanistan just recently.
I'm really not trying to portray the guy as a saint or as my favorite person ever. I just think that the quote you cited without context was an unfair representation of his point in that speech.
If your argument is that the troop withdrawal from Iraq according to standing agreements between the US and Iraq wa an motivated by Obama's love for the Muslim. It kind of gets shot in the foot when you consider that he extended our stay in Afghanistan just recently.
I'm really not trying to portray the guy as a saint or as my favorite person ever. I just think that the quote you cited without context was an unfair representation of his point in that speech.
I don't think Barack Obama could be treated "unfairly" enough.
I'd like to see the unfairness get cranked up another 5000% ....... and it still won't get the American public even remotely close to being even.
I'd like to see the unfairness get cranked up another 5000% ....... and it still won't get the American public even remotely close to being even.
Re: 90% of people will agree or disagree simply based on who said it
agreed with all of that. I can't seem to understand how people are oblivious to the current administrations body of work and how there is some serious cause for concern with any foreign policy decisions. The list of WTF moments are endless with this guy. Ditto for the last administration. In most conversations I had with people who supported Obama in the 2008 election it was based on their outrage over Bush's unilateral decision making and circumventing the majority DNC congress at the time. Reverse the roles and put in Obama and the hypocrisy in defense of the action by citing Bush as an example is frightening.
agreed with all of that. I can't seem to understand how people are oblivious to the current administrations body of work and how there is some serious cause for concern with any foreign policy decisions. The list of WTF moments are endless with this guy. Ditto for the last administration. In most conversations I had with people who supported Obama in the 2008 election it was based on their outrage over Bush's unilateral decision making and circumventing the majority DNC congress at the time. Reverse the roles and put in Obama and the hypocrisy in defense of the action by citing Bush as an example is frightening.
Look at the bozos in this thread.
You can't see how they are oblivious to this moron's policies?
We're not exactly dealing with the Linus Pauling Festival of Gray matter here.
Consider the source, man.
If it was Bush the script would simply be flipped with a new cast of characters.
You can't see how they are oblivious to this moron's policies?
We're not exactly dealing with the Linus Pauling Festival of Gray matter here.
Consider the source, man.
If it was Bush the script would simply be flipped with a new cast of characters.
So ya don't support any people, which policies do you support?
If you don't see a difference between the right and the left fine, I happen to and I see which policies and direction I prefer. Nothing blind in that at all. That said I never thought anyone on either side was the antichrist hell bent on destroying America, although Cheney comes close!
If you don't see a difference between the right and the left fine, I happen to and I see which policies and direction I prefer. Nothing blind in that at all. That said I never thought anyone on either side was the antichrist hell bent on destroying America, although Cheney comes close!
What differences?
The only thing that changes in which special interest groups benefit during those 4 to 8 years.
Bush ushered in this vomitous Patriot Act. Obama has not only not repealed it but has actually built on to the foundation with more control.
The masses are eventually going to be under one umbrella.
Ain't it grand?
I hope everybody will be wearing deodorant.
The only thing that changes in which special interest groups benefit during those 4 to 8 years.
Bush ushered in this vomitous Patriot Act. Obama has not only not repealed it but has actually built on to the foundation with more control.
The masses are eventually going to be under one umbrella.
Ain't it grand?
I hope everybody will be wearing deodorant.
Re: 90% of people will agree or disagree simply based on who said it
It's the sanctimonious, self-righteous stances that trouble me the most. Never being able to admit that "my" side might be wrong in this instance. Everything is immediately framed as "how can I spin this to make it look good for my side" or "how can I spin this to make it look bad for the other side". I was semi-accused of being stupid and disingenuous above, but I can't think of anything more disingenuine than spinning everything rather than reaching an objective conclusion.
I have no issue with people taking the entire body of work into account and reaching a conclusion. And as Wolf has pointed out (as well as you here) the only conclusion to be drawn over the last 14-15 years is a pretty bad one. What gets me is taking a single quote and running off half-cocked to make some kind of statement that isn't supported by the entire body of work. Or, in defense, to seemingly justify the comment because the other side did or said something just as stupid.
It's the sanctimonious, self-righteous stances that trouble me the most. Never being able to admit that "my" side might be wrong in this instance. Everything is immediately framed as "how can I spin this to make it look good for my side" or "how can I spin this to make it look bad for the other side". I was semi-accused of being stupid and disingenuous above, but I can't think of anything more disingenuine than spinning everything rather than reaching an objective conclusion.
