Burn the Koran

Remove all ads!

How dramatic. Liberals expect results; pandering doesn't cut it with many of us, as is evidenced by Gibb's remarks.

Probably cause no one really knowsmuch about them. I certainly don't. I never heard of most of stuff you are clamoring about.

[QUOTEHow about all the 'kill Bush' signs, or even the politicians who went on national TV to say it?][/QUOTE]

What are you talking about here?

Fine. But what "stupid thing like this?" An example with some [even meager] sources would added some clarity. I didn't realize that it was some other, unnamed issue, for us to just guess at. Note that Ragusa provided some links with specific Republican politicians and their actual comments, in their own words.

More dramatics? You must have us confused with the other side. The "platform" is not some "Holy Grail," unless it has real substance in it. Don't forget, in all your rhetorical firecrackers, that it was Dean's strategy that got Obama into the White House in the first place. And it was Dean who put some backbone into the whimpy Dems when they were grasping at anything that would save them. You can accuse us of "eating our own" but if they ain't walking the talk, they ain't "our own," dude. We are not like the other side. I may not agree with the Tea Party, but at least I can respect where they are coming from regarding the rather poor performance of many Republicans in recent years -- at least by conservative standards.

You mean like this?

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/17/nation/na-mccain17

BTW, You like to change the topics pretty quick and make it about Code Pink or whatever instead of addressing the topic at hand. Isn't that what happened on one of the other threads? wasn't that one about "Conservapedia," and low and behold you just happened to change that one to be about Code Pink as well?

 

How do you guys manage to get so excited about your political parties? How come everyone is either one thing or other? How does it get so black and white? There seems to be no middle ground at all.

 

I find it odd too, Harb. It's like Celtic and Rangers fans.

 

Indeed.

Because I object to the things that are happening right I am automatically a democrat or leftist to NOG (hint: I am neither). But apparently it doesn't make any other sense to him otherwise. So people are struck with a bipolar world view and thus think in tribal patterns.

 

No need for that, really. In Saudi-Arabia carrying a Bible is punishable in a lot of different ways. Fines, prison, what have you. They destroy mounds of Bibles confiscated from tourists every year. Well, maybe not mounds, but you get the idea, I'm sure. Hundreds of them. They... what was that word? Incinerated? Yup, they incinerate more books a month than this pastor would have a chance to his whole life, figuratively speaking.

 

Chandos:
I'm just grabbing examples to compare and contrast. For some details, you can look here. This provides a bried history of the use of the term by Dems (without sources, though). Here's an article about it's use against black Tea Party members.

As for the death threats against Bush, I linked to this in the Einstein thread. There's also this, this, this, and those are just the top four.

Also, I'm not trying to change the topic. I'm trying to respond to Ragusa's outrage that the Republican party is only saying it's a bad idea, while also personally contacting the man and trying to convince him not to do it. Ragusa seems to want them to lynch the guy, or at least burn him in effigy, and their response is, 'This guy's some idiot with 50 followers. Why is this news?'

I know you're not a democrat. You're a german, and they have different political parties there (unless they have their own party called the 'Democrats' and you're one, but then I expect no relation between the two). I do think you're a liberal, because you tend to oppose all conservative actions while supporting all the liberal ones. I also don't think name calling is particularly becoming of you. I know you do it a lot, but it doesn't look good.

 

@Yulaw9460
Yes, yes, but they're Muslims. So it's different. Christians forgive, Muslims go bananas. We have to respect that. Islam is a religion of peace.



My new year resolution this year was to be less cynical. I give up.

 

For what purpose? We are speaking of a specific action, by a specfic person. I could drag the Klan into every topic about something stupid that a Democrat does, to compare and contrast, but would that accomplish anything worth while? I don't consider the Klan to be Republicans, nor do I consider some of the ones you are holding up to be Democrats. Heck, I don't even consider Jones to be a proper Republican; he's just an opportunist/loser, wanting his 15 minutes of fame. I think Ragusa's larger point is that your typical "counrty club" Repbulcian is suddenly afraid to offend the "trailer park" Republicans to any extent, because of all the Bible thumping going on. How's that for class warfare?

Republicans like to keep the "echo chamber" finely tuned.

 

You may be, Chandos, and if so I'm happy. Ragusa, however, isn't. Ragusa is talking about the entire Republican party and the way they act. My effort was to point out to him that this is the way politics works, that the Democratic party does the same. Hell, if the Libertarians ever gain enough influence for people to listen to them, they'll probably do it, too. Ragusa seems to want either the entire republican party to mount protests in front of this guy's church, or a deep and sincere apology from them for something that they neither did nor supported.

To be clear, my point is that the Republican party has condemned this action, in public, on national TV, as well as making personal efforts to see that it doesn't happen. Ragusa asks for more.

 

so, this is basically a christian extremist, trying to create enough religious intolerance and hatred in an effort to prevent the building of a structure which will house but not be exclusively an islam prayre centre 2 blocks from ground zero?

for some strange reason... I dont think thats going to work.

can I put this in the cat intelligence thread to argue that cats are more intelligent then humans?

In the UK he would be arrested for inciting religious hatred.

 

Have they come out and said it was linked to the mosque in NY? I got that strong impression when they started talking about the church chaning it's mind and Donald Trump buying out the mosque investor in the same sentence, but I haven't heard anything official.

 

its pretty much all the pastor has talked about for the past 2 days, He agreed to cancel it when he was told that the centre would be moved, but after being told that there was no such agreement, he's said he's merely 'postponing' it

 

That's exactly what it's like.

 

Another prime example for the complete Republican non-involvement in generating anti Islam sentiment in the US:

The salient point for me is that this is an example of a party making politics by expressing and/or generating overt hostility towards a religious (or ethnic) group. As I said, playing with the passions of the ignorant and bigoted is akin to playing with matches and gasoline. It is neither surprising nor unpredictable when there eventually is a fire. Perhaps not even unintended.

The group is ultimately exchangeable. Exchange Islam and Muslim with 'The Jew' and you have a classic anti-Semitic raving. Which would (rightly) be considered unacceptable. But with Islam and Muslims - different story!

Exchange it for Catholics and it'll be the same.

Spoiler

​

This is a cartoon from 1943

It took American protestants quite a while to get used to Catholics (being Catholic was still considered a problem for Kennedy). It stands to reason that they don't get into a rush for Islam. It'll be a long ride.

Considering the extent to which the Republican party overlaps with the Christian Right, it is not a surprise to see anti-Muslim themes being common there as well. I resent this way of playing politics, never mind what's the name of the party conducting it.

 

Isn't that what the orthodox Islamists are saying about us? This guy should go and shake hands with the religious tyrants n Saudi Arabia. What irks me to no end is that this guy probably holds up the Constitution when it suits him. In this instance, he completely stomps on it. America is becoming a rat's nest of opportunists. People need to turn off their emotions and turn on their brains if they want to get past all this.

 

And exchange it with conservative Christians and you have... the atheist extremes of the American Left (and you know exactly what I'm talking about, we've had whole threads on it). Or Bush and you get more mainstream American Left. You're right, the groups are exchangable, both the targets and the performers, and that's my point. You're attempting to portray this as a Republican feature, and that's just plain dishonest.

The issue is that those nations that want to destroy us are strictly Islamic, thus people that don't think (you put it quite well) are willing to say it's Islam that wants to destroy us (despite the long history of Islamic immigrants and citizens in the US). The US isn't nearly so strictly Christian, and the other Western nations they say are trying to destroy them are often even less so (with a few exceptions). Of course, I don't think their rhetoric really distingushes between Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, and atheist heathens.

I agree, though, that America in general needs to shut up, ignore our emotions, and listen to what little brain the average American has left. Good luck, though. The average American is addicted to sensationalism like a drug. And that, I think, is what Ragusa is really seeing. He's just ignoring the left side of it.

 

I agree with that comment.

 

... as represented in the Democratic party? The extent to which Democrats and Republicans have endorsed extremists and whacky messages differs. In fact, the Democratic party under Obama is decidedly centrist. Even the notorious Alan Grayson is merely flamboyant, not radical.

I have yet to see a recent Democratic proposal akin to investigating Muslim interns ... for espionage, probably for Islam. Or Democratic candidates actively endorsing torture in their election campaigns. I still haven't quite stomached the revolting spectacle of Republican candidates in the Republican primaries falling over themselves to out-endorse each other on torture (with the notable and laudable exception of Ron Paul; whose economic policies are lunacy IMO, but who gets the rule of law thing straight).

If that changes, trust me, I'll be the first to attack a Democrat.

No; and no I am not. I just see that the Left is currently doing the less outrageous things.

Even though I am aware of tenacious Republican obstructionism, I am still put off by Obama covering up for crimes committed by the Bushies ((keyword *torture*) and Democrat complicity in it), his continuation of other problematic Bush era policies (like the extensive view on executive powers; the travesty of military tribunals), or Obama's failure to crack down on the Big Banks for their excesses, or his continuation of extra judicial killings, etc. pp.

Perhaps I am a moralist. Boiled down, I see in your jaded posture that the left and the right are equivalent, that everything sucks in politics, a mere excuse to be a partisan.

 

Yes, you are an advocate for the Rule of Law and Constitutional government. By the standards of the 21st Century, what can be more moral than that?

 

And apparently that makes me a 'Liberal'. If that is so, so be it.