Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
74 online now:
jar, kjsimons, PaulK, vimesey (4 members, 70 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,122 Year: 4,234/6,534 Month: 448/900 Week: 154/150 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Expectations For The New Obama Democrat Government
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 286 of 341 (500195)
02-23-2009 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 285 by Dr Adequate
02-23-2009 7:41 PM


Re: Topic Update
DA writes:

I'm glad that I don't have to live in your imagination.

Is that all you have to contribute, DA? Bare personal assertion? How about something substantive on one or more of the items listed?


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-23-2009 7:41 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 314 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-26-2009 1:03 AM Buzsaw has taken no action

kuresu
Member (Idle past 1745 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 287 of 341 (500240)
02-24-2009 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 284 by Buzsaw
02-23-2009 6:40 PM


Re: Topic Update
1. Well, even the employee free choice act doesn't force people to join unions. And that hasn't even been passed yet.

2. Still no socialized medicine. And I doubt it will happen. Obama never campaigned on universal health care, only on mandated coverage for children. And the republicans will kick and scream and filibuster before they let it happen. But pray tell just what is so ineffective about British, Canadian, Swedish, Finnish, etc health care?

3. Well, for being an advocate of a weaker military he's done an odd thing in ordering 17,000 more troops to afghanistan. As to those DoD budget cuts that Fox reported on a while back--I never found them reported anywhere else except Fox and extreme right-wing media. Let's see what his budget says. Besides, cuts are probably good--you do know that there are multiple weapons programs that are bloated, right?

4. There is no mandated paramilitary service required. Do you even know what paramilitaries are? In the US, classic examples are the Coast Guard auxiliary, civil air patrol, aspects of the CIA, SWAT teams, the Naval Sea Cadet Corps, and probably every ROTC program in the country. If you're talking about Obama's bid to get people involved in community service, well, I'm glad you're against people helping others.

5. Obama does not support the Fairness Doctrine being reinstated. Said so as much himself.

6. Increased terrorism? Well, so far we have al-qeada acting like a little kid insulting Obama (house slave?). Oh, wait, they didn't support Obama. But Hamas did. Funnily enough, they haven't stepped up their attacks on Israel.

7. Israel can go stuff itself. They have every right to exist, but this whole conflict could have been solved decades ago if it wasn't for people like you who want to bring about the pre-requisites for Armageddon. Besides, Israel is capable of wrong, and supporting them no matter what is a little ridiculous. That said, Obama won't be undermining Israeli sovereignty (anymore than he undermines anyone else's sovereignty).

8. Energy costs will go up regardless of what Obama does. That's because there is a limited supply for an ever-growing demand. If it wasn't for the recession we'd still be paying $4/gallon gas. Obama's actions can limit the increase or exacerbate it. I say he should exacerbate the increase in carbon-based energy, as that will get us toward energy independence and clean energy much faster.

9. Coal mines will die eventually. There's nothing all that good about them, other than that they employ a lot of people. The sooner we replace them, the better.

10. EPA influence is expanding, and good thing too. Looks like carbon dioxide might just get regulated! I guess this destroys anyone's wet dreams about racing Hummers.

11. severe depression? We will most likely not see a depression. Worst case scenario is a japanese lost decade, and that will be because Obama and team will have lacked the courage to act appropriately. Namely, wipe out the shareholders at Citi, etc, take over the bank, clean it up and sell it off. Zombie banks will drain us, and Citi and the like are turning into zombies.

12. Well, smart regulation is a good thing. I'm sure you're pissed that nobody was watching the store regarding those derivatives, huh? Last I checked, businesses will find every possible manner by which to cheat the customer. Regulations help protect the consumer from things like lead-based paint used on children's toys.

13. Illegal aliens should be protected. By shunning them we create a shadow society that is not only dangerous for them but for us.

14. UN power is not likely to go anywhere. But at least we're not dissing it anymore (yes, we do need to work together with the entire world). No, I think you're problem with the UN is that it's no longer the tool of the US like it was in the cold war.

15. We'll have to see the budget, but we've not been meeting our expected payments to the UN for some time. In terms of oppressive governments, I guess that would include Israel as regards the Gaza strip? Oh, you meant oppressive governments that don't agree with us. Last I checked, people shouldn't have to suffer needlessly because of some dictator they had no choice but to accept. Glad to see you're such a christian.

16. restriction of freedom of religion? How so? And what does the fairness doctrine have to do with religion? (oh, I see: televangelists, and with the FD, us atheists would get equal time to broadcast our sane messages). You're really reaching buz.

17. A liberal court system is not a bad thing. And right now, on the supreme court, it would take more than a couple departures to overturn the ideological balance that currently exists. Do you really see that happening over 8 years?

18. anti-gun laws can be expanded. I know you want a rocket launcher to stop kids from TPing your house on halloween, but that's a little overboard.

19. Oh, I guess you weren't paying attention to the Bush administration. Already done. In fact, that happens to some degree in every administration going back to, oh, before the civil war.

If this is your nightmare world buz, bring it on. The world will certainly be a better place.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by Buzsaw, posted 02-23-2009 6:40 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by DrJones*, posted 02-24-2009 4:09 AM kuresu has replied
 Message 291 by Buzsaw, posted 02-24-2009 10:01 AM kuresu has replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2209
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 288 of 341 (500242)
02-24-2009 4:09 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by kuresu
02-24-2009 3:29 AM


Re: Topic Update
7. Israel can go stuff itself.

What I don't understand is why Buz thinks Israel needs the US for protection? Aren't the Jews the chosen people of Buz's mythological diety, is he too impotent to protect one small country?


soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 3:29 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 7:55 AM DrJones* has taken no action
 Message 290 by Buzsaw, posted 02-24-2009 9:18 AM DrJones* has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 1745 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 289 of 341 (500253)
02-24-2009 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 288 by DrJones*
02-24-2009 4:09 AM


Re: Topic Update
is he too impotent to protect one small country?

No, they probably did something to piss him off. You know, like refuse to accept Christ as their lord and savior. I mean, you go through all that trouble and they don't even thank you for your efforts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by DrJones*, posted 02-24-2009 4:09 AM DrJones* has taken no action

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 290 of 341 (500263)
02-24-2009 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 288 by DrJones*
02-24-2009 4:09 AM


Re: Topic Update
DJ writes:

What I don't understand is why Buz thinks Israel needs the US for protection? Aren't the Jews the chosen people of Buz's mythological diety, is he too impotent to protect one small country?

God knew that the (yet in unbelief) Jews would need the US and Britain to defeat the enemies of his messianic people and to be a factor in fulfillment of the return of Jews to their land and the latter day messianic nation of Israel, particularly the US.

Thus the blessings of God upon the US as the most prosperous and blessed nation in all history. God's promise to Abraham, granddaddy of the Jews, was that those who bless Israel would receive God's blessings and those nations which cursed Israel would be cursed of God. Check out the historical record and go figure.

Genesis 12:3:

....and I will bless them that bless thee, and him that curseth thee will I curse: and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

Another classic example of fulfilled prophecy. :cool:


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by DrJones*, posted 02-24-2009 4:09 AM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by DrJones*, posted 02-24-2009 2:57 PM Buzsaw has taken no action

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 291 of 341 (500265)
02-24-2009 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by kuresu
02-24-2009 3:29 AM


Re: Topic Update
kuresu writes:

3. Well, for being an advocate of a weaker military he's done an odd thing in ordering 17,000 more troops to afghanistan. As to those DoD budget cuts that Fox reported on a while back--I never found them reported anywhere else except Fox and extreme right-wing media. Let's see what his budget says. Besides, cuts are probably good--you do know that there are multiple weapons programs that are bloated, right?

Atlas Shrug sets the record straight. What Obama is doing is to send our troops in and pull the rug from under them so as to prevent them from winning, just as Johnson did to our troops in Viet Nam.

Barrack Hussein Obama has demonstrated whose side he's on. He, son of Islam and churched for 2 decades in a Nation of Islam promoting church, has already released two dangerous terrorists from prosecution and confinement to be free to continue their Jihad war against America and Israel.

Our military risks their lives to kill and haul in the terrorists. Their commander in chief releases them back into their Jihad war on America to kill and wound more of the soldiers under his command. Go and figure, Kuresu.

OBAMA TO CUT MILITARY SPENDING BY 25%
WE DONT NEED NO STINKIN FANCY WEAPONS!
As global jihad bares its teeth and goes nuclear Obambi surrenders. This, of all his national suicidal plans, is the worst. I guess he'll cut weapons programs and give them to the Muslim world when he convenes his Muslim summit.

OBAMA WILL SLASH MILITARY SPENDING BY 25% Trafalgar

In 2007, Barack Obama appeared before the far-left pacifist group, Caucus for Priorities, and promised to disarm America.

His 132-word pledge can be seen on YouTube (link below). Among his promises: "I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems."

Today, Representative Barney Frank (D-Mass.) indicated how Obama's plans to gut the military would be translated into budgetary allocations. Frank told the editorial board of The Standard-Times that the Democrats would slash military spending by 25%, forcing American to withdraw from Iraq sooner. Rep. Frank said, "We don't need all these fancy new weapons."

Rep. Frank also called for massive increases in federal spending for social programs and increased taxes.

As president, Obama would take office while two wars are raging, and as the first new commander-in-chief since the attacks of 9/11 brought down the World Trade Center and directly hit the Pentagon.
His own vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden warned that his election would spur a major international crisis of great danger. But Barney Frank assures voters that Obama remains serious about gutting the military and disarming America.

There's too much in your message for one message, so I'll begin here.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 3:29 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 10:41 AM Buzsaw has replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 292 of 341 (500268)
02-24-2009 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 284 by Buzsaw
02-23-2009 6:40 PM


Re: Topic Update
I've placed a dash on the ones which I see as on track as per the policies of the president and his cabinet.

-5. So called (miss called) Fairness Doctrine essentially eliminating right wing talk shows in the media, highly expanding what is regarded as hate speech.

I'm curious where you get this one since Obama himself has state that he is opposed to it, and there is very little support for it even among Democrats in Congress.


An atheist doesn't have to be someone who thinks he has a proof that there can't be a god. He only has to be someone who believes that the evidence on the God question is at a similar level to the evidence on the werewolf question. -- John McCarthy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by Buzsaw, posted 02-23-2009 6:40 PM Buzsaw has taken no action

kuresu
Member (Idle past 1745 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 293 of 341 (500270)
02-24-2009 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 291 by Buzsaw
02-24-2009 10:01 AM


Re: Topic Update
Ah yes, your source is an extreme right-wing blog. From october 2008. From before he was even elected. From before he decided to send 17,000 more troops to afghanistan. From what I read, fox news reported a 10% cut in the defense budget, or about 55 billion dollars. This was in february I believe (that or late january).

Perhaps you should find a more current source? And a more objective source would be nice, but I doubt you can find one.

In other words, you don't have a substantive response other than to point me to other outdated crazies.

And we didn't lose Vietnam because Johnson undercut the military. Not that I would expect you to understand that it was our failed strategy against the vietcong that did us in. But that's a different topic for a different day.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Buzsaw, posted 02-24-2009 10:01 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by dronestar, posted 02-24-2009 11:25 AM kuresu has replied
 Message 295 by Buzsaw, posted 02-24-2009 11:37 AM kuresu has taken no action

dronestar
Member
Posts: 1394
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 294 of 341 (500273)
02-24-2009 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 293 by kuresu
02-24-2009 10:41 AM


Re: Topic Update
kuresu,

In addition to expanding the middle east war (17,000 more troops to afghanistan), what happened to Obama's pledge to bring back troops from Iraq in 16 months? We are two months into Obama's presidency, when will this start to happen? (I'll be adding this failed pledge to my "continued Bush foreign policies" list too.)

Off-topic, BTW, you wrote "failed strategy" in Vietnam. If you mean USA didn't MAXIMIZE ALL its goals in Vietnam by successfully installing a puppet regime and extracting resources for American benefit, then MAYBE you can say USA failed. But the USA DID teach the lesson that if a country seeks full independence, and will not subordinate to USA power/economic interests, they will be punished severly (Iraq, Cuba).

Lastly, America lost? Vietnam suffered OVER TWO MILLION dead (includes civilians) vs only 58,000 American troops dead. Vietnam suffered massive infrastructure destruction vs none for USA. Vietnam STILL suffers from landmines and chemical weapons vs none for USA. Although Vietnam retained its independence, it seems Vietnam lost much, much, much more than USA.


Cogito, ergo Deus non est

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 10:41 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 11:50 AM dronestar has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 295 of 341 (500275)
02-24-2009 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 293 by kuresu
02-24-2009 10:41 AM


Re: Topic Update
kuresu writes:

Ah yes, your source is an extreme right-wing blog. From october 2008. From before he was even elected. From before he decided to send 17,000 more troops to afghanistan. From what I read, fox news reported a 10% cut in the defense budget, or about 55 billion dollars. This was in february I believe (that or late january).
Perhaps you should find a more current source? And a more objective source would be nice, but I doubt you can find one.

In other words, you don't have a substantive response other than to point me to other outdated crazies.l

My point has not been refuted. His plans are to begin cutting the military defense systems and other military expenditure while he increases boots on the ground in dangerous Afghanistan.

During his campaign he revealed his long term plan to undermine the military and our defense systems and technology. So as not to arouse the folks he begins with the 10% amount.

Our stealth Commander In Chief has just begun to undercut America's role in the Middle East. I'm concerned about the safety of our troops under the command of this mysterious man who's father and step father were Muslim Kenyans and his mentors have been enemies of the nation and military which he presides over.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 10:41 AM kuresu has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by Rahvin, posted 02-24-2009 3:18 PM Buzsaw has replied

kuresu
Member (Idle past 1745 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 296 of 341 (500278)
02-24-2009 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 294 by dronestar
02-24-2009 11:25 AM


Re: Topic Update
As to the Iraq War, this is the latest I've found:
quote:
Mr. Obama, who triumphed in November, did not oppose the new agreements, because they left him considerable flexibility to carry out his campaign pledges. What was unclear was how quickly his administration would move to withdraw American forces, particularly in light of advice from General Petraeus’s successor, Gen. Ray Odierno, who had developed a plan for a slower withdrawal – two brigades over six months, compared with one brigade a month. The American military presence in Baghdad and elsewhere was already markedly diminished. General Odierno and other military commanders argued that political developments in Iraq would be crucial to the pace of security changes, from the provincial elections scheduled for the weekend of Feb. 1 and 2 to national elections for the end of the year.

If people were really naive enough to believe that Obama would actually pull out in 16 months, pity on them. There is a specific reality on the ground that is removed from any interest we have in pulling out quickly, and there are political realities back here that will slow it down. What's interesting to note is how our mission in Iraq is slowly changing.

Obama is a politician. He will naturally promise more than he can actually accomplish, and make grandiose promises that will be difficult to implement. He is also more conservative than people give him credit for being. The key is whether or not he totally abandons promises and how he reacts to reality. So far, so good. But it's still early, and there's plenty of time to either royally screw things over or right the ship.

I think I'll be opening up a vietnam topic soon, since it seems no one really has a rational head when it comes to the subject.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by dronestar, posted 02-24-2009 11:25 AM dronestar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by dronestar, posted 02-24-2009 12:17 PM kuresu has replied

dronestar
Member
Posts: 1394
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 297 of 341 (500283)
02-24-2009 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by kuresu
02-24-2009 11:50 AM


Re: Topic Update
thanks kuresu,

As I posted repeatedly, I distrusted every one of Obama's words because they contrasted his voting actions. I said repeatedly that the Bush foreign policies would continue. So far I am nearly 100% correct. (I would very much like to be wrong about this and right about the lottery numbers instead)

I don't think USA's mission in Iraq is slowly changing at all. From the time of the Second World War . . . US State Department described the middle east oil: "It's a stupendous source of strategic power and the greatest material prize in world history." "It's strategically the most important part of the world". USA wants control of that oil. USA will be maintaining the largest (covering 104 acres!!!) palatial embassy in the world in Bagdad to do this.

Since WWII, Every country the USA has invaded (including Vietnam) was about securing power and resources.


Cogito, ergo Deus non est

This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 11:50 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 298 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 1:32 PM dronestar has replied
 Message 301 by kuresu, posted 02-24-2009 4:24 PM dronestar has taken no action

kuresu
Member (Idle past 1745 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 298 of 341 (500300)
02-24-2009 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 297 by dronestar
02-24-2009 12:17 PM


Re: Topic Update
I said repeatedly that the Bush foreign policies would continue. So far I am nearly 100% correct.

I'd dispute this. Next time, can you actually link to your post, or even give the right number? I think you meant message 219, as 217 is from Rahvin.

1) Yes, he did vote for phone company immunity. Whether this displays contempt for the constitution is contestable. First, is the bill unconstitutional? Second, what else has he done or voted for that is unconstitutional?

2) While he did vote to fund the war, he also sponsored legislation to end it. Of course, its now 2009, and we won't see the troops pulled out until 2011 most likely (hooray for the SOFA).

3) I know Clinton rubs a lot of people the wrong way. But your thing against voting to fund the troops is a little immature. We broke Iraq. We have to pay to fix it. As to her performance as SoS, what's been bad so far? She's even got a point person for trying to re-establish diplomatic contacts with Iran (sorry, can't find the article right now).

4) Obama supports Israel's oppression of palestinians? Well, how does 900 million in aid to the gaza strip palestinians jive with that picture? And I'm not sure where the evidence is for his supposed opposition to a two-state solution, or even to peace in the region. In fact, in the first televised interview he gave he had this to say:

quote:
Look at the proposal that was put forth by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. I might not agree with every aspect of the proposal, but it took great courage to put forward something that is as significant as that. I think that there are ideas across the region of how we might pursue peace.

In november of 2008, the Sunday Times reported that Obama told Abbas that the Israelis would be crazy not to accept the Initiative's proposals. The question is, what is the DoS doing to advance the initiative? Or peace? Of course, Bush also supported the initiative.

Anyhow, your contention that Hamas supports the Arab Peace Initiative is false. Abbas supports the initiative, whereas Hamas is divided on it but has opted to officially remain ambivalent, waiting for Israel to accept it. According to Haaretz they wanted to oppose it outright, but didn't to keep saudi arabian support. Apparently Time magazine reported last january that only Hamas and Hezbollah reject it.

5) Sovereignty violation is not simply a Bush policy. Virtually every administration has been guilty of this (and those are the violations we know of, so once you assume successful secret ops all administrations are guilty). Sovereignty violation is not necessarily a bad thing. Sovereignty is not sacrosanct, though it is to be respected if possible.

6) Karzai can demand a withdrawal all he wants. If we were to continue the Bush strategy of muddling through afghanistan, I'd say Karzai would be right. But given Obama's demand for a better endgame than what the pentagon gave him, we will certainly see a new strategy. At any rate, Afghanistan has to be stabilized, so how do you propose to do that? Bush was never interested in stabilizing afghanistan, simply in getting revenge.

7) I'm not sure what the beef with Holbrooke is. Remember, he oversaw the enlargement of NATO as well as brokered the Dayton Peace Accords, along with other impressive work as US ambassador to the UN. He's also been around a long time in the foreign policy world, and certainly knows his stuff. We all have something in our past, and you simply won't find the right people for the job if you limit yourself to squeaky clean and perfect. Aside from that, I can't find anything regarding him and east timor.

But seriously, how is Obama continuing specific Bush foreign policy? If that's your list, it's not really all that impressive.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by dronestar, posted 02-24-2009 12:17 PM dronestar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 302 by dronestar, posted 02-24-2009 4:29 PM kuresu has replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2209
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 299 of 341 (500306)
02-24-2009 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 290 by Buzsaw
02-24-2009 9:18 AM


Re: Topic Update
God knew that the (yet in unbelief) Jews would need the US and Britain to defeat the enemies of his messianic people

So your diety is too impotent to protect the jews himself.


soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by Buzsaw, posted 02-24-2009 9:18 AM Buzsaw has taken no action

Rahvin
Member (Idle past 195 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 300 of 341 (500307)
02-24-2009 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by Buzsaw
02-24-2009 11:37 AM


Re: Topic Update
Our stealth Commander In Chief has just begun to undercut America's role in the Middle East. I'm concerned about the safety of our troops under the command of this mysterious man who's father and step father were Muslim Kenyans and his mentors have been enemies of the nation and military which he presides over.

He's not the "stealth" Commander in Chief, Buz. He is the Commander in Chief. He's not some hidden commander directing the military from behind the scenes,he's the lawfully elected President of teh United States.

Obama is not his father. Obama is not his stepfather. Muslim != "terrorist." "Terrorist" != Muslim. Obama is not Kenyan. Kenyan != "terrorist."

Obama is not his friends and acquaintances. "Angry black preacher" != "enemy of the state." "Friend of angry black preacher" != "enemy of the state." "Former member of a group that used property damage as a political tool" != "enemy of the state." "Bare acquaintance of person who used to be a member of a group that used property damage as a political tool" != "enemy of the state."

All of your posts are collections of absurdities spawned from your anti-Muslim bigotry.

Shall we play the same game with President Bush? Bush freely associated with members of the ruling family of Saudi Arabia, even inviting them to his personal ranch. The ruling family of Saudi Arabia is Muslim, and even includes Osama bin Laden himself. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis.

Should we equate all Christian fundamentalists with terrorists because of the terrorist abortion clinic bombers?

Should we call all members of churches where Christian theocracy is promoted "enemies of the state?"

Should we call you an "enemy of the state" because of your opposition to the current US administration?

I swear Buz, I don't think I've ever spoken to a racist quite as far over the edge as you are when Muslims are concerned.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Buzsaw, posted 02-24-2009 11:37 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 303 by Buzsaw, posted 02-24-2009 7:03 PM Rahvin has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022