"on a whim" is really a term used to apply to people you don't like.

If Obama was a politician as you describe, changing his stances on a whim to suit the public, then he would've had a wildly different presidency. For one thing, health care wouldn't have happened. A majority of people favor gay marriage, but he still hasn't come out for that.

There's a difference between compromise, and capitulating to whatever the public wants. Can you describe some pertinent issues where Obama blatantly postured himself to be whatever the public wanted? Because clearly, it hasn't been working.

The needs of a "leader" change according to the times. In times like WW2, hardliners are the best, as in the case of Churchill. But once things calm down, those leaders are found to be terrible for the circumstance, which is also the reason why Churchill got thrown out after the war was over. When you have ideologues when you do not need them, you only get self-destruction and massive dysfunction, as the brinkmanship of the manufactured debt limit crisis illustrated.

@Q.U.: Hm. Never thought of it that way. I suppose that's accurate.

@DaCrum: Would you say that before running for office, Barrack Obama was a politician, and after being elected he became a (weak) leader? I'm not trying to split hairs here, I believe him to be a politician even now, and I'm trying to see where the line is that determines one over the other.

_________________

He's an idealist, and he's found that its not working, so he honestly believes in compromise. Which is not working either.

_________________
Escape will make me God.

Herman Cain?
I can see how he might make it. Even though he's black, he distracts Republicans from it because he's even MORE racist towards Muslims.

_________________

Exactly how is Herman Cain "racist" against Muslims?

I've heard Cain speak out against the evils of Islam, and say he would not be comfortable with a Muslim in his cabinet. And yet I don't find it racist, I find it truthful. Especially when you consider that traditional Muslims are polygamist, patriarchal, and intolerant of other religions. I'm sure Cain would much prefer an Israeli over a Muslim any day, for these very reasons.

_________________

Traditional Muslims? Ruffdraft, what the fuck are you talking about?

Traditionally, as you say...

Muslims, historically...

Were the most progressive cultures in the world for hundreds of years.
Were the most culturally strong as well.
Were some of the most peaceful countries in the world.

This new craze in Islamic culture? The degradation of women, hatred of 'decadent' lifestyle, hatred of democracy and progressive, rational thinking? It popped up in the 1950s.

_________________
Escape will make me God.

I'm sorry RuffDraft, but clearly you can't see the racism of his remarks because you are to a degree, racist yourself.

I have known several Muslims myself. Both foreign and native. They are not as you describe. At all.

You are stereotyping them to such an egregious extent as their most negative qualities and worst members, a fate that is not reserved for Christian practitioners, and rightfully so.

I am sorry, but this is the first instance in which I must call you blatantly ignorant and deluded. I cannot let your racism go uncontested.

Do you even have any Muslim friends? I think having one would very much help. It probably works like with homosexuals. Once people have a homosexual in their life, they are much more likely to support them. Their hatred, bigotry and misconceptions exist only in the abstract, never in reality. Once they actually get to know the people they think they know so much about, they realize just how wrong they are. I do not judge Christians by their extremists (anti-abortion violence, the Oslo shooter). I extend the same courtesy to Muslims. And so should you.

Yeah, I'm racist. Sure. It has nothing to do with the fact that women have always been looked down upon in Muslim society (it might be more visible in recent years, but it has always been there). It has nothing to do with the fact that a Muslim man can legally be polygamist. It has nothing to do with the fact that other religions in Muslim societies are either banned or are persecuted to the point of being driven out of those states. I'm completely racist about the Islam world as a whole for simply inexplicable reasons. Thank you for clearing that up, Eagle.

If you really think I'm racist towards Muslims, then fine, believe what you will. Strangely enough, Muslims hijacked planes and crashed them into two trade towers and the pentagon and killed thousands of people. I'd like to hear you try to say they didn't. Facts are facts.

I know that there are good Muslims. I used to live next door to a Muslim family. The Muslims I'm talking about are the devout Muslims, who live by a strong, immutable ethical code and usually see America as a cesspool of sin; many of them wish to see America destroyed. And yes I realize that not all Muslims are like that. The fault lies within the society, usually around the leaders, or Priests, depending on your perspective. It can be said that the leaders allow that kind of intolerant behavior to propagate and do little to take action against it. It can be said that many Priests (or Clerics) preach this violent doctrine to their disciples.

Do you want me to act as if there's absolutely nothing wrong with Muslims just so I can be politically correct? I flatly refuse to shade the truth. I tell it like I see it, that's it.


@DaCrum: Exactly what do you mean, "some of the most peaceful countries in the world"?

_________________

Er...
People tend to say many similar things about Christians, Ruff. Hell, except for the polygamy, most of those things applied to many Christian states in the past.

Luckily we tend to frown on most of those things today, but.

_________________

Let's see... maybe you're misunderstanding what I mean by peaceful. They didn't say... rape, steal from, and massacre civilians. I mean, if you want to see a violent culture, sometimes, you really just don't have to look too far from home.

Of course, then there's these facts.


Another thing is the code of conduct Muhammed made for the aforementioned conquests(which occurred after his death),


Which, at the time, is pretty damned civilized for what you consider a violent culture.

Well, you may say that perhaps, the conquests, which happened after his death, didn't use these rules because you know, no way the caliphate would let his war be governed by a dead man. Oh wait. He codified this conduct, making it standard in all Muslim armies. In the words of a historian, the Muslim army conquering Europe "exhibited a degree of toleration which puts many Christian nations to shame." I can go on with their additions to architecture, such as the Alhambra, and music, but I gotta go.

_________________
Escape will make me God.

@DaCrum: Good thing I'm not a Christian.

Actually, I expected that form of response; shift the issue away from Muslims by comparing them to something even bloodier. As if the crimes and atrocities committed by one group of people invalidates the atrocities of another. Not to say Christians don't have an incredibly sinful past, which I find quite laughable and ironic, considering their "God's" teachings.

But back to the issue of Muslims. Regardless of their past, the present seems to have devolved into some miserable bastardization of the original intent, if that was in fact the original intent indeed. I haven't read more than a few paragraphs of the Koran, and what I read was almost straightforward with the intent of a peaceful society; however, I have also seen verified citations that paint a much different, intolerant picture. In much the same way that I've only really read a few passages from the Bible, some of which I like, and some of which I find incredibly contradictory and sometimes downright insane.





We're straying from the topic by quite some latitude. The original topic was the US's Credit Rating. Did we finish up with that, or was accusing me of racism a natural progression from that?

_________________

Translation of the bible is a funny thing, I can never find the line in the hebrew bible *flips through the pages*
meh the bible is a silly thing, and in hebrew it's so hard to understand and there's 50 way to interpret each line...

_________________

Yeah, except that the Bible is really meant to be taken as a whole, usually allegorically, and in paragraphs. The mundane, earthly, non-prophetical, purely-human hands that wrote it didn't intend for it to be taken line by line as I have done above.

Even so, it's very telling that religious "interpreters" tend to use only the passages they like from the Bible, so they can tell people that Christianity is all about faith and doing the right thing. Just like those people who ask "What would Jesus do?" Usually, they don't want to know so they can do it; they want to know so they can tell other people to do it. But that's religion for ya.

_________________

I wouldn't know, I know only of the what you people call old testament, since that's all we learn here in israel.
so I would hardly know what would jesus do

_________________

Well then, if it's only some, and you know Muslims who are nice people, why would you support someone who publicly hates all of them? It is, after all, the clearest sign of bigotry.


Anyways, the issue only came up because you mentioned Herman Cain, and it reminded me of something Colbert said about him. He was joking about fund raising, and said Cain's was "Give me five dollars and I'll punch a Muslim."

As for the credit rating, well. It sucks it hurts us, just cause some company says it matters. Never mind they've been taking bribes to bump up other credit ratings, and that policy helped get us here in the first place.

Reminds me. Doesn't the stock market go down when they all sell sell sell? So wouldn't it stop sliding down if they, like, stopped panicking and selling everything?

_________________

splitting hairs.

you are being a bigot if you find fault with a religion in the same context that you find another religion not at fault. they've all had unspeakable things done in the name of their God, it doesn't matter when or how.

absolutely disgusting. i'm out of this thread. my post awhile back was dropped anyway. you guys can talk religion now. i'm not going to be come back to this discussion once i'm done with this post. maybe when you guys are done discriminating people in religious contexts i'll come back.

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.

...

Funny, I never figured BR to care about religion.

_________________

Yeah, go figure.
Not certain, I'd guess he's atheist since that seems to be common around here (heathens), but I couldn't really say.
Well, back to the rest of it. Responses?

_________________

In regards to your claim that Herman Cain "hates all of them," I'd like to know what you're using to hold that claim up. Do you have a quote of him making that very statement? Or is it more along the lines of a blurb you heard from the mainstream media that they took out of context? I would like to see the video clip or article that first made you think this.

_________________

Hm.
Can't find it. It's one of those things where you get linked through a page, then forget how the hell you got there. Youtube searches rarely go good for me. There's definitely a few videos on it, though he also tries to explain it by saying he doesn't want to have to watch them constantly to see if they're trying to implement sharia law. I wasn't even aware that's considered a legitimate threat in this country, so go figure. He's says it reasonably enough, but then he's running for a political office, so.

Anyways, what about that credit downgrade and stock market?

_________________

Heh.

I guess you're telling us to "Get back to the issue at hand."

_________________

Weekly discussion 19 (6/18-6/25): NYC shenanigans

As you may have heard, New York City is considering banning the sale of soft drinks over 16 ounces, with a fine to venders of $200. Sure, obesity is a problem, but what do you think about this attempt to address it? Also, in a not-strictly-related but amusing coincidence, NYC is also considering decriminalizing possession of "small" amounts of marijuana, reducing possession of up to 25 grams from a misdemeanor to a "violation" that carries a $100 fine. So then, is any of this appropriate? How many times as illegal should one be compared to the other?

valhallen

i like the things you do

valhallen!

if i could i would be you

you're the one and only poster

with the mighty rock god axe

who knows how to take a thread and make it

GGGGGGREEEEEAAAAAAAT

valhallen posts they're moooooooore than good

THEY'RE GRRRRRRRREEEAT

_________________
Bleedcomics Staff Writer/Editor, , and Keeper of the Jar Brain of Secret President. RIP Ku Ku Ku \(-^.^-)/ U Wuz A REAL N***A!!!!!!!
"We're quite aware of this. BR is no happy rainbow face man. He is simply our neighborhood best fucking poster." ~ Warbear
Puff Most Epic.