I sometimes respond in kind. I have not seen that from thumbs, which is why I am pointing out that I find it interesting that the intolerant leftists attack in a vile manner regardless of how soft-spoken a poster is, as long as they do not agree with that poster's opinions.
That's b.s. You don't respond in kind - you initiate. You're such a hypocrite. At least show an ounce of honesty and awareness about yourself.
I note your obsession with me. But this thread is not about me. Try to not make every thread about me. Besides, what happened to your promise to stop posting on this forum? The forum would be significantly better off if that happened.
Fair enough. But while I do agree that some people have responded extremely and that I wouldn't use such language, my respect for the President (doesn't matter which party) supersedes my respect for an opportunistic person who uses a tragedy to promote his own absurd, hateful agenda.
Geez, I state a well-known fact and I get called out as the one who distorts things... ATW is one of the most patient and respectful posters on here--- given the amount of personal attacks he suffers. It is unbelievable to me that you on the left of issues cannot see your own behavior. The Cadre of Back-Slapping Liberals indeed. Rather than reasonably discuss thumbs' thesis, all you can do is belittle it and him and throw in some of the other conservative posters for good measure. Disingenuous, self-congratulatory blowhards is all I see.
This. Americans have no tolerance for slow people, whether in business or with non-family,,-, - , , ,, , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , ,- , ,,, ,,,, , , ,, , ,,
Agnostics, not atheist... or atheistic agnostics. Atheists are just as informed on their position as theists .... none, no information, zip, zilch, nada (views on god or no god assume information from before the Big Bang, and there just isn't any. I guess you could say god came in to being at the same time but that would preclude a claim of a sentient cause)
If you go back to Clutchfans 2008, you will find that, while I opposed Obama because of his economic policies during the election run, afterward I stated that I wished him well. I was encouraged about electing the first black as president because this was a huge step in normalizing race relations, despite his support of Wright. Yes, I believed in his "hope and change" rhetoric. Then he began to show his true colors -- his divisiveness, his unwillingness to work with Congress (even his own Democratic one), his pettiness -- and finally his deceit regarding everything from religion to allegiances. I call Obama a "closet Muslim" not out of offense to Muslims who actually believe in their faith but, rather, because he won't make clear what his beliefs truly are. He purports to be a Christian, but he never supports any Christian beliefs. He ignores the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Mid-East Christians, but gets very concerned about the welfare of Syrian refugees. He is willing to bring tens of thousands of them to the United States even though they pose a serious threat of ISIS infiltration. If you knew me personally and discovered that, while professing to be a Muslim but supporting non-Muslim value systems, you would be within bounds to label me a "closet Christian." The truth is not offensive to anyone except to the guilty.
I think a stronger case can be made that W and the Bush family ties to the Saudis make them more closeted Muslims than Obama. Spoiler
Independent voters see threads like this and go running to the left side of the aisle. Thanks, thumbsy.
Yep. I'm not really on board with the talking points the left typically provides with regards to Islam, but seeing posts like the OP make it almost impossible to consider standing on the right.
Wow. Just wow. This is so sad to read and disappointing that someone thinks this way. Really have to think that people are just crazy. No offense to you thumbs, but I feel like you are just utterly brainwashed. And it just makes me sad.
First time I've read of the Muslim Conspiracy.. How long will it take for them to go back the Zionist Jew one?
As you should be... As you should be... Please, allow me to illuminate how little "evidence" your post contains. You begin by assuming (without evidence) that Obama's father "set the agenda" in any way, shape, or form. As has been observed in this thread, his father wasn't present in his life after the age of 3, so any agenda would have to have been very deeply ingrained, but even speculating about this ignores the pure fact that someone just made up the statement above and you choose to believe it. If you wrote a book, would you attack or defend your father? Unless he was a truly vile human being, I would assume that any reasonable person would be laudatory about his biological father. Another statement devoid of any "evidence" whatsoever. Are you privy to the discussions of the National Security Council? Have you heard or seen quoted Obama "refusing" to protect Christians? Does Obama have to intervene everywhere that people are being killed across the globe or do you only find it objectionable when Christians are killed and not protected directly by Obama? Of course, entertaining you by asking those questions gives legitimacy to a baseless accusation, devoid of any factual information. Ahh, finally the appearance of a truth accompanied with a lie. The Obama administration has indeed agreed to accept Syrian refugees, but then you make the assumption and accusation that some significant percentage (by using the word "many") of these people are ISIS sympathizers. Of course, they are refugees because ISIS has destroyed or taken over their homes, but feel free to ignore facts in favor of what some fear-monger has conditioned you to believe. Well, except that the administration has sent arms to the Kurds... http://theweek.com/speedreads/448373/arms-kurds-iraq--fight-usarmed-isis http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/10/30/obama-authorizes-advisers-enter-syria/74867792/ I tell you what, I'll stand on this point by paraphrasing what another poster said (and you ignored). If you think that any special forces troops would allow themselves to be deployed into a suicide mission, I think you're fooling yourself. Those men are trained to survive and I have faith that they will be able to help the people fighting against ISIS. The second factual thing you've said, then you follow it with... Which assumes the outcome of a process that not only hasn't started yet, but has exactly zero probability of happening, with a Republican Congress. Still, you use this garbage as "evidence" that Obama actively wants "ISIS guerrillas," and that is why he wants to close Gitmo. Added to the fact that those guys have been at Gitmo for so long that it isn't likely they even know what ISIS is or that they exist. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...-should-know-about-the-federal-inmate-release Given that all of the people released in the program you reference (without a link, but a reference) were drug war offenders, it certainly doesn't follow that the Gitmo prisoners, in the fictional world where Obama is magically able to transport them into federal prisons, would then be released. This is the biggest load of horse$hit you trotted out. The treaty negotiated does not "arm" the Iranians in any way. The experts believe that this deal extended the window, increasing the time it will take Iran to develop nuclear arms. Claiming Obama has armed the Iranians with this deal is pure, unadulterated nonsense. Really? It didn't take me 30 seconds to find one where his administration criticizes Iran for both of those things, among others. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-admin-criticizes-iran-and-cuba-for-human-rights-abuses/ "It said that other Iranian violations included disappearances; cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; politically motivated violence and repression; lack of an independent judiciary; legal discrimination and violence against women, ethnic and religious minorities, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons; and incitement to anti-Semitism and trafficking in persons." Sure, it is the right thing to do to criticize bigots and morons. Yes, enough to convince those of us who think that you have ceded control of your opinions to right wing pundits who lie to you. BTW, on an unrelated note, I was at and left the UH game early last night. My 11 year old insisted that it was time to go and, as we were walking to the car, told me that he really wanted to go because he felt like if we left then, the Cougars would win by one point. Spooky. And more factual than your original post, too.
When will the most conservative racist white people realize that their beloved Jesus Christ was a Palestinian Jew that has a lot racially in common with Jihad people? When? Not all white people but just the really shrewd racists..
