Because in 20 years of Sundays, he said only a few controversial things, and some of those weren't really that controversial when read in the context of the whole sermon. While I don't know for a fact that Obama didn't, not one person has been able to provide a witness or proof that he did.
Exactly. This video helps prove me my point. Clinton never claimed he was offered Sudan, and nothing in that video indicates otherwise except the editorial writing at the end of it. He said that the Sudanese released him. He didn't say they offered him to Clinton. This is from a post I made to TJ back in 2005. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: #2 The govt. of Sudan NEVER offered OBL to Bill Clinton. I've listened the link a thousand times. What Clinton said was that there would be legal problems getting OBL extradicted at that time. What the clip you have didn't say is that Sudan never made a credible offer of OBL during Clinton's presidency. I will post the facts again in less detail. If you want details please do a search and look up the other 10 times when I debunked this falsehood you keep pumping. The part about the tape, is that Bill Clinton pleaded with the Saudis to take Bin Laden which is totally different than Bin Laden being offered to the U.S. Furthermore, the 9-11 commission the very claim, that you are talking about now. Guess what they found? There was no evidence to support such an offer. What Clinton said about any sort of offer to the U.S. was this. This is the only part we he mentions even the notion of an offer. And just how was the govt. hearing that the Sudanese wanted the U.S. to take care of Bin Laden? From none other than a business man named Mansoor Ijaz. Ijaz had business contacts in Sudan and they were being hampered because of U.S. sanctions against them. The U.S. had sanctions against them because they supported terrorism, and were the largest players in the adult slave trade industry. Yet Mansoor wanted sanctions lifted so he could make some money. He went to the whitehouse and made the claims about the Sudanese govt offering Bin Laden. Clinton's whitehouse told him they weren't in the business of doing business with sovereign nations by using a middleman. They then contacted the Sudanese govt. themselves and investigated the claim. They found that there was no credibility to Mansoor Ijaz's claim. Guess where Mansoor Ijaz works now? FOX NEWS.
The 3 AM ad isn't proof that Hillary is a racist. Palandino is racist and his emails prove it. Affirmative action is not racism. Sorry, that is a huge fail. First of all it isn't mandated by the government except in cases where there is proven discrimination in the past. Other than that it is voluntary with government incentives for it. If you knew the history of literacy tests you wouldn't advocate them again. They are racist. Rand Paul being a Libertarian doesn't excuse the idea that he believes private businesses should be allowed to discriminate. It is in fact a racist policy. Rand Paul may not be a racist, but that policy is.
Both sides: the president has total control of the economy and is to blame if the stock market or unemployment goes up or down
I love how people criticize Clinton for not getting Bin Laden back in those days. Back in days when people accused Clinton of "wagging the dog:" and trying to distract people from the Monica Lewinsky controversy - Clinton was going after Bin Laden. At least Clinton say him as the biggest threat while Republicans saw an intern with a blue dress as the biggest threat.
anyone know if there's a non-religious conservative in the media or in politics? when I think of republicans, I think of this: <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6RNfL6IVWCE?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6RNfL6IVWCE?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
There are plenty of non-Christian, Atheist, small-government, freedom-loving Libertarians like Penn Jilette if that makes you feel any better http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF_wExWxUcA And when I think think of big-government nanny Liberals I think of this: Michigan Woman Faces Civil Rights Complaint for Seeking a Christian Roommate A civil rights complaint has been filed against a woman in Grand Rapids, Mich., who posted an advertisement at her church last July seeking a Christian roommate. The ad "expresses an illegal preference for a Christian roommate, thus excluding people of other faiths,” according to the complaint filed by the Fair Housing Center of West Michigan. "It's a violation to make, print or publish a discriminatory statement," Executive Director Nancy Haynes told Fox News. "There are no exemptions to that." Haynes said the unnamed 31-year-old woman’s case was turned over to the Michigan Department of Civil Rights. Depending on the outcome of the case, she said, the woman could face several hundreds of dollars in fines and “fair housing training so it doesn’t happen again.” Harold Core, director of public affairs with the Michigan Department of Civil Rights, told the Grand Rapids Press that the Fair Housing Act prevents people from publishing an advertisement stating their preference of religion, race or handicap with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling. "It's really difficult to say at this point what could potentially happen," he told the newspaper, noting that there are exemptions in the law for gender when there is a shared living space. But Joel Oster, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, which is representing the woman free of charge, describes the case as "outrageous." "Clearly this woman has a right to pick and choose who she wants to live with," he said. "Christians shouldn't live in fear of being punished by the government for being Christians. It is completely absurd to try to penalize a single Christian woman for privately seeking a Christian roommate at church -- an obviously legal and constitutionally protected activity." Haynes said the person who filed the initial complaint saw the ad on the church bulletin board and contacted the local fair housing organization. The ad included the words, "Christian roommate wanted," along with the woman's contact information. Had the ad not included the word "Christian," Haynes said, it would not have been illegal. "If you read it and you were not Christian, would you not feel welcome to rent there?" Haynes asked. Oster said he hopes the case will eventually be dropped and that he's sent a letter to the state asking the authorities to dismiss the case as groundless. "The First Amendment guarantees us Freedom of Religion," he said. "And we have the right to live with someone of the same faith. The Michigan Department of Civil Rights is denying her rights by pursuing this complaint." But Haynes said officials plan on pursuing the matter. "We want to make sure it doesn't happen again," she said. Great News! Good Triumphed Over Evil! Officials Say No Discrimination In Seeking 'Christian Roommate' http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/06/officials-say-no-discrimi_n_779767.html Too bad evil made a court case out of this to begin with.
Actually, it is the Farm Bureau that said that the estate tax had never caused a family farm to be sold. That claim is documented.
That was a joke on my part. I thought it was funny when everyone was up in arms about the racism in the 3 a.m. ad. I also think it illustrates one of the points I made above: a lot of things get called racist that are not. I would hate to be judged by emails I have sent. Some people have certain banter that they fall into. My roommate and I would do it: he was black and I was white and we would crack over the top race jokes at each other, but neither of us really meant them, we were just being silly. I don't know if Palandino is racist or not. Is there some policy that he was advocating that was racist? Affirmative action is textbook racism. It is treating people differently based on the color of their skin. Look at the Michigan admissions case. Whether or not it was mandatory for everyone to participate is irrelevant. Imagine a school that gave you 50 extra "points" on your admission application for being white. Would that be racist? Of course it would. Affirmative action was an attempt to counteract historical racism with modern racism. That is the huge fail. As I said, I am aware of the racist history of literacy tests. I also said that there is nothing inherently racist about requiring literacy tests for voting. There is also nothing inherently racist about a poll tax. Racism is treating people differently based on skin color. Not being white does not decrease a person's ability to read, that is a result of not being educated. No, it is not. A business discriminating on the basis of skin color is racist. A government staying out of private affairs is not racist. If the government mandated that Asians were not allowed to go to the post office, that would be racist. If the government said that UPS could refuse to do business with whomever they wanted, and UPS then refused to do business with Asians, it would not be the policy that was racist, it would be the people at UPS. Treating everyone the same will never be racist, as it is the very opposite of racism.
This is where either your age (the lack of it) or simply not studying the era adequately has served you ill. Literacy tests and the Poll Tax were in place precisely to discriminate against Blacks in the South by discouraging them from voting. If you truly believe otherwise, you are simply ignoring the facts. I prefer to think that you honestly don't know the history and are operating on some "internal logic" that justifies a blatant racist attempt at the time to depress the Black vote. It's well documented. This isn't simply my "opinion."
That he didn't send forces into an autonomous nation (Sudan) and fight to take Bin Laden. Again, Clinton himself claims he was never offered Bin Laden, everyone who was working on the issue at the time claims that Clinton was never offered Bin Laden. One businessman is the only person who ever made the claim.
Affirmative action isn't racism. The fact that Universities seek to remedy a history of racism of the past, and provide students with a broader college experience by increasing minorities on their campus is the opposite of racism. You and black roommate are not group e-mails. If you are sending group racist e-mails it's a pretty safe bet that your a racist. That's what CP did. You are correct that businesses that would discriminate based on race and keep minorities from their establishments are racist. Supporting the idea that businesses should be allowed to do that is racist policy.
I would assume that supporting the idea that allowing people to discriminate based on race in their private home along with their private business without government interference is also racist policy?
It doesn't discriminate against them because of their race. Yes it is a race based policy, but isn't hurting them because of their race.
