| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| RockGolf |
Posted - 06/10/2009 : 22:13:53
An 89-year-old White Supremacist walked into the Holocaust Museum in Washington, pulled out a rifle and killed a guard before being shot himself.
This is just another example of right-wing terrorism that is being stoked by organizations like FOX News. The nutjob was a vehement anti-Obama protester, and believed the right-wing propaganda that Obama was actually born in Kenya, not Hawaii. Propaganda spread, in large part, by FOX.
This follows on the heels of the murder of an abortion doctor, and another cop in Philadelphia murdered by a loonie who was sure Obama was going to take his guns away.
How many people have to DIE before FOX backs down on it's increasingly more radical agenda? I'm sadly afraid it will take an assassination attempt on the President or his family, but I fear it won't be just an attempt. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| RockGolf |
Posted - 06/18/2009 : 15:48:34
I agree that napkin story says more about the teller classlessness than the folders.
I'm reminded of a similar story where a well-off family had a poor or unsophisticated guest at dinner. The storyteller was the daughter of the rich family. In the story, the guest pulls some faux pas like drinking from the finger bowl. The daughter looks aghast, then waits to see what her father will do. Without a word, the father drinks from his own finger bowl. Afterward, the father tells the daughter that the purpose of manners is to make other people comfortable. |
| BiggerBoat |
Posted - 06/18/2009 : 13:14:47
I was introduced to Bully Reilly by an American friend a few years back in the aftermath of 9/11. Having been on the anti-war marches here I couldn't understand why Americans were so keen to go to war with so little justification. I watched one of his rants aimed at the French for refusing to join the 'Coalition of the willing' (because they weren't convinced by Colin Powell's 'evidence' that Iraq had WMDs. Justifiably of course.). I couldn't believe the pro-war bias, xenophobia and crass simplifications that erupted from his mouth. It was only then that I began to understand the effect of Fox's propagandizing slant on an angry American public. The anti-French feeling that was propagated after that (and other right-wing) broadcasts astounded me, such was the lack of logic in their conclusions.
Needless to say I haven't watched him again since until seeing those videos on the Ebert page. I see he's stil the same ignorant, knee-jerk reactionary bully he always was.
|
| Sean |
Posted - 06/18/2009 : 06:50:55
quote:
Originally posted by duh Improper Username
And wouldn't the very truly "classy" person ignore altogether whether napkins were folded or crumpled?
I think this is correct. Someone born into nobility (e.g., someone in the UK with a "Lord" or "Duke" in front of their name) would not give a crap about used-napkin etiquette. Why would they bother noticing or caring about something so trivial?
Whereas a snob (derived from the French sans nobilit� or "without nobility") will worry about paltry details while they try to jump up a class. One could assume that an attempt at class-jumping is likely to be a result of insecurity to some extent.
|
| thefoxboy |
Posted - 06/18/2009 : 05:40:17
quote:
Originally posted by rockfsh
quote:
Originally posted by duh Improper Username
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
McCain was born in Panama for example and it was never challenged.
Didn't Congress conduct an investigation of McCain's eligibility?
Whereas all attempts to confirm Obama's eligibility have so far been thwarted.
The Republican Governor of Hawai'i had her Dept of Health confirm Obama's birth certificate and then there is this link to the Honolulu Advertser birth announcement. See lower left col.
http://www.wikileaks.org/leak/obama-1961-birth-announcement-from-honolulu-advertiser.pdf
I'm keeping that number of the car rental for next time I visit Hawaii..cheap as!!
|
| duh |
Posted - 06/18/2009 : 04:58:53
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
Roger Ebert wrote an interesting article on this topic a few days ago. Thanks to GHcool for the link. 
This reminds me of something I have thought of from time to time ever since reading one of O'Reilly's books several years ago:
He told a story, while discussing "class," of having taken a date along to a dinner with friends at a fancy schmancy restaurant. He said his date was a very polite lady but that she (horrors!) neatly folded her napkin instead of crumpling it. He said that he could tell that the others thought less of her (because it showed she had less "class") because of it.
To me, that story told more about O'Reilly's own insecurity than it did about either his dinner companions or his date. How do we know for sure that the companions really thought less of his date? Perhaps he was merely projecting his own insecurity.
Does folding a napkin really indicate that the folder of the napkin has less "class" than do those who crumple their napkins? What if the folder came from a region where all classy people fold their napkins but unmannerly people crumple them. If she was mannerly according to the customs that were part of her culture, then why would she suddenly be considered to be "classless" just because the region she was presently in had the custom of crumpling napkins?
And wouldn't the very truly "classy" person ignore altogether whether napkins were folded or crumpled?
Note to self: If ever dining at a fancy schmancy restaurant, be sure to blow nose on the napkin. Or the edge of the tablecloth. |
| rockfsh |
Posted - 06/18/2009 : 04:52:45
quote:
Originally posted by duh Improper Username
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
McCain was born in Panama for example and it was never challenged.
Didn't Congress conduct an investigation of McCain's eligibility?
Whereas all attempts to confirm Obama's eligibility have so far been thwarted.
The Republican Governor of Hawai'i had her Dept of Health confirm Obama's birth certificate and then there is this link to the Honolulu Advertser birth announcement. See lower left col.
http://www.wikileaks.org/leak/obama-1961-birth-announcement-from-honolulu-advertiser.pdf |
| Sean |
Posted - 06/18/2009 : 00:31:03
Roger Ebert wrote an interesting article on this topic a few days ago. Thanks to GHcool for the link. |
| BiggerBoat |
Posted - 06/17/2009 : 17:15:26
We are all God's children. Now we have to work out which God we're talking about. |
| Sal[Au]pian |
Posted - 06/17/2009 : 16:59:53
O.K., I missed what was meant by natural citizen but it's still a nonsense to make naturalised citizens be second class. Having said that, Obama's mother is American anyway so why would it matter where he was born? Or is it two American parents that are required?
And I'm afraid that this obsession that some Americans have with 'heritage' is also a nonsense. In many countries, certainly including Britain, literally or virtually the whole population have genes from outside the borders. The way in which some Americans arbitrarily pinpoint their 'heritage' to a particular point in the history of, and subset of, their family is so strange and frustrating. I want to say, "No, you're not an Irish American or an Italian American, you're just an American." |
| duh |
Posted - 06/17/2009 : 16:53:40
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
McCain was born in Panama for example and it was never challenged.
Didn't Congress conduct an investigation of McCain's eligibility?
Whereas all attempts to confirm Obama's eligibility have so far been thwarted. |
| turrell |
Posted - 06/17/2009 : 16:05:49
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
Everywhere is a nation of immigrants these days and most places don't have such laws. The point is that if citizenship is given to someone, then it shouldn't be a second-class citizenship that comes with exceptions. That, and talking up being a "nation of immigrants", creates needless barriers. Being born elsewhere would be a sufficient political disadvantage that a legal veto makes little difference. What if someone is born to American parents on a trip to Canada, say? They could be the best possible candidate and yet they would be stupidly ruled out.
For starters, exactly how many British Prime Ministers are of non-British heritage - I'm guessing none but certainly not a majority. To date there have been 44 out of 44 US Presidents that have foreign heritage - so really not all other countries are remotely like the US - sure much of the Western Hemisphere, but even in South America it is more common to have mixed with the indigenous population than to be purely European (Nazi's in Argentina excluded).
Secondly a Natural Born Citizen is one that is born a US citizen. If two US citizens pop out a baby while enjoying the sights in Toronto - their child would be born with US Citizenship. Their child would not have been naturalized - so they would probably pass muster. McCain was born in Panama for example and it was never challenged.
So as a defender of my Constitution I passionately disagree. |
| lemmycaution |
Posted - 06/17/2009 : 03:49:55
I am not an abortion proponent but there are times when I wish it could be made retroactive. |
| Sal[Au]pian |
Posted - 06/17/2009 : 02:01:13
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
There's a very good book called Freakonomics which talks about how a huge surge in crime was predicted in America in the early 90s. But instead it dropped and no one could work out why. Then someone realised it was because abortion had been legalised some twenty years before and all the potential criminals from broken homes had not come to be, they'd been aborted. And, in fact, the murder rate dropped off, so, in effect, abortions had saved people's lives.
Freakonomics is one of those books I keep meaning to get around to reading. I've got to admit that that is the closest to a convincing argument for allowing abortion that I have ever heard. |
| BiggerBoat |
Posted - 06/17/2009 : 01:43:41
quote:
Originally posted by duh Improper Username
I had a friend who was pro-life. For her, the movement was a way to meet people and make friends. 
That's the problem, so many people get involved in so many issues for all the wrong reasons. Pro-life isn't the worst thing to get involved in (imagine if Duh had substituted 'pro-life' with 'Nazi party', 'KKK', or 'holocaust deniers' - "I don't agree with everything they say but they do serve wonderful cake...") but surely it's got to be for the right reason.
I'm pro-life. I'd like everyone to live, and live well. I'd like to live in a world where abortion isn't necessary, but unfortunately, at the moment, it is. There's a very good book called Freakonomics which talks about how a huge surge in crime was predicted in America in the early 90s. But instead it dropped and no one could work out why. Then someone realised it was because abortion had been legalised some twenty years before and all the potential criminals from broken homes had not come to be, they'd been aborted. And, in fact, the murder rate dropped off, so, in effect, abortions had saved people's lives. |
| duh |
Posted - 06/17/2009 : 00:56:24
quote:
Originally posted by turrell
this is to ensure that our President is sufficiently American - we wouldn't want an Austrian born Cyborg to gain control of Skynet or something.
OK, I vote for this as the best post of this topic so far! |
