Every now again, politicians get a gimme, an opportunity to show just how noble and broad-minded they are, how they can stand up to bigotry and narrow-mindedness without fear of hurting themselves politically. Bill Clinton had that in 1992 when he condemned the race-baiting lyrics of Sister Souljah.
President Obama had just such an opportunity yesterday when Louisiana’s Republican Governor joined him at a town hall in New Orleans yesterday. As this video from Politico shows, some people in the audience booed that good man and the President took them to task. Well done, Mr. President, classy.
Perhaps, the President learned from his failure on Inauguration Day to quiet the boos against his predecessor, the then-outgoing President of the United States. That was also a gimme. He might on his first day in office have really inaugurated a new era of civility had he taken to task those who would so rudely register their disagreement with a hard-working civil servant.
Had he given that good man credit, he would have taken a huge step to fostering a new spirit of comity in our nation’s capital.
All that said, he did act with grace yesterday and defended the efforts of a member of the opposing party. And such classy acts, even if easily performed, should not go unnoticed. Kudos, Mr. President.
OK, one small instance of Obama doing the right thing.
Good of you to acknowledge. Now, how about following his example?
#2: “Good of you to acknowledge. Now, how about following his example?”
Oh, please, you racist. Obama is following the example set by George W. Bush, John McCain, et al. In fact, this is the one and only time in Obama’s political career that he will ever resemble a Republican.
Good answer, Sean A. Tano badly needs to learn from Obama’s example – and the example of the Republicans you mentioned.
Wow, there’s a first time for everything! Congrats to Obama for doing the right thing for once. Based on his deplorable behavior so far, I expect showing class this once was a fluke.
My bet is the town hall was full of his SEIU thugs who booed on cue so he could “reprimand” them. It’s the usual theater with this clown.
I’m sorry…I just threw up a little.
Oh dear god. Calling Bobby Jindal (the evolution denialist, the man who employed outrageous homophobic rhetoric to gin up religious bigots for his election – that Bobby Jindal) a “good man” is disgusting. I honestly would like to engage in some kind of meaningful conversation on gay issues and the Republican Party, but when you’re just living in your own fantasy land where it’s ok to promote bigotry as long as you find “big government (but only Democratic big govt., of course – it’s just fine when Bush II is doing it, and high taxes are Satanic under Obama, but acceptable and more under Reagan, of course!)” distasteful, it’s really hard to have a decent conversation.
Oh, Eric Olsen, this is your cue for one of your ridiculously overplayed “one liner” or snideness of some sort.
DavyJG scoffs at Jindal as:
Now let me see. If you go to Wikipedia, you will quickly discover that biological evolution is a “powerful explanatory and predictive theory (that) has become the central organizing principle of modern biology, directing research and providing a unifying explanation for the diversity of life on Earth.”
Does DavyJG have some special information showing that biological evolution is settled science?
If so, why are scientists still using convoluted terminology such as “powerful explanatory” and “predictive theory” and “organizing principle” and “unifying explanation?”
Never mind trying to answer, DavyJG. It is not settled science. Evolution is a huge word encompassing many meanings. But to the point, biological science is a long way from proving the origin of the species and the common ancestor theories.
Like man made global warming, many impatient, lazy liberals would rather pass a law making it all the accepted truth and herd the idiots who don’t buy into the game off to some camp somewhere for reeducation.
Tell me, DavyJG, how much room are you willing to leave in your world for people who hold religious convictions?
I don’t care if you choose to believe that 6000 years ago, some deity created this 4.5 billion year old planet. I don’t care if you believe that the Flinstone’s is historically accurate or that Noah’s Ark just hasn’t been found yet. I don’t even care if you think that the billions of failed galaxies and imploding stars and the fact that 99.9% of all species that have ever existed on Earth are now extinct are in fact evidence of some kind of “intelligent design”. But I do start caring when a person with executive power attempts to undermine actual science because of religious convictions which are based on absolutely nothing (nothing at all!).
Just because we don’t have all the answers for the various intricacies and nuances of evolution DOES NOT mean it’s an even playing field where even zany ideas about supernatural “designers” ought to be considered. It means we don’t have all of the answers but we have a great deal more any other theory. Bobby Jindal is a bad politician for undermining science in the interests of his own religious zealotry.
Well, DavyJG, now you have sidled a bit away from “evolution denialist” and gone straight for the jugular on Jindal’s religion. At least you have taken a stand. Why did you shuffle around with the elitist evolution theme instead of pronouncing your bigotry against his religious belief system from the get go? I smell the stink of a coward.
Hah, I’m a “bigot” for disagreeing with someone else’s ideas? So those that make your opinion on my post “bigoted”? After all, you are disputing my ideas, just as I am Jindal’s. Likewise, Gay Patriot must also be an outrageous outlet for “bigotry” because Dan is constantly disagreeing with the ideas of various Democrats and Progressives/Liberals.
Look, just get it straight: one is bigoted if one insults or criticises another for an immutable characteristic (skin colour, racial background, gender, sexual orientation, disability, nationality, etc.). Insulting and criticising another based upon their decisions (choice of religion, choice of gubernatorial education policy, FOR EXAMPLE) is perfectly reasonable and it’s absurd to suggest there is anything “bigoted” about it.
So please stop calling Democrat’s “bigots” for disagreeing with, and being disgusted by, your ideas. Republicans disagree with, and are disgusted by, Democratic ideas too.
Here’s one for DavyJG; since you oppose the insertion of religious beliefs in government, what do you say about a politician who, in his campaign advertising, uses pictures of himself in a pulpit, claims that he wants to be “fulfilling God’s will” and to “go out and do the Lord’s work”, talks about how he “felt a beckoning of the spirit and accepted Jesus Christ into his life”, and cites his “active church membership” as a reason for electing him?
Barack Obama, who you are seemingly talking about, does not believe that Creationism (or whatever the Religious Right has dressed it up as this week) has an equal footing with actual, reality-based science like evolution. He does not believe in forcing women to go through with unwanted pregnancies because it is commanded by some “God” and he does not victimise gay people nor does he exploit and promote homophobia in the name of his religion. The kind of religious tone and language used to appeal to religious voters by both the Democrats and the Republicans is obviously cynical and distasteful and bothersome, however.
Also, just FWIW, I wasn’t criticising Jindal for not being a Democrat. I was criticising him for being an absolute, unforgivable moron. I know there are Democrats’ who believe the same harmful nonsense that Jindal does (Obama is NOT one of them, however) so you can please surcease from informing me of how awful Democrats are when my point is about how awful Republicans are.
You didn’t answer the question, DavyJG.
Probably because it was indeed Barack Obama — and the fact that you support and defend him for this behavior after criticizing it in Republicans demonstrates that you are a complete and total hypocrite.
I know there are Democrats’ who believe the same harmful nonsense that Jindal does (Obama is NOT one of them, however) so you can please surcease from informing me of how awful Democrats are when my point is about how awful Republicans are.
Unfortunately, since you support and endorse these Democrats despite their beliefs, what that makes abundantly clear is that you really don’t care about these beliefs at all and are simply using them as an excuse for your outright bigotry.
He does not believe in forcing women to go through with unwanted pregnancies because it is commanded by some “God”
Of course not. He and his party support child rapists, so God gets set aside in the need to cover one’s tracks, even if it involves telling a child to cross state lines without telling her parents for an invasive medical procedure.
#15: “He does not believe in forcing women to go through with unwanted pregnancies because it is commanded by some “God”…”
Nor in a right to life-saving healthcare if the “fetus” has the temerity to survive the procedure that was designed to kill it, it would seem.
“…and he does not victimise gay people nor does he exploit and promote homophobia in the name of his religion.”
So, when Obama says that marriage is between a man and a woman, it’s A-OK because it’s not based on religion?
I have a different take on this.
It’s not just the President; politicians love to praise “hard work”. I’m sorry, but I have spent my entire career in the private sector, and “hard work” doesn’t count for squat. What matters is results. Anyone can work hard. Successful people are those who produce something of value for a customer. Confiscating one person’s earnings to give to another is not “hard work”, regardless of party affiliation.
Sources please!
Ive already heard enough of your hyperventilating lies to know you are misrepresenting the truth.
with exact quotations from Bobby Jindal please you pathetic liar.
Bobby Jindal is a good man. Bobby Jindal is a good man. Bobby Jindal is very much a good man.
If you can’t stand people saying that, then get out.
Creationism is a word that covers any of the many numbers of ways in which God could have created the universe. What you are saying is that Obama does not believe God created the universe, which means pretty much Obama doesn’t believe in God.
At least we can agree on that. He’s far too egotistical and leftist to believe in any higher power than himself and government. Government IS the lefts god.
DavyJG, here I praise the President, a Democrat whose policies I oppose and you find it necessary to attack the Republican he praises.
Telling.
A Democrat acquitted himself quite well. And this Republican takes notice. But, you have to dwell on the minus, quite possibly an imaginary one.
So the extermination of 6 million Jews was just for shits and giggles then? Tell that to the Christians who are killed around the world every year just for practicing their religion. Good to know (and very telling) that you think it’s acceptable to hate a person because of their religious beliefs.
If you check the American Heritage Dictionary for bigot, it includes religion.
Further, could you please explain what’s so “dangerous” about his religious beliefs, especially since it’s shared by the MAJORITY of Americans?
#13: “Insulting and criticising another based upon their decisions (choice of religion, choice of gubernatorial education policy, FOR EXAMPLE) is perfectly reasonable and it’s absurd to suggest there is anything “bigoted” about it.”
With liberals like DavyJG, even their honesty is dishonest. He admits to being a bigot and indicates that it’s directed at people based on their “choice of religion,” but he’s lying because his criticism is reserved exclusively for those who choose Christianity. Thus, his criticism of Jindal’s Christian beliefs on this thread is no surprise.
Now let’s compare this to the post titled, “Death Penalty for ‘Aggravated Homosexuality’.” The post is about the law being considered by Uganda’s Parliament that would impose stricter penalties on gays (even death) for engaging in homosexual acts. And who does DavyJG blame for the introduction of this law? You guessed it:
“It is well known that the violent flames of Ugandan homophobia have been fanned by U.S. Evangelical Christians, who are enabled by the very political party this blog supports!”
Of course he blames American Christians. Keep in mind that he also links to a story that reports that “In 12 Nigerian states that subscribe to Sharia law, homosexuality is punishable by death.” But strangely, DavyJG offers no criticism of Islam or Sharia law whatsoever. Apparently, the violent flames of African homophobia can only be stoked American Christians.
It seems to me, Sean, that alleged “human rights” groups tend to blame America and Israel for everything. The rest of the world just wants to live in the Utopia they’ve created for themselves.
Throw in the “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” and you’ve got material for a phone call to George Noory.
DavyJG,
Clearly you are a member of the Bill Maher School of Deriding Religion. That is your choice. You came in here using the code words about denying evolution. I flushed you out of the bushes and, sure enough, you hate Jindal and all “God” believers, “creationists” and “intelligent design” people. I do not see how anyone could read your words and not see you for who you are.
I called you a bigot and a coward. I have no reason to amend my assessments. You are smug enough in your anti-religion stance to let it all fly when prodded, but pseudo-sophisticated enough to try to peddle your bile with elitist code.
A real man would be like Bill Maher and sneer openly at the little people he so disdains. It is an integrity thing.
Thanks for your information about abortion and I love your definition of bigotry. I am relieved to know that Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Militant Islamists, the Han Chinese in Tibet and the Hutu’s and Tutsis are safe from of any charge of bigotry.
I will ask again:
Why do I believe that you will only tolerate politically correct, state monitored religion? Did you know that the Chinese now finance the monks in Tibet and have cut them off from being religiously independent? Clever, isn’t it. Maybe you can control the religious message with a Sermon Czar and a religion Stasi. Do you think Obama has already thought about it?
ThatGayConservative,
“So the extermination of 6 million Jews was just for shits and giggles then?”
6 million Jews were murdered in the holocaust because of their race, not their religion. Do I really have to inform you that the Jews (in the case of Holocaust, mainly the Ashkenazi ‘European’ Jews) are a racial group, not a religious group? Even if those 6 million Jews were irreligious or Christian or Muslim, Hitler would have killed them because he done it in the name of “racial purity”, not in the name of religious persecution.
I am of course outraged, sickened and appalled by actual cases of people who are persecuted for their religion. Like I said, there is absolutely nothing wrong with having your faith and organising it with other people, etc. But if you start to inflict some of these ideas you derive from your faith (like, for example, that gay people are a social ill because the Bible tells it so or that abortion should not be offered as a choice to women because God doesn’t like abortion, etc.), then I have every right to criticise and dislike your religion because YOU are the person making a big deal out of it. And because religion is something that is chosen, something over which one has total control, it is not in any way bigoted to dislike someone because of their choices.
heliotrope,
You did not force me out of any bushes. I was never trying to hide my disdain for Jindal’s religious zealotry, especially it’s manifestation in his belief that creationism should be taught in schools alongside actual science (source: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Gov._Bobby_Jindal_supports_creationism_as_part_of_the_very_best_science). But you all knew Jindal was anti-science all along.
As for this idea that I am not as disgusted by Islam as I am by Christianity, well I would like to state, unequivocally, that Islam absolutely offends every fibre of decency I have within me. If we are going to talk about degree, then Islam is obviously a much “worse” political and social movement than Christianity is. However, if I’m being honest with myself, I understand entirely that far too many U.S. Evangelicals would install a death penalty for homosexuality if they could and would turn America from a republic into a theocracy given half the chance. I also dislike all other religions, because anything that forces one to believe in the supernatural can only be mind shrinking. All that said, the reason I haven’t spoken about Islam is because Bobby Jindal is not being the complete and utter moron he is because of Islam, he’s doing it because of Christianity.
B. Daniel Blatt,
You’re kidding yourself if you think Bobby Jindal is not uncompromisingly opposed to gay rights at the least, and responsible for ginning up Louisiana homophobia for political gain at the most. It’s also undeniable fact that Jindal supports the idea of creationism being taught in a science classroom. If you can overlook both of this outrages because Jindal has said a few words about how evil big government is when Democrat’s are doing it, then that’s fair enough, but please do not attempt to disguise the truth about this man.
Where in the world do you paranoid critters meet “U.S. Evangelicals” and study their minds to come up with this type of fetid fear and hatred? You sound like the KKK going after Catholics in Indiana in the 1920’s. Thank God you don’t have the courage of your convictions or there would be mass “U.S. Evangelical” hangings. In my unsubstantiated opinion, if there were to be a rumble between paranoid gays and “U.S. Evangelicals” who want to slaughter gays, the gays would outnumber the “U.S. Evangelicals” ten to one. However, I will consult Las Vegas to see what the more scientifically calculated odds would be.
It isn’t any belief in the supernatural that has presented you with not just a shrunken, but truncated mind.
Good grief, man, you are a poster child for religious bigotry.
One other thing. The entire concept of “race” has been shattered by DNA. Your attempt to make Jews a “race” is now discredited by science and impossible. But I commend you for sticking up for Hitler. If you admire government making people toe the line, he was an outstanding example. He was a terrific role model for Alinsky.
I’d add that the Rrom, the Jehova’s witnesses, gays, etc… also went to the Gallows under Davey G’s, er Hitler’s reign.
At least one of those is not an ethnic group.
Well we -know- as a fact that some U.S. Evangelicals travelled to Uganda to push for stricter enforcement of a death penalty on homosexuals. We know Mike Huckabee wants to alter the constitution so that it conforms to “God’s law”. We know Sally Kern in Oklahoma considers gays a bigger threat to the United States than Islamist extremist terrorists. I’m really not being “paranoid” when I say there are Evangelicals out there who would put homosexuals to death and install theocracy in this nation. However, I have a hard time finding any elected representatives who are gay who call the religious more dangerous than terrorists. And I must have missed the conferences in China where gay activists were promoting hatred of Christians and pushing for tougher death penalties.
Regardless of whether race actually exists or not, it is indisputable that Hitler believed it was very much real and that he executed 6 million Jews along with millions of Slavs and Roma because of their perceived race. Now, if you want to get into the business of calling people Hitler apologists or Nazi sympathizers, then I really have absolutely no time whatsoever for you. heliotrope, do not expect any responses to whatever bile you reply to my comments with. The adults are talking.
Oh, and I really am having considerable difficulty understanding why so many people are bringing up Hitler and genocide and persecution here. Are you trying to make the point that my opposition to Christianist attempts to replace actual science with nonsense from a “holy” book, that my disgust at Christian homophobia are somehow tantamount to supporting Hitler? Actually, I don’t why I’m asking that question, the last few comments make it perfectly clear that some in this thread ARE comparing me to Hitler for disliking religion. Grow up, children.
has suddenly morphed into
As to Hitler: you dropped this stink bomb:
Read the Nuremberg Laws of 1935 and particularly the November Decree that clearly defines a “Jew” for purposes of protecting the Master Race from contamination.
For whatever reason, you have chosen to adopt Hitler’s terminology in which you claim that good old Adolph killed the “race” and ignored the religion. There was a concerted Nazi effort (Mengele) to find genetic “Jewish” markers. The Nazi killing machine depended on birth certificates and other bureaucratic tools for rounding up Jews.
If you really read and understood your brief Wikipedia education on the Ashkenazi Jews you would have also understood why this statement is so silly:
Bobby Jindal is a liberal that plays a republican. That is why the president stuck up for him, he knows one when he sees one.
And then, the next day: President’s Un-Classy Attack on Others of His Legitimate Political Opponents.
He calls them “dishonest and deceptive” – Standard Left tactics of projection and deflection.
Please, helioptrope, do not tell me I know nothing of the Ashkenazim. My name is David Joshua Goldberg, it doesn’t get much more Ashkenazi Jewish. My maternal grandparents fled Bavaria during World War II, and considering my grandparents were atheists (as were many Jews back then, the most famous of which is Einstein) I really doubt they were fleeing religious persecution. In any case, this argument is rather silly. The only reason I replied to your claim that Hitler killed Jews because of their religious ideas is because I personally know that was not the case at all.
#29: “But if you start to inflict some of these ideas you derive from your faith (like, for example, that gay people are a social ill because the Bible tells it so or that abortion should not be offered as a choice to women because God doesn’t like abortion, etc.)”
It always amazes me how skillfully and soullessly the Left has equated opposition to abortion as a belief based exclusively in religion. All it shows is that the Democratic Party’s sheep have swallowed whole the party leadership’s demonization of religious people (who happen to be at the forefront of the anti-abortion movement) as crazed, fascist, Bible-thumping nut-jobs. It enables people like DavyJG to construct a bubble of denial around themselves so they don’t have to think about the actual procedure. It facilitates rationalizations that are less challenging to basic concepts of morality, i.e., “I’m not some insane holy-roller, so I’m pro-choice.”
We’re talking about a procedure that in the latter months of a pregnancy involves delivering the baby’s body, and while the head is still in the birth canal, shoving a shiv into the back of the baby’s neck, vacuuming out the contents until the head collapses so that it can be extracted from the birth canal and thrown in the garbage. There are only two ways that someone could not only support such a procedure, but scream to the rafters that it is an essential component of individual freedom: (1) maintaining a catatonic level of denial of the logistics by claiming not to be “religious”; or (2) admitting to a psychopathic absence of humanity that would make Dr. Mengele proud.
So, DavyJG, which is it with you? Is it that you are in denial or a psychopath that allows you to characterize opposition to abortion as others “inflicting” their ideas on you?
Oh, my goodness. Nowhere did I say “Hitler killed the Jews because of their religious ideas.” It is you, DavyJG that insists on the Jewish “race” terminology that Hitler adopted. Perhaps you believe there is a Jewish “race.” But, like trashing “U.S. Evangelicals,” you have to contort a lot of logic to come up with that form of thinking.
Hitler used Social Darwinism and the vogue of eugenics to go after the Jews. But, like all anti-Semites, he had the challenge of just exactly what he was after. Please get in touch with the complications implicit in Jews and non-religious Jews. The many arguments and battles within the family of Jews as to who is “authentically” Jewish is as checkered as prying open the lid on the “black community.”
If you are an atheist or an agnostic are you still a Jew? Give me the eugenics and biological “evolution” on that one. Do we trot out phrenologists, body structure experts, sociologists and the rest. If so, I suspect David Duke would be your best resource for tagging and labeling Jews. Wow. Just, wow.
Your characterisation of abortion as always or most regularly being the most graphic form of partial-birth abortion is extremely dishonest. A lot of abortions do not require surgery, many are carried out with the administration of an abortifaecient drug, for example. But that’s beyond the point, if you seek to criminalise women who have decided that they are not ready to raise a child, or that they do not have the resources to effectively provide for this child, then you are infringing on her rights as an individual. What makes YOU think that you can coerce a woman into going through with a pregnancy against her will? The very thought is disgusting.
But that’s beyond the point, if you seek to criminalise women who have decided that they are not ready to raise a child, or that they do not have the resources to effectively provide for this child, then you are infringing on her rights as an individual.
Not really, since children do not spontaneously materialize in a woman’s womb; they are the result of a choice on the woman’s part to have unprotected sex. If a woman is not ready to have a child or lacks the resources to raise one, she should restrain from having sex or have her tubes tied and eliminate the problem completely. If she chooses to ignore those facts, she has exercised her choice and has chosen to risk creating a new life, which itself has the same right to be born and to live its life.
And before you start screaming about rape, let us keep in mind that your Obama Party and liberalism support and endorse drugging women, even children, and raping them multiple times, as we see in the case of Roman Polanski. The fact that you and your party endorse and support forcing women to have sex with you for your pleasure does not justify killing babies; it justifies prosecution and punishment, which will neatly end the problem of liberals impregnating women against their will.
And that, again, is the point: Roman Polanski and his defense by liberals and Barack Obama supporters demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that liberals’ only interest in women is as sexual objects. When you have Barack Obama supporters stating on television that drugging and raping of a thirteen-year-old is acceptable and that it was “consensual” on the girl’s part, that makes it clear that liberals treat women as nothing more than the playthings required to give them sexual pleasure.
I’m literally quite surprised and shocked by North Dallas Thirty’s post. Glenn Beck really has far too much influence on the fragile minds of the incredibly (and it really is beyond belief) stupidity of the modern GOP.
How is anyone supposed to have a decent conversation with that kind of talk? I mean, seriously, are you for real? You are clearly part of the insane populist right who is freaking out because there isn’t an inane Republican president in office who will placate you any more with rhetoric and mere platitudes. I have my problems with Obama, but that he is forcing you and your horrid political movement up to the surface for all to see makes his victory over brain-dead Palin all the sweeter.
Also, heliotrope, I’m pretty sure accusing a Jew whose grandparents fled the Holocaust and whose grandaunts and uncles actually died in gas chambers at Stutthof of wilfully using “Hitler’s language” is entirely appropriate. But Republicans never were good at being decent and respectful.
#40: “Your characterisation of abortion as always or most regularly being the most graphic form of partial-birth abortion is extremely dishonest. A lot of abortions do not require surgery, many are carried out with the administration of an abortifaecient drug, for example.”
Okay, so there’s “good abortion” and “bad abortion,” DavyJG? If that’s true then why did all of the pro-abortion and women’s rights organizations oppose the ban on partial birth abortion when it was before the Supreme Court and subsequently condemn the decision upholding the law as constitutional? And what do you mean by “graphic”? Would that be yet another leftist euphemism for “gruesome”? “Grotesque”? And why does it matter that it’s “graphic”? Afterall, as I understand the position of the pro-abortion lobby, it’s just a bunch of cells and organic medical waste. What’s the big deal?
“What makes YOU think that you can coerce a woman into going through with a pregnancy against her will? The very thought is disgusting.”
“Disgusting”? Really, DavyJG? How disgusting? As disgusting as the contents of a dumpster behind Planned Parenthood being written off in favor of women having the freedom to fu*k whomever they want, whenever they want without inconvenience? Oh, that’s right. You’re not “religious,” so why on Earth would you trouble yourself thinking about such things?
Also, heliotrope, I’m pretty sure accusing a Jew whose grandparents fled the Holocaust and whose grandaunts and uncles actually died in gas chambers at Stutthof of wilfully using “Hitler’s language” is entirely appropriate.
It certainly is, given how you support and endorse its use in your Obama Party.
When you decide to condemn these supporters of Barack Obama and Barack Obama’s spiritual mentor and father figure who rant about Jew conspiracies, then you might actually demonstrate that you really care about hateful language. But until then, just as with your gay identity, you’re nothing more than a hypocrite who is attacking Republicans and conservatives for behavior he fully supports and endorses in his Obama Party.
Glenn Beck really has far too much influence on the fragile minds of the incredibly (and it really is beyond belief) stupidity of the modern GOP.
Isn’t it amusing to hear a pseudo-Jew spew his Goebbels talk about the danger that those who disagree with him present to “fragile minds”?
You are clearly part of the insane populist right who is freaking out because there isn’t an inane Republican president in office who will placate you any more with rhetoric and mere platitudes.
Another typical maneuver of the Nazis; declare your political opponents and those who disagree with you “insane”.
Are you a psychologist? If so, you will be reported to your board for diagnosing and trying to use your professional position to smear a person who you have never met, which usually results in suspension of your medical license. If you aren’t, than you are making a medical judgment without qualification — not atypical for an Obama Party liberal, but only a demonstration of how even science and medicine are subverted to the ideology of Obama worship.
DavyJG proclaimed from on high…
Every now and then I need to remind myself that there exists in our society a community of people so desperate for relevance that they literally cannot stomach the existence of dissent. Awash in their delusions of sanctimony and moral superiority, to disagree with them renders one stupid.
You cannot reason with such people, as that is the first thing to be cast aside in the modern liberal utopia; without reason, independent thought seems to be happily sacrificed for the “good of the many.”
I expect you mean that it is inappropriate.
But, DavyJG, you are the one who insists:
In all this back and forth, you worm around the whole Jewish race nomenclature.
Now you try to shame me with the horror of your predecessors. Whether you realize it or not, your insistence on the Jew as a race or ethnic group separated from religion is the old anti-semitic game:
Perhaps you have an inner struggle with the concept of a Jew without religion.
No, you’re frothing moonbatshitcrazy and a despicable hate-filled SOB who gets off on defending his hatred and hiding behind his family’s heritage and religion when it suits him.
Indeed. How does one have a conversation with a POS who finds nothing wrong with tossing out inconvenient children?
Yeah. Remember all those McCain supporters who demanded Jews get in the ovens a few months ago? And how about all those Republicans who mocked Lieberman a few years ago. And who could forget all those Republicans bowing and scraping to make sure the UN loves us when they blame Israel for all the world’s ills?
Notice that DavyJG responded to everyone except the person demanding he back up his lies with actual quotes. Because he cant do it.
And then he goes right on lying.
Elephant, but I honestly do not have the time to reply to each and every post made specifically to me. Please tell me exactly what you want me to back up, and I assure I will do just that.
In any case, I hope GayPatriot is happy with his disgusting commenters. Just a few posts after I reveal I’m descended from German Jews, I’m called “Goebbels” and accused of Nazi talk for the third or fourth time in this thread, this time by North Dallas Thirty. I’m quite seriously shocked. The fact that heliotrope continues to lecture me and question me on the the collectivity I feel with other Jews, suggesting it is ill-informed or Nazi-like is just obscenely insensitive. This is, of course, what I have to expect from the Republicans of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck, however.
I am not hiding behind my heritage at all. By all means, continue as you are referring to me as some kind of Nazi (and it doesn’t look like you most of you need my invitation to continue with that) even though you know I’m a Jew – that’s your entitlement, but to suggest that my expressing disgust at the sheer grotesqueness of using that kind of language when referring to an actual Jew who’s actual relatives were gassed to death in Poland is hardly “hiding” behind anything.
Anyway, at least I now know that even the gay Republicans are just as hateful as the rest of the collective that makes up the modern GOP. Good luck with that in 20 years when racial minorities (oops, using such a term makes me Adolf Hitler, right?) are the majority in this country. There’s a reason Hispanics, blacks, gays and Asian-Americans don’t vote for your party. Just think about that.
#11 DavyJG said this:
The Discovery Institute in Seattle is an “Intelligent Design” think tank. It sent out this “press release” concerning the Louisian Science Education Act. (I have not been successful in locating a rebuttal from the “Evolution is Settled Science So Get With the Program” acolytes.)
I repeat: I have not been successful in locating a rebuttal from the “Evolution is Settled Science So Get With the Program” acolytes.
But it has always been curious to me why some scientists get so annoyed with people who don’t fall in line with the conclusions they derive from their theories. Isn’t it important to show the strengths and weaknesses of theories? Darwin himself assumed that massive fossil evidence would flesh out his theory of evolution. To some extent it has, but so far, there has been no discovery of that layer of fossils that map the “origin of the species.” It is not for the want of trying.
I was taught that Pluto is a planet and that oil was the product of dinosaurs all getting squished together. Both were theories presented as scientific fact. Neither is currently considered scientific fact.
Evolution covers a lot of territory. But biological evolution is where the action is and the science for it is shot through with theories and explanations and scant evidence. It is compelling and I am inclined to subscribe to many aspects of it. But like the man made global warming crowd, the evolution fan club is far too much like the eugenics crowd for my tastes.
I am not sure that the Louisiana Bill that Jindal signed into law is proof positive that he is a moron and anti-science. Perhaps DavyJG or some other Charles Johnson type might be able to turn down the blow torch and have a sensible debate on the topic.
There is a difference between discussing the weaknesses and strengths of the theory of evolution by natural selection and allowing for complete non-science (intelligent design/creationism really is not science at all) to be taught in a science classroom because of religious convictions. There is no evidence for intelligent design, so why should it be a matter for the science classroom?
What makes Jindal’s education bill so sinister is that he is obviously not doing it to strengthen scientific discourse but to appease religious types. Do you deny this?
Do you have a problem with letting the kiddies know that biological evolution is not fact? Do you have a problem with a science textbook saying that many people in this society believe in intelligent design and that there is no scientific evidence that either proves or disproves intelligent design?
Jindal signed a bill passed by the legislature. In your case, that makes him a moron. In my case, it makes him controversial and the people of Louisiana will have to decide what they think of the whole matter.
I am a conservative. I want to see the issues, examine the facts and draw my own conclusions.
“Collectivity” is a long way from where you started when you clearly used the word “race.”
I know of two “tribes” who wander the world dragging their identity conflicts with them: Jews and Gypsies. (To my knowledge, there is no Gypsy religion or fundamental body of religious works.)
Many people gather together in ethnic enclaves. But the Jew is bound up in the ancient tribes of Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph (subdivided into the tribes of Manasseh and Ephriam) and Benjamin.
Jews are tied by lineage, their diaspora and the histories of the tribes that spring from the Torah, the Old Testament and Talmud and Midrash.
The agnostic or atheist Jew has the complex problem of divorcing himself from religion while still cleaving to what is undeniably an ancient religious culture that defines the tribes and the lineage and, to the extent that it exists, the Jewish culture and personality.
Most anti-semites just hate Jews. Religion has nothing much to do with it. Therefore, DavyJG, if you were to suddenly decide to accept Radical Islam and its beliefs, would you still be a Jew?
My ” obscenely insensitive” lecturing and questioning is pretty fundamental to your self identification. And I do find it passing strange that you use Hitler’s language of “race.” I would think that for all your sensitivity and the horrors in your family history that you would assiduously avoid using the anti-semites tricks of logic.
Good luck to you. Perhaps a little time with a Rabbi would help you discover who your people are. And may I suggest that if my grilling has been hard on your fragile psyche that it is because you have been badly mistreated by overexposure to cotton candy and cuddly kitten education.
I’m pretty I’m entitled to Israeli citizenship because I’m part of the Jewish “race”. The state of Israel uses such language – does that make them Adolf Hitler incarnates also? I must have missed the point in history when referring to races of people was Hitler-like. When people celebrated Obama’s election, many were pleased about Obama’s “race”. People talk about Jindal’s race, also, being an Indian-American. The Kennedy family is racially Irish, etc. I don’t see a problem with using such a term to describe nations of people who share common ancestry.
Also, I don’t need to spend time with a Rabbi to know who my people are. Why are so intent on telling me, an actual Jew, how to be Jewish? I’m very proud of who I am; I don’t need Judaism for that, thank you very much. What’s your background, heliotrope?
Just a few posts after I reveal I’m descended from German Jews, I’m called “Goebbels” and accused of Nazi talk for the third or fourth time in this thread, this time by North Dallas Thirty.
That would be because you support the Nazi tactics of silencing your opponents like Goebbels and declaring those who disagree with you insane in a perversion of medicine and science.
What makes the latter particularly hilarious is your hypocritical blabbering about Jindal putting ideology ahead of science. No legitimate medical agency says that those who disagree with you politically are insane, but you and your Barack Obama do. You are a blind ideologist who has no idea of science and who is willing to pervert science to support your twisted social theories, just like the Nazis.
And then, here’s the hilarious rejoinder from the blackmailing thug.
There’s a reason Hispanics, blacks, gays and Asian-Americans don’t vote for your party. Just think about that.
Mainly because bigot liberals like yourself call those members of a minority who dare deviate from Party norms hateful names like “Uncle Toms”, “Sambos”, “house slaves”, “mashed-up bags of meat with lipstick”, and “oreos”, and then set out to destroy them. It is the height of hilarity to watch gay liberals like yourself who get all tied up in knots about Nazi terminology scream “kapo” at gays who dare to vote Republican.
You are a bigot and a worthless thug, DavyJG, just like your Nazi forbears. And unfortunately for you, people are starting to realize the racism and hate that lies at the core of your Obama Party and of liberalism as a whole. You whine and scream about religion, but you support and endorse antireligious bigotry. You claim others are “racist” even as you call black conservatives “Sambos”. You babble about how hurt you are by Holocaust references even as you call others “Jewish Nazis”.
DavyJG,
The 2800 or so Ashkenazi Jewish collective in Lima, Peru have nothing to do with the Iquitos Jews because they don’t meet the rules of Jewish law (halakha.) The Iquitos Jews were Jewish men who came to Iquitos in the late 1800’s from Morocco and intermarried with local intermixed and native Indian women. Jewish Law (halakha) rules that being authentically Jewish requires the lineage to pass through the mother. Hence, the Iquitos Jews are not Jews in the eyes of the Ashkenazi.
You may contact Israel to find out if the Iquitos Jews are automatically qualified for citizenship. I, for one, have no idea. I do know that the tension between the Ashkenazi Jews and other Jews present at the creation of Israel was enormous. It continues to this day. Perhaps “race” is a particular Ashkenazi concept. I will have to research that a bit.
I suggest you bring yourself up to speed on the whole concept of race. Because some still prefer to use outmoded and discarded concepts which once defined race does not make it valid for use today.
As to my background, it is of little importance. Logic, rhetoric and ethics are not changed a whit if being employed by either a prince or a pauper. Nor is anyone’s argument supplemented in any way by misery, strife, kind fortune, luck or good looks. Unless, of course, you view the world through affirmative action lenses.
wtf is North By Dallas Thirty talking about?
heliotrope,
I am familiar with the situation with the “Iquitos Jews” (they are, in fact, ethnic Sephardi Jews who came from Morocco AFAIK). And though there has been, and continue to be tensions between the Ashkenazim and other Jews, I know that the Israeli government has reached out to these Sephardi Jews and many have made Aaliyah. I never denied that there were problems with the Ashkenazi Jews (mainly stemming from the fact that Ashkenazi Jews were white and were thus able to prosper in America after they fled Germany and Poland in the late 30s and early 40s while Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews were not white and therefore unable to prosper in Jim Crow-era America). Also, the Ashkenazi Jews were the subjects of the Holocaust and so that created a (silly) feeling of singular entitlement to the state of Israel.
“Race” is not an Ashkenazi concept. What on Earth are you talking about. The government of Ireland, for example, recognises that there is an Irish race. The Russian government invaded Georgia last year to protect ethnic Russians. I don’t understand your problem with the concept of a race of people, or your idea that “race” is something only racists and Nazis are interested in
Good grief. Google “race.” I am finished with your shallow-mindedness. Educated people do not interchange “race” and “ethnicity.” You seem determined to pound your slippery non-standard use of the word “race” like a drum. Google UNESCO and understand that even that liberal bastion has shunned the use of the word “race.”
Let us also remember, heliotrope, what liberals like DavyJG and his Barack Obama consider to be “scientific” when it comes to race.
Carruthers is a defender of Leonard Jeffries, professor in the department of black studies at City College in Harlem, infamous for his black supremacist and anti-Semitic views. Jeffries sees whites as oppressive and violent “ice people,” in contrast to peaceful and mutually supportive black “sun people.” The divergence says Jeffries, is attributable to differing levels of melanin in the skin. Jeffries also blames Jews for financing the slave trade. Carruthers defends Jeffries and excoriates the prestigious black academics Carruthers views as traitorous for denouncing their African brother, Jeffries. Carruthers’s vision of the superior and peaceful Kemetic philosophy of Ptahhotep triumphing over Greco-Euro-American-white culture obviously parallels Jeffries’ opposition between ice people and sun people.
More of Carruthers’s education philosophy can be found in his newsletter, The Kemetic Voice. In 1997, for example, at the same time Carruthers was advising SSAVC on how to set up an African-centered curriculum, he praised the decision of New Orleans’ School Board to remove the name of George Washington from an elementary school. Apparently, some officials in New Orleans had decided that nobody who held slaves should have a school named after him. Carruthers touted the name-change as proof that his African-centered perspective was finally having an effect on public policy. At the demise of George Washington School, Carruthers crowed: “These events remind us of how vast the gulf is that separates the Defenders of Western Civilization from the Champions of African Civilization.”
According to Chicago Annenberg Challenge records, Carruthers’s training session on African-centered curricula for SSAVC teachers was a huge hit: “As a consciousness raising session, it received rave reviews, and has prepared the way for the curriculum readiness survey….” These teacher-training workshops were directly funded by the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Another sure sign of the ideological cast of SSAVC’s curriculum can be found in Annenberg documents noting that SSAVC students are taught the wisdom of Ptahhotep. Carruthers’s concerns about “menticide” and “genocide” at the hand of America’s white supremacist system seem to be echoed in an SSAVC document that says: “Our children need to understand the historical context of our struggles for liberation from those forces that seek to destroy us.”
I was wondering when someone was going to point out that all of DaveJG’s examples were of ethnicity and not race.