-
-
Copy & paste this:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous AFRICA | At Least They Won’t Be Hatin’… Next »
» 210 comments
-
Recent Comments
Roger Phillips on Vandals Cashing In MacFeegle on Tim Gunn Eyeroll MacFeegle on Real Classy MacFeegle on Both at the Same Time Vila Restal on Helpful Sign is Helpful Vila Restal on THE FABRIC OF OUR LIVES MacFeegle on Take it to the Grave Eugene Adams on Vandals Cashing In ba12348 on Funniest Case Scenarios Earl Simmons on Vandals Cashing In 
Cheezburger Company BlogPrint on Demand
More I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?
I Can Has Cheezburger? Home - Lolcats n Funny Pictures
Cyoot Kitteh of teh Day: Ai Atez Awl Ur Medisinz, LOL!
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies
Quality shnuggle time
Just Capshunz - All of the Internet. Captioned
Dave. It Was Dave.
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
Tub Regrets
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
GOZLINGZ
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode.
Pocket Protected
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
A FATHER'S EYES
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
Limitless Spinach Party
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
THIS IS GONNA BE THE BEST SHOW EVER
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz
2012 Grammy Nominated Albums of the Year... Wif KITTEHS!
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
My Unborn Child Totally Looks Like The Punisher
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
Guns Can Be Girly Too
Firsty
Here, have a glass of water
HAHA
Wow… Someone who makes Kanye look like the lesser douche!
Stupid. Thanks for ruining the site.
So PK now stands for Just make fun of Beck? Really? It’s like getting five Palin’s in a row, or ten Bushes in a row. Enough of Beck already. We get it, he’s a loon, he had some sort of meeting on the 28th, the same day MLK had his Dream speech. We get it… enough already. It’s boring, sad, and well pizzaburger = pathetic.
As much as I think Beck is a little nuts it’s been overkill lately. I’ve lost track of which bridges the Beck sympathizer trolls come from and it is getting really hard to get them safely back home after they are dogpiled here. Then again if pizza can go after the physically disabled then I guess the mentally touched are fair game as well. I think it’s time for another good revolt.
This site is the most liberal fan-boy filled site on the web. Why don’t you all get statues of Obama for your homes? Stupid puppets.
So because jokes have been made, we can’t have more funny ones about Beck?
Too easy
THAT’s funny…
Especially when you consider the vast differences between MLK’s ‘Dream’ and Glen’s ‘Smoke-And-Mirror-Pipe-Dreams’…
ewww… nevermind. It pains me.
Let’s just revel in the moment of the smack-down that should have been.
There were people during MLK’s time that felt the same way about him. So, what is so terrible about restoring honor?
It’s not the restoring honor part that people question, it is the douche bag behind it.
By their fruits ye shall know them.
Call him a douche, thats fine. But to dismiss the message completely…when it was given by many, many people is a mistake.
I know why people hate him. But are we being intellectually honest about it? Or do people just hate him because the Daily Show can do a funny roast of him? or because people with lots of money want him off the air?
In 40 years, if people still know of Glenn Beck, will they say “Why did people hate him.” Just like people today wonder why we needed MLK in the first place? In today’s world, its obvious that people should be held equal, regardless of race.
In the future, will it be as obvious that we should treat people with differing ideas as equals?
Depends on whether the ideas are sensible or not.
But didn’t you know? Not accepting all ideas as inherently valid is BIGOTRY! It’s not like ideas require any basis in fact, or can be changed!
Who decides sensible? That’s very dangerous ground VG.
If I recall my jury duty correctly, the judge asked us to consider the situation ‘as the reasonable man would see it’. And that was a jury, not one person. I’m not asking for a dictatorship. But if one person thinks that all red-headed children are contagious and dangerous to the general public, should we really give that person equal time?
Gingerism is a very very scarey disease, my daughter caught it. **sheds a tear**…
I kind of understand what you’re saying, but I get very fearful of who defines sensible. B/c it’s clear we all have different versions of that here.
What exactly did he do to “restore honor?” What honor needed to be restored? How does he define honor anyway? What are his real motives for doing this?
Well, if you’re not bigoted, then perhaps a little perspective could help.
According to Beck, we’re losing honor when we lose our moral values: Honesty, Integrity, etc
This is illustrated by common experiences we all face.
When business cheat consumers.
When consumers cheat businesses.
When people lie, cheat and steal in general
When we say we’re going to do something, and then we don’t.
When we say we aren’t going to do something, and then we do.
When we say we’re something we’re not.
When we say we’re not something we are.
All of those things point out people who don’t have honor…or at least are lacking honor in those categories. I’m a firm believer that no one is 100% on way or the other. We’re all shades of different levels of honesty, honor, etc.
Actually, to be totally clear, no one is 100% Even though, in our current society, its the 1% wrong that we hang on to and rake someone over the coals. We have more in common than we have differences…but in this soceity of holding everything under a microscope, all we see is the difference.
What is honor to Glenn? I’m not Glenn…I couldn’t say. What is honor to you?
His real motives? Again, I’m not him, so I couldn’t say. I do know that he paid a great deal out of his own pocket for the rally. He donated everything above the cost to the Special Operations Warrior foundation – takes care of the families of fallen spec ops members. That seems pretty good to me.
Here’s the thing. Many of the things Beck has said in the past have been very scathing to people like me (liberals), so I don’t exactly trust him. So when he talks about honesty, honor, etc, I question his sincerity.
To question is good, even noble. Trust is earned and takes time to set.
Well, I doubt Mr. Beck and I will ever see eye to eye on many issues.
And that’s very good! He even acknowledges it. He just wants you to be true to your values. And from what I’ve seen, I know you do, like Rev. Al Sharpton. I’d bet Mr. Beck would like you as well! He wouldn’t agree with you, but he’d like and respect you.
The problem is that all those things are mostly Human nature. If Beck has a problem with it, he should take it up with evolution, or, in his case, God. I’m sick of seeing that stupid haircut everywhere.
Thats exactly what he is doing.
If its human nature to be weak, lie, cheat and steal, then turning to God for help (if you believe in God) would be a natural source of support. If he encourages you to be good to your fellow man…and boy do we screw that up along the way! Then turning to him when we mess up is exactly how to counter human nature.
Its not a coincidence that this is why the writers of the constitution set it up the way they did. The knew, and counted on human nature. This is why the seemingly over excessive list of checks and balances were there. By putting in the balances, it gave the opportunity to for states (who wanted to grab their own power) to be held in check by the Fed (who also would naturally lwant to grab more power) who both would be held in check by the people…and so on and so forth.
When, exactly, did we lose our honor?
When we denied people of color the freedoms and rights granted to others with lighter skin?
When we invaded another country based on made up intelligence?
When we sent thousands of American military to die for this intelligence fabrication?
When we then turned around and cut funding for poly trauma units and had wounded veterans living in mold infested barracks at Walter Reed hospital?
When we decided it was OK to torture POWs?
When we gave up our 4th Amendment right to privacy and allowed our government to intercept our calls with no warrant, and requested librarians keep track of certain books being read and turn those people in?
When we decided to deny homosexual citizens the freedoms and rights granted to others with different sexual orientation?
Or is honor being lost right now, in the discussion about suspending the 1st Amendment and having our government step in to declare which religions will be legally persecuted in a country that began as a refuge from religious persecution?
Do tell… What caused us to lose honor, and how are we restoring it?
Oh that was pure awesome.
Semper,
EXACTLY right. All those examples are great examples of when/how we have shown that (our leaders at least) have lost honor.
Lies, misstatements, and fabrications, no matter how fervently wished for nor how angrily repeated, are no substitute for the truth. But you just want to be angry — about what doesn’t really matter — and this stuff sounds evil and dramatic, so hey, why not?
Lies, misstatements and fabrications? Hmm, lets see…
“When we denied people of color the freedoms and rights granted to others with lighter skin?” Not as bad as it used to be, but ‘driving while black’ and ‘shopping while black’ are still different experiences than doing either as a white person. Sorry, true.
“When we invaded another country based on made up intelligence? When we sent thousands of American military to die for this intelligence fabrication?” Under debate. The intelligence was obviously at least a goodly percentage incorrect. Was it fabricated by an Iraqi who hoped to become a bigwig once the war was over (there’s a guy I remember reading about repeatedly, but I do not recall his name). I won’t accuse US officials of inventing intelligence, I’m not THAT cynical. But I wouldn’t put it past humans to hear what they want to…nor some scheming dude to tell them what he thinks they want to hear. Only time will tell, probably the historians of our children’s generation.
“When we then turned around and cut funding for poly trauma units and had wounded veterans living in mold infested barracks at Walter Reed hospital?” Absolutely and disgustingly true. I don’t know if the budget was cut by Congress, or by Rumsfeld’s minions (he of ‘we don’t need a big Army’ fame). But the conditions in Walter Reed were well-documented, well-publicized, and absolutely disgusting. I’m still ashamed for our country that we let conditions deteriorate to that extent, when it was obvious that the need for facilities was going to increase.
“When we decided it was OK to torture POWs?” True, and again, disgusting. Doesn’t matter if they wore uniforms or not. Torture is wrong, abhorrent, and the resulting information is less dependable than that gained by an experienced interrogator.
“When we gave up our 4th Amendment right to privacy and allowed our government to intercept our calls with no warrant, and requested librarians keep track of certain books being read and turn those people in?” Again, true. Wiretapping without a warrant, etc via the Patriot act. Just goes to show that putting a fancy name on dog doo can help sell it to folks.
“When we decided to deny homosexual citizens the freedoms and rights granted to others with different sexual orientation?” Yup. If you don’t like gay marriage, don’t have one.
“Or is honor being lost right now, in the discussion about suspending the 1st Amendment and having our government step in to declare which religions will be legally persecuted in a country that began as a refuge from religious persecution?” Senator Orrin Hatch spoke up yesterday in defense of the Muslim community center yesterday–it is after all a matter of freedom to practice religion.
Sorry about the wall-of-text, but I was motivated.
don’t apologize.
it was a magnificent reply.
With some mistakes. I wouldn’t call it magnificent. Though worthy of reading and respect b/c it wasn’t all that be-littling.
speaking of belittling…
I was I belittling? Please calrify. Sometimes I think your bias do the typing for you.
my what?
did you use the wrong verb, or did you mean a plural of bia?
: )
I guess I’m going to have to leave smiley faces from now on, because you always take things literally. maybe because of all your bias. : )
and I do really think it was magnificent. even though you don’t.
different strokes for different folks. : )
I concur. And thanks!
Hatch? Orrin Hatch? Wow. He’s not one of the ones I was expecting to support it.
No kidding. It was an amazing and pleasant surprise, but I’m always glad to see any congressperson stand up for the constitution they swore to uphold when they took office. Kudos to him.
I don’t often agree with Senator Hatch, but I’ve always thought he was that rare thing, an honorable public servant.
There’s a BIG difference from supporting the MOsque and saying it’s their right to build it. I believe in their right to build it, however I do not support the Mosque/ community center. And actually that’s the position of most of the Politicians against the Mosque.
to keep it simple:
Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act
SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF LAND USE AS RELIGIOUS EXERCISE.
(a) SUBSTANTIAL BURDENS-
(1) GENERAL RULE- No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly, or institution–
{http://www.rluipa.com/index.php/article/398.html} (full text of the federal law)
{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Land_Use_and_Institutionalized_Persons_Act}
{http://www.propublica.org/blog/item/experts-argue-all-you-want-mosque-project-on-firm-legal-ground}
{http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21C.html}
{http://definitions.uslegal.com/r/religious-land-use-and-institutionalized-persons-act-law-rluipa/}
{http://pewforum.org/Church-State-Law/The-Constitutional-Status-of-the-Religious-Land-Use-and-Institutionalized-Persons-Act–Cutter-v-Wilkinson.aspx}
I don’t get your point? I didn’t say they didn’t have the right to build. ARe you trying to convince me otherwise? Most Politicians aren’t against their right to build (actually most have seen it as their right), however they have asked it to move for sensitivity purposes.
Interesting point about the controversy, apparently the fight against the building has actually helped Taliban recruitment. It’s caused increased discussion of the idea of America as anti-Islam, making it easier for those already against America to convince others that America is against them.
All they really have to do is present America as being against Islam and point to the fire in the mosque in Tennessee and the anger against the building in NY, and those already prone to being suspicious of America move that much closer to outright hatred.
I don’t know about the building being seen by them as a sign of victory, but they do seem to be feeling rather victorious about the fuss over it.
Dan: It’s a damned if you damned if you don’t. They twist and turn everything to their view. After the fight and the mosque does go up, they will not be like, “See Americans changed their ways, and allowed us to do it.” Nope it’ll probably be “We prevailed in putting a center of our religion on the site of our highest victory.” Anyway you look at it, that’s how it’ll be.
Except it’s not ‘their’ religion. Or have you forgotten that they bomb mosques of opposing sects? It’s sort of like saying that the WBC cheers every time a Mormon temple is built and claims it’s a victory for Christianity.
A mosque built by moderate, non-violent Muslims would only stand as a victory for the terrorist groups in the eyes of the paranoid. What it would do, however, is make it harder for groups trying to portray us as being against Islam to do so if we turned around and let it be built, and turned the area of their attack against us into a symbol that they failed to make us fearful.
“nteresting point about the controversy, apparently the fight against the building has actually helped Taliban recruitment. It’s caused increased discussion of the idea of America as anti-Islam, making it easier for those already against America to convince others that America is against them.”
That’s what I’VE been trying to say!! Now the radicals have more examples to propagandize their message. If it went up with no fuss, the whole “victory” argument would make them look more like kooks than people with a valid argument. Now with all the fuss and fight, it’s the other way around now.
You say it’s not ‘their’ religion — but I’m not so sure. I see surveys that say 30-40% of Arab Muslims support suicide bombing and other acts of murder done in the name of their religion. I see a line of ‘moderate’ clerics and believers who either flat-out refuse to condemn Islamic terrorism, or respond with a “yes, but…” I also see more than a few of these moderates funneling their alms contributions to groups like Hamas.
Now, let’s contrast that to the Christian extremists who kill abortionists and bomb abortion clinics. They *are* universally condemned, and they *are* universally shunned, yet pro-lifers around here are routinely accused of supporting them. (Heck, we’re accused of supporting the WBC.)
Is there a double standard at work here?
PS Know: It was only a NYC discussion until Bloomburg (Independent) and Obama (Democrat) tried to “take the high road” and bring the arguement to the forefront. OOPS!!!
No matter what happened with the Mosque the radicals would find a way to turn it to their advantage. Just like anything OBama does can be portrayed as wrong by the conservative Pundits. If y’all can’t see that, then there’s no point talking about it anymore, b/c, no offense, you’re in your own world.
PB
I think I can agree with that. There’s a reason they’re called radicals. Because their ideas are, well, radical. In a bad way. Not surfer dude way. We need to find these guys already. It’s been like 10 years.
I propose we follow the Dave Chappelle plan. Promise a bunch of crack heads about 500 lbs of crack. They’ll find Bin Laden in the next few weeks and we’ll save billions in investigation and war funds.
Problem solved!!
Arabs make up only a small percentage of Muslims worldwide. There are very large Muslim populations in Indonesia (something like 90%), India, Europe, Asia, North and South America, etc.
Moderate Muslim communities repeatedly denounce violence in the name of peace, but if media refuses to broadcast their comments, exactly how are they to let you (the universal you) know they disagree with terrorism.
Christian terrorism is no different from Muslim Terrorism – a small, angry, undereducated portion of the group as a whole.
Can’t go point for point too tired, but two thins are blown out of proportion.
1. We finally have a Black man in the white house and people still scream racism. When will it stop? Yes there is racism in this world, but not in our governmental laws anymore. “Driving while black” was more of a late 80′s early 90′s thing, now a days our police forces spend more time in “sensitivity training” rather than spending that time on traing that could save their lives (why we have a higher rate of death/ injury to our Police Force today).
And we didn’t torture POW’s, we had no POW’s. Semper Gunny has lost site og his Geneva convention. This troops were netiehr in uniform, nor part of an organized military, therefore they are not POW’s. Also define torture. Waterbaording = torture…. to me no. Sleep deprivation = torture…. no they do that now in simple criminal investigations.
Who have we denied a right to worship? No where have I seen any Politician actually STOP the mosque/ community center, but ask that it be moved. But once again that distinction is lost on too many liberals and it’s too frustrating.
Agree with you on the Iraq War.
Agree with Semper and You on Walter Reed, that was just disgusting. One thing Smeper missed as well was arming and armoring our troops in IRaq and Afghanastan correctly.
And the gay marriage thing is different from state to state, so how on a country as a whole have we lost our honor?
I think what pi$$es me off about Smeper’s rant, is that he puts all Americans in the light of those “issues”. He’s generalizing, which to me means he has ost his honor. Of course he 100% lost his honor when he equated people against the Mosque as Nazi’s from the Third Reich.
I got stopped for DWB two months ago…
I’m sorry. Not to take from your story, b/c each story is different, however my friend came into work and said the same thing. I asked hom how fast he was going, his answer “*80 in a 55″.
So my problem with “DWB” is that for every ture case, there is probably at least one or two other cases of someone just saying it. I my life too many cried wolfs that it can be hard not to “suspect”. I know I know I’ll catch hell for saying that, and I’m sure I’ll be called racist, even if I don’t know it.
I was pulled over ‘driving while white’ last month. As in, being a white educated polite female, I didn’t get ticketed. Deserved it (moderate speeding). Recent research has shown that men and especially male minorities, are more likely to get ticketed for the same offense that women and white guys are more likely to be ‘warned’ on.
Gee I wish I was warned. Only time I was ever warned was when I was in Uniform.
Actually the biggest person who skates are Grandmas. Those damn old bats.
Wait, don’t white guys fall under male? I’m confused, it does not compute.
White guys do better than black guys on avoiding tickets when pulled over. White women do better than white guys on this. I think female minorities did better getting warnings than white men, but I’m not 100% sure on this.
Did boob size and hotness get taken into consideration? (sad thing is I’m being 100% cereal.)
Oh and pizz = pathetic.
I’ve never gotten a ticket. It pisses my mom off every time I’m pulled over.
Well I WAS wearing one of those tank tops with the built-in support. A modest one, but still. So, yeah, probably a factor… Not fair, but a little fun for a gal my age!
That’s the thing though. I wasn’t speeding. I turned a corner without turning my blinker on. While I was already in the turning lane. While SIX other cars in FRONT of me did the same thing.
My license & registration were fine, but for some reason I had to step out the car while he searched it. Another officer stopped and helped. I was asked multiple questions about crimes that were not even done in the area. After 30 minutes of “investigation”, I was let go.
Is that sufficient for DWB?
Maybe. As someone who works with law enforcement, I know that they often get memos about suspects possibly being in the area.
You could have hit a few things on the possibly related list. There’s a fine line between profiling, doing a thorough job and possibly letting criminals get away cause you don’t want to offend.
To be fair, there is a fair share of law officers who will make the experience as painful as possible if you have a terrible attitude.
My car is white, so I would understand if the memo stated “black male, white 2000 Nissan, backwards hat” and the crime was actually done IN THE AREA.
The car is registered under my name, I’ve never been arrested, I followed all instructions, I didn’t even ask any questions (although in retrospect I probably should have) and the crimes I was questioned about were literally done across the city. Google a map of North Miami Beach and Hialeah to see how far they are. They also questioned me about crimes done two counties over. How the hell am I supposed to know about a robbery/homicide in Ft Pierce, FL?!
The entire situation made no sense. If I really looked like a suspect, why wouldn’t they just tell me that instead of giving me a crappy excuse of “you didn’t use your turning signal”, then search my car and find nothing but my school books, insinuate that they didn’t belong to me because “folks in your general demographic don’t go to college much”, question me about crimes done in areas where I don’t even live close to, complain about my “dangerous rap radio”, ask if I was high or drunk or if I’ve ever stolen anything, etc etc.
Now that sounds dwb.
I had my car searched once because when my wife and I were pulled over, I started looking through the cluttered glove box for our insurance card. The cops thought I was trying to stash drugs or a gun somewhere they couldn’t see it. It was seriously stupid. I got a warning once but only because it was my birthday and the officer felt generous.
Know: Does sound like DWB. Sorry.
Yeah I thought it was. Now I don’t blame all my stops on DWB. There was a time I was stopped I actually DID look like the suspect. I was taken in for a few hours but my alibi checked out. I was out of town during the time of the crime. Go figure. Lucky me huh?
Hell, I was stopped today because my tag expired yesterday (my birthday btw, so I expect some some presents people! Preferably all the PK women jumping out a cake with the same bras as in the avis)
As I understand it, you don’t HAVE TO let them search your car if they don’t have a warrant. But, I suspect if you refuse that will give them “suspicion” enough to make life miserable for you while they wait for a warrant. Then, you will get searched anyway.
True, you don’t have to grant them consent to search if you don’t want to! (And it always amazes me to watch “Cops” and similar and see people go “Ok, go ahead, search my car” when they KNOW they have something illegal in it.” At least take the chance that if you say no they won’t follow through, if you’ve got something to hide!)
Now, if you don’t have anything illegal in it, saying yes to the search takes nothing but your time, and of course there’s the possibility that if they really, really think you’ve got something they will either a) arrest you for a traffic misdemeanor so they can do a search incident to arrest or b) take the time to get a warrant. On the other hand, I think a lot of times they know they don’t really have much genuine suspicion so if you said “no” they’d probably go “Well…ok.”
And, yes, yours totally sounds like DWB.
And the only time I’ve ever gotten away with a warning instead of a ticket was for things like having a taillight out that I didn’t know about.
You grad students are just suspicious looking, y’know.
Oops. Nesting fail. I was replying to that dangerous college student, Know.
weird. I’m a white woman and have never, ever skated on a ticket. And I’ve got a stack of em, believe me. Just livin in the wrong places, I guess.
It might have also helped that I’ve a 31 year clean driving record?
my husband was from India, and dark brown. my sons look just like their dad. dwb is alive and well in Texas.
I have a coworker who got nailed for it earlier this year. Worse yet, it was DWB with out-of-state plates.
Was it DWB or driving with out of state plates. And how do we determine it was DWB?
My friend was stopped for driving with ‘hair too long for anyone but a stinking hippie to have.’ (Quote from the officer.) Sometimes it’s rather obvious why one is being stopped.
I’m pretty sure if a cop came out and said “I pulled you over b/c you’re black” they would be fired. Let’s not forget all cops are mic’d now, for your and their protection. If the camera is ever turned off, instant punishment for the officer.
Obviously they can’t just say “I pulled you over for DWB.” They cover it up with a bunch of bogus reasons like Kn0w cited in his experience up above. I mean, c’mon, it would naive to suggest it doesn’t happen. We KNOW it happens. By the law of averages you know there are gonna be racist jackasses in law enforcement.
His plates weren’t expired. If you can’t drive with out-of-state plates that’s gonna cut down on tourism. He said he hadn’t broken any laws, and I believe him. I know the area he was talking about, and I’m not horribly surprised.
I’ve been pulled over due to out of state plates. He cited some other thing, don’t remember what. But was clearly interested in the out of state thing. Turns out car theives often use out of state plates because states don’t share their plate list, which makes it hard for an officer to know ifthat out of state license is hiding a stolen car. (I’ve helped recover a stolen car by calling in the vin. The plate was out of state so the police wouldn’t come check it out. The ‘wind’ accidently blew away the paper covering the vin and after they heard the vin, they sent several squad cars)
I can almost see that, but it still seems like a flimsy excuse. I don’t remember what other details he told me about it. Let’s just say he was driving through a county where I’m surprised they weren’t chasing him with pitchforks and torches just for driving through. I live in an ass-backwards racist redneck county, and we’re practically [insert very racially diverse area here] compared to the county in question.
On the interstate coming through my city, they do tend to pull over a lot of cars with out-of-states, because, well, it’s like a drug bonanza coming through here. They get some pretty major busts out of it, too.
Why is this post still awaiting moderation? I see nothing in the above ‘awaiting moderation’ post that indicated a problem: mo profanity, no insult, no sexual reference. This makes no sense to me, whatsoever.
You’ve pissed off the ModGod, VG.
so is the nesting now zonked?
testing… testing…
it seems to be.
I had a friend that was an Orange County Deputy Sheriff (Calif.) but lived in San Diego County.
There is a (Mexico/US) border stop between SD County and Orange County (sort of a secondary check point about 2 hours north of the actual Mexican border).
My friend was stopped numerous times for no apparent reason. Each time, he allowed them to search his vehicle, then when they found nothing, allowed the service dog to search his vehicle, and then went on his way.
The fourth time they stopped him and had the dog tear up his car upholstery for driving while hispanic, he politely informed them that he was both a U.S. Citizen and a Deputy Sheriff and didn’t appreciate the weekly damage to his car.
He said he could have shown his ID the first time, but he wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt that it was not a racial thing. Sadly to say, it really was a racial thing.
Think how someone who can’t whip out a badge feels in that situation.
“I think what pi$$es me off about Smeper’s rant, is that he puts all Americans in the light of those “issues”.”
ILPB, I don’t understand what this means? The things I mentioned simply go against what this country stands for (at least in writing). You know? Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness…with liberty and justice for ‘all’
You can dance around who is a POW, or who is not a POW, but any time you capture someone, then hold them captive, with no representation, and no oversight, strip their clothes, sic dogs on them, make them perform sexual acts, waterboard them (WE called it torture when the Japanese did it to our troops, and we EXECUTED them for doing it… but whatever), that is disgraceful… I don’t care what ‘rules’ you are allowed to point out that allow it, it’s wrong.
And I did not compare the people against the Mosque to Nazi’s, I compared them to the otherwise, by all accounts, every day normal German people, who stood by (or turned in their neighbors) while 6 million Jews, and 4 million gypsies, gays, handicapped people, nuns and priests were sent to their deaths.
Or to your average American who had no problem with their own government placing American citizens in concentration camps during WWII.
In 1988, Congress passed, and President Ronald Reagan signed, legislation which apologized for the internment of U.S. Citizens by the U.S. government.
The legislation stated that government actions were based on “race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership”.
Over $1.6 billion in reparations were later disbursed by the U.S. government to Japanese Americans who had either suffered internment or were heirs of those who had suffered internment.
“Race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership”
THAT is what I am trying to point out. THAT is the reason people are against the Mosque.
It’s NOT about ground zero.
If you think it is, please explain the violent protests and arson of Mosques going on this very minute in Tennessee, California and Wisconsin… ?
Some quick hits:
“When we denied people of color the freedoms and rights granted to others with lighter skin?” Last I checked, we don’t — and apparently you agree, because you’re talking about things that, while they need to change, are completely different than SG’s original point.
Walter Reed: Yes, conditions were reprehensible — emphasis on “were”. The whistle got blown, heads rolled, and the place got cleaned up, to pretty much unanimous public support. Shouldn’t have gotten that way, but when we found out about it, we fixed it. Again, if you take SG at face value, he makes it sound like that’s the kind of treatment we all think our wounded vets deserve, which is absolutely false.
Torture: ILPB said it better than I, but nope, not torture. Sorry. (SG should know better — I get the sense he’s an older gentleman, so odds are he went through worse at boot camp back in the day.)
Fourth Amendment: Please show me where the constitution guarantees a specific, enumerated right to privacy. I don’t like it either, but it’s ridiculous for a number of reasons to claim the Patriot Act rendered the Fourth Amendment null and void. More ranting by SG.
Gay marriage: Obviously we’re going to disagree on this one, because I don’t agree with the special snowflake theory of law.
Religious persecution: Again, ILPB says it better than I, but this is another baseless rant by SG.
So, in summary — his points are pretty much baseless accusations, half-truths twisted way out of context, or just entirely false. But, again, since they sound good, people show up to defend them — even if you have to go WAY out there to back it up.
1. the government ‘s laws do not deny equality, but many Americans do, in the way they treat others.
2. who is the “we” in this? “we” the government that was supposed to have oversight and make sure everything was right in the first place? they failed. miserably. or “we” the ordinary American people, who, if they(we) really cared about the vets, would have seen this for themselves… when they(we) visited these wounded heroes?
3. waterboarding IS torture. period. (see Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions)
4. wiretaps require proper procedures to be followed in order to be legal. if there were no rights in this, it would not be necessary to pass laws to institute legal procedures to do so. (BTW, it’s all moot now… with cell phones, no tapping is necessary… just grab the voice right out of the air.)
5. special snowflake?
6. religious persecution: yeah, it’s here. example: mosque elementary school vandalized and obscene words and pictures painted on the walls. frighteningly similar to the beginning stages of religious persecution in Germany,1930′s.
7. in summary, his points are valid, and you are embarrassingly ignorant.
Like I said, you have to reach like crazy to back him up. Thanks for proving my point. And insults, too — classy. Neither SG nor VG needed to sink to that level to get their points across, but you did. I wonder why that is?
I guess I should just be happy you didn’t call me a “national disgrace” for disagreeing with you. Again.
ignorant is not an insult because it is not an opinion.
you are ignorant of the Geneva Conventions.
Enemy combatants not wearing a uniform and otherwise engaged in terrorist activities are not covered under that Convention.
read Article 3. does NOT limit rules regarding torture to those in uniform. says NOTHING about uniforms.
I notice you failed to address any of my other concerns — I’ll take that as concession.
Third Geneva Convention, Part I, Article 4, Section 1.2: In order for a member of a militia or other volunteer corps, including organized resistance movements, to be covered by the provisions of the convention, they must fulfill ALL of the following conditions:
- that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
- that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);
- that of carrying arms openly;
- that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
As is so often the case with material quoted out of context, your favorite section seems not to apply in this case.
The “argument” you’re making here is shockingly bad and poorly supported. Frankly, I would have expected better from a teacher.
Dhoti could you please cite where she refused to address your concerns. Wthout a cite it is just made up BS.
hmmm…
PB, sometimes I think you are two different people. you are so difficult to figure out. : )
1. Unh? I was under the impression racism in any form of treating of others is pretty much illegal, except where protected under 1st Amendment.
3. See below, really confused.
6. School vandalization is not persicution unless done by the government. And really it is so pathetic (yes I’m saying that) to equate anything happening today in America to the 1930′s Germany. Godwin’s law at it’s worst.
7. No many of his points would fall under the standard “fear” tactic that you tend to put down on a regular basis. But I guess when the liberals do it it’s ok, but when Beck and his ilk do it, it’s “destroying America”.
“school vandalization [sic] is not persecution unless done by the government.”
I am disappointed in you. I had thought you were more erudite than that.
Definition of PERSECUTION
1
: the act or practice of persecuting especially those who differ in origin, religion, or social outlook
2
: the condition of being persecuted, harassed, or annoyed
[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/persecution]
per·se·cute
vt \ˈpər-si-ˌkyüt\
per·se·cut·edper·se·cut·ing
Definition of PERSECUTE
1
: to harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict; specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief
2
: to annoy with persistent or urgent approaches (as attacks, pleas, or importunities) : pester
[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/persecute?show=0&t=1283402268]
Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another group. The most common forms are religious persecution, ethnic persecution, and political persecution, though there is naturally some overlap between these terms.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution]
: to annoy with persistent or urgent approaches (as attacks, pleas, or importunities) : pester
Accroding to that definiton, all Tele-Marketers and Solicitors are persecuting me.
Sorry never thought of people not in power persecuting others. I think of it as racial bigotry and something that should be taken care of to the full extent of the law. To me, and to any “training” I’ve had on the subject, in order ot persecute you hae to be in a position of power, and hose hate groups have very limited power.
I never thought of eco-terrorists as persecuters, I never thought of Hippies as persecuters…..
I just provided the definitions from sources. I didn’t write them. : )
“I was under the impression racism in any form of treating of others is pretty much illegal, except where protected under 1st Amendment. ”
I did not say it is legal. I said people do it. and they do.
3. see below. waterboarding falls under the parameters of Article 3, paragraphs (a) and (c).
7. fear is real when the things to be feared are real.
I have given specific examples and cites to back up what I say. where are yours? ever?
if you do some research, you will find that the comparison of the desecration of synagogues in Germany in the 1930′s to the desecration of mosques today are similar, Godwin’s law notwithstanding.
If I do some research I could find that the giant $hit I just took can somehow be connected to Nazi’s. “you know Nazi’s pooped on a toilet, you poop on a toilet, you must be Nazi.”
It’s a fear tactic that you b itch and moan about Conservative Pundits doing. How does that hypocrisy taste? Or do you not taste b/c your immune to the flavor already?
What cites would you like my dear? What would you like me to prove? If you ask for a cite, I will gladly give you one. What do you want me to prove to you? Just ask, and I shall provide. And no I’m not going to “Cite” everything I say. You want me to cite the $hit I just took, sorry didn’t have a video camera with me at the time.
I see you are in your Mr. Hyde persona now. : )
Text
Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Here is the text of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which the Bush administration acknowledged on Tuesday applies to terror war detainees held by the United States:
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ‘hors de combat’ by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.
An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.
The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.
The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.
Still don’t see where Waterbaording was mentioned. *re-reads* nope don’t see that mentioned as torture. You may want to explain further how waterboarding is torture per what you pasted.
(a) and (c)
On second thought, you probably need more explanation than that.
(a) “violence to life and person”
waterboarding is violent. it is an attack.
“cruel treatment”
waterboarding is cruel treatment.
(c) “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating
and degrading treatment”
waterboarding humiliates and degrades.
waterboarding therefore falls under the paragraphs 1(a) and 1(c) of Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.
It’s not torture as was defined back then by the governing bodies who make those decisions. I may be speaking out of turn here, but I think the UN were the ones that didn’t consider waterboarding torture until recently.
where is your cite???
You “think” the UN were the ones that didn’t consider waterboarding torture until recently?
but you don’t KNOW.
so why not do some research and find out for sure?
I am constantly flabbergasted at the number of people who are uninterested in actually finding out the truth.
I’m looking, but as you’ll recall, there are some differences of opinion as to whether it’s torture or not, even in the UN itself.
no, I don’t recall. show me.
and show me how waterboarding is NOT:
violence
cruel treatment
humiliating
degrading
all the above are prohibited by article 3, paragraph 1, of the Geneva Conventions.
Being loud and insistent does *not* make you correct until proven otherwise, sorry. Rather than pestering Cricket, why don’t you respond with something (more concrete than “I think it should be”) that proves what you say?
In particular, be sure to cite, then disprove, the Yoo memos.
I am not pestering. just asking for information to back up her claims.
I am interested in the truth.
If someone can show me a valid source that says my idea/concept/opinion is in error, I gladly discard my old idea/concept/opinion and take up the new one.
I have done that on a number of occasions.
but I do need information from a valid source. I have yet to see you provide any.
As for cricket, she can take care of herself, and much better than you. she is an intelligent and capable sparring partner. her posts make me think, question, reflect. yours just make me want to regurgitate.
Citation on how the US once treated it’s conquered enemies soldiers on the topic of waterboarding. Have those pardons for the convicted Japanese soldiers been sent out yet? {http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170.html}
It was bad when it was happening to US soldiers but not too bad for them durn terrorists right?
Dear jklinders,
I am not quite sure what point you are trying to make.
However, I will make this comment:
If we claim that waterboarding is permissible under the Geneva Conventions, then we are saying it is permissible for others to do the same to our guys. There could be no charge of war crime for others who commit this despicable act against our troops.
To say that waterboarding is not torture, nor in violation of any statute of the GC, is to declare our guys fair game for anyone out there who wants to play tit-for-tat.
From videos I’ve seen on TV and the interwebs about waterboarding, I start to get panic attacks just watching it. Ugh. Awful stuff. If it were done to me I’d lose my mind.
Well it would be nice if the self-appointed restorer had an iota of honor himself. Yes and we know who felt that way about Dr. King no comparison, not even close.
You don’t like the comparison, but thats ok.
I’ve listened to Glenn on the radio on the way home from work (better than my other options) and found that a lot of what he says makes sense. I hear news that no one else will touch for months to come. I’ve checked sources and, if you strip away what he gives as opinion, vs what he states as news, you’ll find he’s quite accurate.
Many of his opinions and guesses end up being true as well.
There is QUITE a bit of hate for this man. There are many, many examples of him being misquoted and such. Why are there so many media outlets that focus on him to roast? Their articles almost never actually hold up.
So who is to say who is without an iota of honor? The man who asks us to reach within ourselves to seek greater introspection, honor, etc (even if he himself has done dishonorable things). Or the people who just hate him based on half truths from sources they haven’t checked up on?
Too many people stand on one side and point at all the dishonorable things (in their eyes) that the other side does/has done…while excusing what they do as right or necessary.
Take WAR as a great example. We (as a military force) feel it is necessary to take out key targets…not attack civilians.
We feel that their IED’s (is that the right anacronym?) are dishonorable. we feel that their hiding amongst civilians is dishonorable.
They feel that our massive power and stepping in where they didn’t ask, is dishonorable.
The true measure then, must be made from a higher perspective. A truer and deeper insight that just a view from one side of the fence. We, as people – possibly misinformed and jealously guarding our traditions, whether right or wrong – are almost incapable of making that kind of perfect judgment. We should, then, scrutinize our motives, examine our information and try to step in other’s shoes before pulling the trigger or swinging the axe.
Glenn Beck Godwins more than any other pundit I know. The guy literally says that ANYTHING from the left is either communist, fascist, or somehow connected to Hitler. And yes, I’ve listen to him as well. Much of what he says makes NO sense at all.
Just about everything you’ve said can also be said about Obama. There’s QUITE a bit of hate from him too. I’m not even a big fan of him but the hate has gotten out right scary. Read any Yahoo! Buzz story that even MENTIONS Obama and you’ll see what I mean.
He’s been misquoted several times, had his family attacked, the conspiracies have gotten down right ridiculous, and how many half truths are spread that people still believe and REFUSE to give up even when faced with overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
If Beck was really honorable, he would state his opinions with actual facts instead of connecting almost everything the administration or the left says/does to Hitler.
“Too many people stand on one side and point at all the dishonorable things (in their eyes) that the other side does/has done…while excusing what they do as right or necessary.”
If this is what he really believes, why does he continue to do it? Is hypocrisy now considered “honorable”?
Glenn’s hitler week was abt 8 months ago. He ranted about how extreme conservatism leads to nazism and extreme liberal leads to socialism. Sounds like maybe he anti extreme when itcomes to conservative/liberal.
If it doesn’t make sense to you, doesn’t mean its wrong (doesn’t mean its right) . Too often people refuse to see or understand simply because they don’t agree. Its easier to dismiss as a loony than to confront the issues. Ittakes too much time and energy to face them head on so we lazily accept talking points.
At the end you’re quoting me, not beck. I think he’d agree with me, however, and that he is trying to be honorable.
Beck has Nazi Tourette’s. It’s been proven. Easily. By Lewis Black no less.
Speaking of someone with Tourettes.
The first Kanye interruption I’ve ever supported.
God I wish that had actually happened. Instant redemtion for Kanye that would have been.
Come on. This whack joke was tired before it woke up.
Double Fail:
1) Kanye *did* do this to Taylor Swift. Not that I’m a fan of hers, just that *almost* no one deserves that.
2) Kanye *didn’t* do this to arguably one of only a handful of people on the planet who *do* deserve it.
Sorry, Kanye… ur still doin it rong.
Really, really lame and disrespectful of Dr King.
Why is this disrespectful of Dr. King? It’s disrespectful of Beck. Which isn’t really a problem.
Why is disrespect to one person held higher than disrespect to another?
In order to answer your question, I’d have to go and read what Glenn Beck said…and I have a feeling it will make me feel too stupid to answer your question.
News does that to me, these days.
Well, these days, most of what he says is the same as what you would expect to hear in any church.
Pray with sincerity, Have Faith, Hope and Charity. He also throws in a healthy dose of Be those things all week, instead of just at the chapel during worship.
I’m assured that those guys of things offend everyone and make the collective IQ of the U.S. a little lower.
I see you skipped over alot to defend beck. Don’t need him to talk about sincerity when he continues to slander our President with such vitriol. If he does not agree with Obama’s policy that is one thing but nasty personal attacks only show what a lying hypocrite he really is. He should restore his own honor first. And spare us the litany about how many followers beck has…blah blah blah, hitler had quite a few as well.
Slander would have to be something that is not true, right?
Vitriol implies bitterness. What you are implying then is that his statements about the president are both untrue, and said in bitterness.
After having listened to him, I can say that the hasn’t, within my recollection, ever said something that wasn’t true about the president…that he did not later apologize for.
As far as nasty personal attacks, a citation is needed.
The number of followers is a moot point, for sure. I’d rather stand alone, and be right, than stand in the crowd, and be wrong.
OMG I can’t even argue with this. I’m getting a headache just reading it.
Right after his “non-political” rally he was on national TV calling Pres Obama’s religious belief as perverted. He has called the President a racist. Both are bitter lies, just to name a few.
Actually Obama does show some racist tendacies, whetehr or not he’s a racist who knows.
I think that pretty much everyone sometimes shows potentially racist tendancies or makes potentially racist remarks. What makes someone a racist is that they actually believe the “my ethnic or national group is superior to this other ethnic or national group” arguments that underly the actions or remarks.
Paws, thats only half the equation.
“my ethnic or national group is INFERIOR to this other ethnic or national group” also engenders racism. A belief of the state of victim-hood perpetuates itself.
so, if you have a non- political rally, you can never say anything to do with politics again?…or there is some kind of unspoken buffer time in the which “politics” is taboo? Obama’s religious views is as much a religious comment as it is a political one.
Saying that Black Liberation Theology is a perversion of Christianity isn’t a lie…and I think you’re mistaking conviction with bitterness…
If i said “Barack Obama is a typical Black politician.” you’d say I was being racist. Theres no need to add the “black” to that statement. BO has said “typical White CEO” and “typical white woman” in several of his interactions with people. Those are racial in nature.
[citation and context needed] Note my 05:33AM as to why you should provide it if it exists.
And, it didn’t even answer the question.
I didn’t say:
“Why is disrespect to one person held higher than disrespect to Glenn Beck?”
The answer, is that if you are Okaying disrespect for someone, and not for others, you’re either a bigot or a hypocrite…possibly both. Not a bigot about all things, and not a hypocrite in all things…but in THIS thing, you would be.
OK, I don’t know why I’m stepping in here. But here is one reason to differentiate between Beck and MLK as potential targets for disrespect. MLK is deceased, and therefore can’t defend himself.
Let’s not bicker and argue about who killed who! This is supposed to be a happy occaision!
So, generally speaking, its more acceptable to disrespect the living than the dead. I might buy that. I still say there’s a disproportionate amount of claiming Beck is disrespecting anyone. He was very respectful at his event.
Well, good for him. That doesn’t change the other 99% of the time when he’s an asshat to everyone who has differing viewpoints from him.
One doesn’t deserve respect. The other does.
Yes. I’m not generally one to say, “Respect has to be earned”, but rather, “A certain level of respect should be accorded to everyone, until they’ve shown they don’t deserve it”, and I would say that Beck, the clown and the hypocrite, has shown he doesn’t deserve it.
Hey Naoyusimi, I remember you said on another thread that the avi is your real picture. Were you telling the truth? Because if so, uh…I’m single.
What is wrong with this lame website??
How many times do you have to post before it goes thru?
But as long as the adverts keep rolling probably the management dont care.
Dr Obama and his socialist minions are the biggest dream killers in recent memory. MLK wouldnt have wanted an affirmative action black president.
Well it’s a good thing we don’t have one then!
**has mental image of the yellow guys from Despictable Me running around yelling Socialism, Obama wants socialsim** Thanks PulseXtreme……
Aw, I haven’t seen that one yet. I want to though.
Despicable Me was awesome and PulseX is an idiot and probably a sock of Pulse. When the hell did Obama become a doctor?
Dam you Obama for killing my real estate dream.
I was going to move to Honduras and live the american dream.
Move to Australia instead then Sqwirk. You’d fit right in with the weird and wacky marsupials that live here and hell forget the American Dream, it’s dead and has been for years. The Aussie Dream is way better, but only if you like cold beer (not Fosters that stuff is piss), long summers, clean beaches (we have over 7000 of them), beautiful women, prawns the size of lobsters on a barbie and so on
This is a time of economic uncertainty and political division. It’s a time when the USA feels genuinely threatened by the rise of other powers, and its inability to solve the world’s problems by force or example. The rise of the tea party movement and the ridiculous influence of a tub-thumping idiot like Glenn Beck, and the sentimental yearning for ‘honour’ and ‘return to traditional values’ (what does that even mean, if you think about it for more than ten seconds?) reminds me of nothing so much as the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party in the 30s. Sorry to be all Godwin about it, but as a dispassionate observer I can’t help noticing the parallels. Laughing at the little fvcker might help, but I only hope that someone better than Kanye can deconstruct him before it’s too late.
Yeah I’ve never understood the whole “in my days, things were better” argument, when you deconstruct it, the whole thing is simply untrue. Traditional values didn’t make for a more harmonious society just a more timid and more shortlived one. Modern society isn’t driving itself into hell via the handbasket, the problems we have today have existed since man first evolved from the ape. The only difference between today’s society and society 50 years ago is reporting on the problems has gotten better.
Speaking of reporting, a lot of the stats people use to claim violence and sexual misconduct etc is on the rise is usually a load of crap as well, mostly because the data set is usually highly selective and/or the definitions are expanded to increase the number of people included within the stats. If you don’t believe this is done then you’ve never worked with statistics. I do it all the time, it isn’t lying though, because numbers don’t lie, it’s just forcing the numbers to fit the story you want to tell based on your agenda.
The ‘family values’ buzzword is another that drives me up the wall, especially considering every family has very different values to the next one.
When people say ‘traditional values’ or ‘family values’, what they mean is ‘my values’.
Awe c’mon…are you really going there? Its easy.
Family values = protecting the innocence of youth. Family friendly values allow a family to go to a restaurant and not be bombarded with nastiness.
Traditional values are those generally agreed upon to be good…even if people secretly (or openly) don’t live by them. Honesty, candor, hard working, polite, loyalty, friendly, etc.
Things that are viewed as “old school” but were traditional values: modest clothing, marital fidelity, abstinence before marriage, soberness of mind and cleanliness of speech.
If you actually had used those ten seconds to think, perhaps you could have made a similar list.
Family values has been perverted over the years to cover up blatent bigotry.
which is sad that its been perverted. There are always going to be those that ruin it for everyone else.
Abstinence sucks! BOOO!!!
*throws pie*
it doesn’t really work as a birth control measure either. just ask…
Actually abstinence works perfectly as a birth control measure, b/c you can’t really get preganant without sex (unless there’s an OOPS right near by the…..)
However I bleive you were trying ot say Abstinence only teaching isn’t a good form of Birth Control.
yep.
sometimes you take me too literally. : )
I’m pretty sure if you’re sucking it doesn’t really count as abstinence.
had to scroll up a ways to get it, but well worth the scroll…LOL!
Of course, there’s a big problem with defining things like ‘protecting the innocence of youth.’ For a lot of people, that ‘traditionally’ meant keeping their innocent white youth separated from those obviously non-innocent non-white youth. It still does for lots of people (I personally have met some of them unfortunately). I would say Dan was spot on.
Family values means to protect the innocence of youth? I thought it was a buzz phrase used to suggest that the only good families were mom & dad families and that so-called alternate families didn’t have good values.
Traditional values are meaningless. Tradition is also meaningless. Society is constantly evolving and changing, and our values change with it. The Beatles used to get their albums burned by angry people in the Bible Belt. Now Yellow Submarine is in elementary school music books. Books that used to be controversial are now considered classics (Catcher in the Rye which I never read, To Kill a Mockingbird to name a couple). Movies? Do I have to go there? Kate Winslet’s breasts are all over Titanic and it’s PG-13? You could never get away with that 60 years ago.
Traditional values also used to mean the husband would go make the living and the family would rather end up homeless before the wife would work because the wife belongs at home taking care of the children and making her man a sammich. Now, in many many families both husband and wife have careers and guys gotta make their own damn sammich.
As for your “old school” values: Modest clothing is okay if you want, but nothing wrong with looking sexah. Marital fidelity is naturally important, unless alternate rules have been decided on. Abstinence before marriage is flat out outdated and impractical. Soberness of mind I don’t get what you mean. Cleanliness of speech fvcking blows donkey balls. Words only have the power you give them. Nothing in the Bible says “Thou shalt not say fvck.”
All this really means, is that people have been abandoning traditional values for a long time.
If Yellow Submarine is really about drugs, then really, we ought to find something else to put in the elementary school..just sayin.
The Last excorism movie trailer looks like the kind of thing that should be R. But I’m just a out dated traditionalist.
Soberness of mind refers to not being frivolous in what we think about. We have become a lazy nation, and part of thesymptoms is that we don’t even care enough to give real thought to a lot of these issues.
“Its a fascinating article about how you can turn plastic back into oil!” And then two seconds later you forget about it because you’re queued up to play another map on modern warfare.
Your frivolous is not my frivolous.
Definately, and the disagreement is welcome. By comparing ideas we can see if our ideas are good, or merely good in only a small set of circumstances.
You know for someone who appears to listen to Beck on a regular basis, you’re surprisingly sane and reasonable.
Now if Beck were more like yourself I don’t think people could object so much to him.
Mind you, I don’t agree with most of the bullsh*t you say (if any at all) but it is refreshing to read a calm defense instead of the usual angry ones written by Beck supporters with allegedly severe anger management issues.
I honestly think Beck is trying to be better about it. I think he’s realized that division is not helping at all.
In fact, I’m trying to take his advice and look to where we have things in common…because we all have plenty in common.
There are two things to remember about Beck. Hes an entertainer…not a news caster. He talks about news a lot however.
Second thing is, hes human. And we humans have an uncanny knack for being hypocritical.
You are stating your values. Thank you for proving my point.
/sigh A photoshop lol? It’s fail and blah. But hey! I guess a lot of people are upset if he can draw a 500k crowd.
/poke the left nuts oozing in under the door
Wish this wasn’t photoshop but the real thing…. where the heck was Kanye when we really needed him????
lolbeck
Pundit Kitchen. Where teenagers and mental midgets go to opine on media talking points between episodes of Jersey Shore and Dancing With The Stars.
I notice you’re on it.
That’s just silly; Tombee is dark red and not bright orange!
Which one are you?
@Mabsba
“First, ignoring your decision to believe crowd estimates of the event organizer rather than people actually paid to professionally estimate such things… That leads directly to Godwin-land.”
1) I choose to ignore the laughably stupid estimate of 87,000 by whatever company CBS hired. There were 130k on facebook watching. I was one of them. There were 6 people at my home taking up that 1 spot of the 130k online…so the actual number from just Facebook is at LEAST 130k.
2) Godwin country? Are you just trying to sound smrt? You’re evoking a “silly” theory that has become an internet meme.
“Second, you wonder why people do not respect him and/or doubt his sincerity. How about that he stated an out-and-out lie (that he physically held Washington’s handwritten inaugural address in his hands) then extorted people not to lie.”
What is the absolute closest a person can get to the documents in question? First, you’d have to be a national archivist in order to touch them…with gloves on.
SO, as close as is humanly possible, to have someone hold the document for him, and have him dictate the turning of pages, etc, it as akin to holding himself as possible. EVEN the national archivest said his statement is likely a figure of speech.
If you want to be respected, you’d better find a better “out and out” lie. This is just silly! An out and out lie is “I did not have sex with that woman” and you really did.
“Third, the primary burden of communication is upon the speaker, not the listener as none of us are mind-readers. Hence the discussion back and forth here to determine what is meant by ‘traditional values.’”
No, it is an equal share upon the listener.
Too many times someone says something and the other side hears what they want, maybe not even realizing that they’ve tainted their view. And that not even the bad part…because everyone will have a slant based on their own personal knowledge. No, the bad part is when they start pointing fingers and calling names based on this slant. If you’re going to go so far as to point and call names, then you should self examine and see if your coming from a tweaked point of view…in this case, Beck hate.
Traditional to you aren’t traditional to everyone else. Especially considering that we have such a diverse population in America. You can’t call traditional Sharia Muslim values traditional the same way you call Judeo-Christian values traditional, since they’re not anywhere close to the same thing.
I would never presume to think that the traditions of a Judeo/Christian society would be anything like the traditions of a Muslim/something else society.
If we’re going to use “traditional” in a world stage than one could barely even call a belief in God traditional. Most nations have a traditional religion and many have a God…but thats diverging greatly from the original line of thought way up the thread.
Seeing as the Untied States was found on Religious Freedom by a population approaching 100% judeo Christian, I think I’m safe in saying that the traditions, over the last 200 years, have been largely Judeo-Christian.
I’m just saying that if you’re going to invoke a word like “traditional” you need to know what it means. And what you mean by using it.
You’re casting a wide net here….what exactly are you hoping to catch?
What I saw upthread was a general disparaging of all traditional values as worthless.
I suppose their value may appear relative to some. I suppose that what tradition is will depend on your own experience…this is all true. But in all the circles I’ve been in, “traditional values” and “Family Values” has a pretty set meaning. And their value is not relative to those who observe them.
It is relative when one set of “traditional values” involves stoning your wife to death if she is accidentally seen by your brother when she steps out of the shower naked.
Thats quite the extreme example.
Of course one cannot just presume to keep ALL traditions. After all, its the tradition of the Jew and Arab to hate each other from the time of Abraham on…do away with that one already!!
The law of moses was given to a very stubborn people who had been steeped in Egyptian idolatry for generations and the laws sound very extreme to us. By the time Christ arrived they were ready to do away with the old law.
And none of the above really fits into what I mean, when I say today, “traditional” and “family” values.
Those would be “ancient” and “extreme” in pretty much everyone’s book, even in Jesus’ apparently.
They’re traditional in Sharia-compliant countries, and Sharia-compliant households in America, so you don’t get to tell them their values aren’t traditional.
Exactly. “What YOU mean.” What everyone is trying to point out to you is that these are extremely subjective terms, subject to cultural, social, religious and personal interpretations.
You’re right. There is the assumption that when one says “traditional” and “family”, it refers to mainstream, which was (still is, I think) Christian values.
So basically, I should change my nomenclature to “traditional/Family Christian Values” in order to be understood or considered PC on this forum?
How about just Traditional Christian Family Values.
I’m more for non-traditional Christian values. and i haven’t read this whole thread yet so please don’t rip my head off.
Sure, but it still comes down to whose values? The WBC says they’re protecting ‘traditional Christian family values’ by protesting soldiers’ funerals.
Right, OK.
So to finely make the point.
When the original posters spoke of tradtional values (i mentally listed out my christian family values) and felt that a general disparaging of all values was a bit much.
The end result of all this is that there are SOME values that people can have that are traditions and have value.
Some sound crazy to other people…like stoning someone for an accident. Now if there was also a rule about how wives step out of showers, where brothers are allowed to be in the home and this scenario meant an extreme breech equating to adultery…I might start to understand (not agree) with that tradition.
I did not disparage all values.
I disparaged the stupidity and hypocrisy behind citing a need to ‘return to traditional values’ when the people making that claim actually mean their own personal values, ignoring the many times that different groups’ ‘traditional values’ have been used to defend injustices and atrocities.
Everyone has their own values. Some values are shared. I’d just rather people be honest and not hide their desire to have everyone follow their values under the guise of some mythical tradition everyone supposedly followed.
Yeah, I have to go with that, Dan. I’m not interested in returning to the ‘traditional’ values espoused by the WBC or by the c0ck-fighting ‘Christians’ hereabouts or by the bigots who promote race segregation. Those are all ‘traditional’ values held by many people that those people would like to have us return to.
Umm no, I’m Jewish and we don’t hate Muslims, and we certainly haven’t since Abraham. Most Jews and Muslims are extremely tolerant of each other especially in countries where we are both minorities. But even under Muslim rule Jews have usually prospered and been allowed to practice our religion freely.
Of course it’s been the fundies who’ve gone and upset the apple cart, (see the Berber invasion of Al-Andalus for example) but that’s been no different to our treatment in Christian nations.
Dan, do you speak for Glenn Beck? Do you know that in his heart he meant that everyone should have HIS values? Why did he look for Rabbi’s, Imam, Preists and Pastors of various Faith’s to speak and respresent at the rally?
Perhaps, much like my discussion on “traditions” went through iterations here, he himself went through something similar…and got to the core of what values all those groups represented had in common. Also, based on what Glenn Beck talks about, his statement that traditional values will restore honor (and hence, our country) comes from the study of the founding fathers, and their clear statement of Piety.
Maybe he was speaking of the big three that were the theme of the rally. Which he was very openly stating throughout.
Faith, Hope and Charity – as a means to restore honor?
I’d say that the 500k on location, and the several hundred thousand watching via online/tv all agree with the “traditional” values Beck spoke of.
Rather than blast it as “hypocrisy” you could seek to understand what it is he meant. Rather than forcing him to mean what you believe it means.
This is one of the classical weeknesses of communication. When we speak we (all of us) speak through a filter of our own understanding and experiences. Then, when the listener hears what we’ve said, they understand it through the filter of their own understanding and experiences.
It is partially the burden of the speaker, to speak clearly. But a large portion of the burden is on the listener to seek to understand the intent of the speaker, and not just one’s own understanding.
I don’t think that the traditional values I listed at the start of my rant are mythical in any way shape or form.
i stated:
Honesty, candor, hard working, polite, loyalty, friendly, etc.
These are the values we need to return to. These kinds of things. These kinds of things edge toward universal truth. Every respects them (or ought to) regardless of religion (or lack therof).
While stating such might be labeled as Bigotry, the blanket opposition to such traditions is also bigotry.
First, ignoring your decision to believe crowd estimates of the event organizer rather than people actually paid to professionally estimate such things, the size of an audience is not a reflection of the value of the speaker. That leads directly to Godwin-land.
Second, you wonder why people do not respect him and/or doubt his sincerity. How about that he stated an out-and-out lie (that he physically held Washington’s handwritten inaugural address in his hands) then extorted people not to lie.
Third, the primary burden of communication is upon the speaker, not the listener as none of us are mind-readers. Hence the discussion back and forth here to determine what is meant by ‘traditional values.’
I don’t buy his honor thing for a second. It’s a clever attempt to make himself look good to draw in more listeners, viewers, and book sales. His attitude towards those with different political views than him prove that he’s absolutely full of it.
Unless his view of whats wrong with people opposite his view, is that they don’t have honor. Which is a part of his view. All the subtleties and shiftiness of the Obama administration lends that argument credence.
If you buy Obama’s administration, then your bigotry would make Beck seem dishonorable. If you don’t buy Obama’s spin, then you see Beck’s statements as a reasonable possibility.