[Gabriel]

Originally Posted by aka Brett

Stoner is correct it was a poor choice.
you feel they were chosen as they could offer a unique perspective...thats fine,,,,lets just dont put them at the top of the totem pole...thats my concern

There's that us and them stuff again

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Gabriel

There's that us and them stuff again

you've got such a keen eye, gabriel

[buffoon]

Originally Posted by aka Brett

You lefts

who ya talking about? Don't go putting labels on me Brett. You have absolutely no idea who I am.

will discredit anything.....I mean anything...

heard you the first time....and I'll show shiite on people that shiite is sticking to.

that why I dont provide many links its a waste...

that link is indeed a waste albeit for entirely different reasons

isn't anything wrong with Pipes

"The Palestinians are a miserable people...and they deserve to be."

"Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene...All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most."

Pipes is a racist.

The fact that he ardently supports Israel (as do I) and if push comes to shove would favor the Israelis over Palestinians (as would I) makes no difference. People like him are never part of any solution but always of the problem.

[iltos]

Originally Posted by buffoon

Pipes is a racist.

The fact that he ardently supports Israel (as do I) and if push comes to shove would favor the Israelis over Palestinians (as would I) makes no difference. People like him are never part of any solution but always of the problem.

gotta agree with this....
the dude is a sanctimonious piece of.........
the dude is a hater.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by Drabdr

Alot? His strategy is that of the constrictor. It doesn't happen at first.... he gives you time to exhale. And then he hangs on.....



I think I had to set up a tent near the computer the last time Jack let into me...

Really.....I'm just misunderstood................

[Drabdr]

Brett, I agree with many of the points you have been making. And it is entirely in line with how I feel about Obama anyway (not very good) and about racial pandering (which agitates me probably even more). I could see appointing one, and someone else. But to find two means someone spent a lot of time looking for the correct combination. We have bigger concerns in our country than to be spending time on that junk.

Terrorists that are Muslim are a small subset of the Muslim community at large. There are some very proud Muslim Americans that are as angry with the radicals as any other group. Heck, the Americans with Middle Eastern background were as hurt and angry after 9/11 as anyone. This is their country too, they were attacked too.

I think what scares you is that it's possible that these individuals are "seeds"; and may create havoc in those appointments. That's entirely possible. However, I tend to look at it that they are probably more American and Patriotic than I. They will work harder than any other individual in that position to protect our borders; to help weaken these cells, and protect our borders.

I would have chosen differently, but like most other things in the past year, they seem little concerned with my thoughts.

If things go well, Obama will win some political pandering points over the next year.
If things don't go well on this, well.....

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by Stoner

Really.....I'm just misunderstood................

Much better understood now.

Hope your weekend is going well.

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by Stoner

No....I agree on one point, not your entire line of thought.


I thought about it............it's your take on religious discrimination that's the issue..



What?.....this?
I'll ask you again.....how do you intend to impose legal restriction barring people from government appointments on the basis of religion?
This is not an issue of the President's choice, it's an issue of limiting the President's choice......and that is your argument.
I think you have a Constitutional problem to address and it's obvious you dodge it because you likely don't have an answer.

Well......I'd sure like to see the fence first before I choose a side.



This forum used to be a lot more active and a lot more interesting, imo.
It's controversial threads like this that I like to 'play' in ......that's a compliment.

Haven't been able to ride the bike much more than a couple hundred miles this year.....a lot more family commitments the last few years keep me near the house a lot more.

You agreed it was a poor choice...that is the line of thought.
I have said many times I have no problems with muslim..dont label me as discriminating

I have never stated that there should be legal restriction barring muslims....why must you insist I have stated such.
Have never stated to limit the presidents choice.
Is search working?................change your argument or use the search feature to quote me.

Winter is coming ,you need to get in a couple days riding while you can

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by Drabdr

Alot? His strategy is that of the constrictor. It doesn't happen at first.... he gives you time to exhale. And then he hangs on.....



I think I had to set up a tent near the computer the last time Jack let into me...

He just wont stop....i wonder if at times he is a machine

[Gabriel]

Originally Posted by Drabdr

I could see appointing one, and someone else. But to find two means someone spent a lot of time looking for the correct combination.

One, What? American?
Someone else, what? Person?
Two what? Americans? People?
I am confused

[Gabriel]

Originally Posted by aka Brett

He just wont stop....i wonder if at times he is a machine

Be nice, lest he swallow you whole

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by iltos

heh
funny, there are conservatives on this board -you included- who do exactly the same....
been that way forever
it's why i choose to take the time to post about WHAT some sources are actually saying

which makes me a source, i guess ....and only wacor will actually read and respond to my deconstructions....and then, only if they're about something he's posted
gotta respect him for that....one of the more open minds 'round here, imo.....it's made for some interesting discussions, too


hogwash....you kinda liked the tone from those sources....
c'mon....admit it

i rest my case

You do an excellent job of research....offering more insight to a post than a simple rebuttal

At times you probally feel ignored or that it all was a waste...i feel the pain...I have found that the more detailed we get the less response we get back as the others may not take 30 minutes to research etc.

I have had many long original posts just gone to waste,,,I found it is better to stick with a couple issues..resolve and go to the next rather that tackle it all in a single post.

The tone of the source i used wasnt the best to express my point....but it had enough info in it and is controversial enough to gather attention....perhaps that is why buffon found it listed number one in the google search

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by Gabriel

There's that us and them stuff again

if its there in plain site use it

Originally Posted by Stoner

Most appointments are likely tokenism of some manner.

Personally.....I think it was politically stupid to be placing followers of Islam into security positions at this time.

[aka Brett]

Originally Posted by buffoon

who ya talking about? Don't go putting labels on me Brett. You have absolutely no idea who I am.heard you the first time....and I'll show shiite on people that shiite is sticking to.that link is indeed a waste albeit for entirely different reasons




Pipes is a racist.

The fact that he ardently supports Israel (as do I) and if push comes to shove would favor the Israelis over Palestinians (as would I) makes no difference. People like him are never part of any solution but always of the problem.

Did I call you a left?
No

[Gabriel]

Brett.....the difference is in scale, not the opinion or thought...the SCALE of it. I could well have the same basic opinion, but a quite different premise. That would surely come through in the way I present my thoughts, the notions behind my conclusions, etc. You know, the scale/depth/internal stewing of a thing. It is also detectable in a persons word usage to what part of the scale they rest or arrest their arguments on. Don't you agree?

GeeSHHH...do I have to continually explain myself