Thoughts & Commentary on the Obama Administration

[Strike For The South]

Population does not matter Strike. If a few people in the government decide to impose Sharia law, then the majority suffers under it. Just look at history Strike, tiny amounts of people in governments have always ruled the majority.

And who will lead this charge for Sharia law?

[LittleGrizzly]

The tiny minority in goverment will quietly push it through with a few leftys who are muslim obseesed... dont you watch any conspiracies

[Fixiwee]

Just look at history Strike, tiny amounts of people in governments have always ruled the majority.

But you are aware that rulers need the acceptance of the majority? If not you get a revolution.
And I don't see a muslim majority in any of the western states.

[Vuk]

But you are aware that rulers need the acceptance of the majority? If not you get a revolution.
And I don't see a muslim majority in any of the western states.

Not at all, and esp not in the States. In the States we have a belief that if we are not satisfied with something we have the power to change it, and if it is not changed, it MUST be because it is the will of the people, and we do not need to revolt against the government, but join activist groups and change the minds of the people. I tell you agian, look at history. Look at how many times things have been done in American history by the government directly against the wishes of majority of the citizens. We have had no revolutions against our government yet. (and no, the war betweent he states does not count, it was not a revolution)

[Strike For The South]

Not at all, and esp not in the States. In the States we have a belief that if we are not satisfied with something we have the power to change it, and if it is not changed, it MUST be because it is the will of the people, and we do not need to revolt against the government, but join activist groups and change the minds of the people. I tell you agian, look at history. Look at how many times things have been done in American history by the government directly against the wishes of majority of the citizens. We have had no revolutions against our government yet. (and no, the war betweent he states does not count, it was not a revolution)

Whom will do it then?

[Vuk]

Whom will do it then?

What do you mean whom will do it? :P Obama is trying to get a guy in who said he wants to do it. Don't play dumb.

EDIT: So let me get this right Strike, you are saying I am being unreasonable to assume that when a guy is put into power, he will try to do what he has said he thinks should be done? That does not make very much sense on your part. If someone said that they think all blacks in the country should be killed, don't you think it would be reasonable to assume that if you put them in a position to do so it is likely that they will try? And don't you think that is a reason for concern? Why then is it far fetched to be concerned that a guy who believes the US should be ran by Sharia law may be put into a position where he would have power to pursue that and possibly bring it about?

[Strike For The South]

What do you mean whom will do it? :P Obama is trying to get a guy in who said he wants to do it. Don't play dumb.

EDIT: So let me get this right Strike, you are saying I am being unreasonable to assume that when a guy is put into power, he will try to do what he has said he thinks should be done? That does not make very much sense on your part. If someone said that they think all blacks in the country should be killed, don't you think it would be reasonable to assume that if you put them in a position to do so it is likely that they will try? And don't you think that is a reason for concern? Why then is it far fetched to be concerned that a guy who believes the US should be ran by Sharia law may be put into a position where he would have power to pursue that and possibly bring it about?

The man floated an idea in academia filled with "maybes" and "coulds" I'm not worried.

[Vuk]

The man floated an idea in academia filled with "maybes" and "coulds" I'm not worried.

Not really Strike, he is a professor, and he expressed that thought it is what the US should do. Even so though, don't you think it warrants concern when he "floats around" ideas like that? Think of my (over used ) example: If I "floated around" an idea that I think all blacks should be killed, don't you think it would warrant concern if I was put in a position where I may have the power to bring that about? Sorry, but I would oppose anyone who "floated" Nazi ideas around, and I oppose anyone who "floats" Sharia law supremacy ideas around. Surely there is someone far less dangerous and equally (or more so) qualified who could fill the position. I do not think America should take chances by giving people like that the power to fufill their ideas.

[Lemur]

What do you mean whom will do it? :P Obama is trying to get a guy in who said he wants to do it. Don't play dumb.

The dude said that some aspects of Sharia might be applicable in some situations. And he said this in an academic setting.

But by all means, remove the qualifiers and turn it into a battle cry. And remember that crazy flakes are an important part of every kid's breakfast.

Not really Strike, he is a professor, and he expressed that thought it is what the US should do.

I have yet to see any quote in which he says that integration of Sharia is what "the US should do." Provide a source, please.

Sorry, but I would oppose anyone who "floated" Nazi ideas around, and I oppose anyone who "floats" Sharia law supremacy ideas around.

Sir, put down the dramatics and step away from the unmarked black helicopter. Sharia law is not exclusively about killing infidels and stoning homosexuals. I can easily imagine a situation in which, say, two Algerian immigrants have a contract with one another based on Sharia, and now one of them has broken it. Say you're the judge; these two men had a contract. Assuming this contract does not violate existing laws in the U.S.A., might it not be enforceable? And what about regulating some of the looser forms of Islamic lending? Again, so long as the agreements/contracts/business norms fall within the law here, I don't see why taking their Sharia into account is the end of Western Civilization.

To expand on your Godwin-confirming example of Nazi Germany: We have integrated lots of ideas, practices and personnel from the Nazis. Hello, Volkswagen Beetle? Hello V2 rocket program? Hello Operation Paperclip? Hello Werner Von Braun? Hello blitzkrieg? Not only did you drag out the rotting corpse of Nazi Germany, but you did it to no purpose.

Islam is not a solid wall of thuggery, and their law is not one long violating of human rights. People live their lives, do their business, and they needs ground rules. Your hysteria about an academe musing on the applicability of exterior law when applied in the U.S. is unbecoming, sir. And from which aspect of your buttocks did you pluck the word "supremacy"?

[Strike For The South]

Vuk. Aren't you in Hungary right now?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

And I don't see a muslim majority in any of the western states.

Do you count Albania as a Western state now that it is in NATO? If so, it is 70% Muslim. Regardless of that, Britain does not have a Muslim majority - and yet...

[Vuk]

Vuk. Aren't you in Hungary right now?

So? That does not mean I do not pay close attention to the news and talk to people in the States regularly.

[Major Robert Dump]

Yes, peacefully exercising our political voice (as Democrats do all the time...when they are not holding violent rallies, burning flags, buildings, and people, throwing stones and molatov cocktails at people, etc) as is both our constitutional right and our duty as citizens to do make sure an appointee we think will be harmful to our country does not get in is sabre-rattling? Funny you say that, yet almost all the violence and vandalism that is done with political motivation is done by the left, not the right. During the Republican convention look at all the violence and destruction that leftwing wackjobs did as they protested that America should dare to have more than their one party.
You think it is unreasonable to get concerned when obama appoints someone guilty of tax evasion as secretary of the treasury?!! Or even worse, when he wants to appoint someone who said what this guy said? You think that is a small thing that should be overlooked? If it was a Republican, I garuntee that you and every other leftist on this board would be burning this thread down with your protest.

Seriously, answer me two questions:
1. Do you know what Sharia Law is?
2. Do you have any idea as to the unConstitutional consequences that would result if we instated Sharia Law in America?

1. I know exactly what Sharia law is and taking a few sentences uttered and turning it into OMGZ we're turning into Iran is over doing it.
2. I know exactly how incompatable Sharia law is with liberty, our constitution, and my way of life, and I've been getting warnings on these boards for making fun of muslims since before you were born. But the fact that I don't agree with it or want it does not make me go nutso because an otherwise very qualified appointee said some stuff to try to pander to muslims sympathizers. What you should be angry about is Henry Kissinger, the herpe who will not go away, being in cahoots with Obama and the string of tax evading people he is appointing. My point is: right fervor, wrong target. Take a deep breath.
3. I'm not a leftist, guy. Things are not black and white. Capitalism does not exist anywhere in the world right now, it is not you vs me. Really.

This is exactly the same rubbish that comes from over scrutiny of every new president, and believe me, Obama will do himself in just fine without your help. Actions speak louder than words. Republicans have been muzzled the last two elections and they are now taking pot shots at anything they can, it's the natural order of things. I expect another flag-burning amendment to come up just before the next congressional elections, like it does every 8 years or so when Republicans need a boost, and just about the time Democrats lose power they will start initiatives they know won't pass and they know the public in general doesn't support because they want reassurance that, if all else fails, well they still got the perceived victim class to go to bat for them. And everyone invokes Hitler, every time, without fail. God, it gets so tiring.

As for your earlier paragraph, please spare me the conservative indignation over the violence of the left. No, really, please. Labeling an entire broad spectrum of people based on the actions of the fringers shows just how little you know of variance, conflict and unholy alliances within parties because, unfortunately, thats how the two party system works, unless of course you are being entirely sarcastic and I'm missing your self aggrandizement. Now, if you don't mind, we can continue this discussion later. When you are done bombing the abortion clinic and ironing your confederate flag give me a call, I'll just be hanging around here making scat porn to fund my Marxist bake sale at the PETA headquarters.

[Lemur]

When you are done bombing the abortion clinic and ironing your confederate flag give me a call, I'll just be hanging around here making scat porn to fund my Marxist bake sale at the PETA headquarters.

If I believed in siggies, I would siggie this instantly. And I guess it would have to be a Backroom-only siggie, and I'm not even sure if those are working.

Anyway, epic sentence. This is why I read the Org. Normally I expect brilliant flights of rhetoric like this to come from DevDave, so it's an added pleasure to see it from you instead. I LOL muchly and bow in your general direction. Bravo!

[Strike For The South]

Can I get in on that scat porn?

So? That does not mean I do not pay close attention to the news and talk to people in the States regularly

.

It might help to be here if you are going to make those kind of accusations.

[Fixiwee]

Do you count Albania as a Western state now that it is in NATO? If so, it is 70% Muslim. Regardless of that, Britain does not have a Muslim majority - and yet...

Being part of the NATO does not make a western state. Turkey is part of the NATO and they have a Muslim majority. Suprise eh?
But that's not a western state.

What are you trying to prove with that link? This has nothing to do with the discussion?

[Major Robert Dump]

Not one dime of extra taxes will be paid by poor people.

Unless they smoke.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Being part of the NATO does not make a western state. Turkey is part of the NATO and they have a Muslim majority. Suprise eh?
But that's not a western state.

Definitions differ. I don't consider Albania or Turkey western either - I was trying to figure out yours.

What are you trying to prove with that link? This has nothing to do with the discussion?

It has everything to do with the discussion. You don't need a Muslim majority for Muslim influence or Islamic law.

[Lemur]

I don't care who's in charge, this is good stuff:

White House Corrects Conference Call Number After Directing Reporters to Sex Line

Journalists seeking to talk a little foreign policy with high-profile Obama administration officials live from the G20 meetings in London this week were solicited for phone sex instead after ringing up the toll-free number given by the White House.

In a press release, the White House accidentally listed a sex line number for journalists seeking an "on-the-record briefing call with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and National Security Advisor Jim Jones to discuss the NATO summit."

But after dialing, a soft-voiced female recording that was clearly not Clinton asked for a credit card number if you "feel like getting nasty."

[Fixiwee]

It has everything to do with the discussion. You don't need a Muslim majority for Muslim influence or Islamic law.

You are comparing a minority court with the discussion if the majority will have the sharia.
No offsense, but that's not an argument.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

You are comparing a minority court with the discussion if the majority will have the sharia.
No offsense, but that's not an argument.

Sure it is. It may be a minority court, but it is still legally binding. The fact there is Sharia law at all is disturbing, whether it is applied the minority and majority. I doubt I am the only one who believes that this will escalate the larger and more influential the population in question becomes.

[Fixiwee]

Sure it is. It may be a minority court, but it is still legally binding. The fact there is Sharia law at all is disturbing, whether it is applied the minority and majority. I doubt I am the only one who believes that this will escalate the larger and more influential the population in question becomes.

It seems we cannot agree on this issue here.

Have you read the post by Major Robert Dump? It says alot about "how" disturbing the Sharia is.

[KukriKhan]

Not one dime of extra taxes will be paid by poor people.

Unless they smoke.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

It's *cough* for teh *cough* chil'ren *cough-hackahhhhh- inhale*

Happy to support the kids. Works even if I buy 'net-ciggies from Ukraine, right?

[KukriKhan]

Meanwhile, back at the Castle, Mz O touches HRH. Is this an act of war? An event of eternal damnation? A breach of protocol ? A gesture of kindness? Two women surprised by their fondness for each other?

If Michelle came to my house to deliver an iPod filled with some songs she liked - and thought I might, too, - I'd be OK with her "guiding" me along as if I were a doddering old idiot who needed help... because I am. But, the queen, please.

Someone please tell her to not do that in Thailand or Japan. Hilarity might ensue.

[Major Robert Dump]

It's *cough* for teh *cough* chil'ren *cough-hackahhhhh- inhale*

Happy to support the kids. Works even if I buy 'net-ciggies from Ukraine, right?

I'm starting to think the tobacco tax was actually also a hand out to the cigarette manufacturers because, while people may smoke less packs due to the taxes, the taxes on rolling tobacco increased $25 per pound, which effectively raises the price of rolling tobacco by about 100%. So, people who save money by rolling their own are going to be saving practically nothing now and may go back to packs.

Wow, a tax that is 90-100% of the base price. Unbelievable.

[CountArach]

I just have to say it: I love this thread <3

[Major Robert Dump]

Hmmm.... tea bagging congress, I like this idea, especially when it involves U.S. Rep. Carol Shea-Porter. My god, this is hilarious.

http://www.wmur.com/news/19068098/detail.html

[InsaneApache]

Meanwhile, back at the Castle, Mz O touches HRH. Is this an act of war? An event of eternal damnation? A breach of protocol ? A gesture of kindness? Two women surprised by their fondness for each other?

If Michelle came to my house to deliver an iPod filled with some songs she liked - and thought I might, too, - I'd be OK with her "guiding" me along as if I were a doddering old idiot who needed help... because I am. But, the queen, please.

Someone please tell her to not do that in Thailand or Japan. Hilarity might ensue.

Yeah, just read it. Off with her hands and then her head.

YOU DO NOT TOUCH HER MAJESTY! SHE DOES NOT TOUCH YOU! (That's why she wears gloves)

Bloody colonials.

So there is room for theological argument as to whether the American reciprocity of touch was allowable given the social dynamics of the situation. (Less explicable was when President George W. Bush winked at the Queen.)

Also I love the caption. Mickey O is about 6 foot tall and black, Madge is about 4' 6" and white..hilarious.

[Lemur]

YOU DO NOT TOUCH HER MAJESTY! SHE DOES NOT TOUCH YOU! (That's why she wears gloves)

According to the press, 1960 called and it wants its monarch back.

When Michelle Obama put her arm round the Queen at Buckingham Palace, some of the more excitable elements of the media - particularly the Americans - suggested she may have been guilty of a breach of protocol.

They missed the real story, however. What was far more interesting was that the Queen put her arm round the First Lady.

It is less than 20 years ago that the Australian Prime Minister was branded “the Lizard of Oz” for committing the supposedly heinous crime of putting his hand on the Queen’s back during an official tour of Australia.

Now the Queen is not just putting up with physical gestures of affection from a woman she has only just met, but is reciprocating with one of her own. [...]

A breach of protocol? Hardly. Buckingham Palace was very relaxed today about the incident, and attitudes there have changed significantly since the days of Mr Keating and his lese-majesty. And no, they don’t issue instructions to people about not touching the Queen.

“This was a mutual and spontaneous display of affection and appreciation between The Queen and Michelle Obama,” said a Palace spokeswoman.

[InsaneApache]

At least she didn't shout "Yo Queenie!"