The Glade 4.0

The only person here with any paranoid delusional crap is you. As for SG, you were starting right on on your usual BS of calling her post "misleading" (and you also later called it "dishonest") with no backup whatsoever except your own assertions that it was. [/quoe]

I provided more than enough back up to show why I felt her post was misleading. Just because you ignored it doesn't mean it was there. And no, I'm not the paranoid delusional one around here. People who believe that Barak Obama is BFFs with a terrorist are. People that believed his wife was a radical black militant are. People that bought into the bullshit about death panels are. People that refuse to accept that global warming is a scientific reality are. The right wing in this country has gone absolutely **** bonkers. It is reflected to varying degrees on this board via the conservatives that post here.



Just because someone works in a field, and just because they are successful, does not mean that their point is valid. Argue it on the merits of the point, not the one making it. Her post was misleading. It painted a very negative an inaccurate picture of medicare, and did not provide context regarding private plans as a means of comparison. As a result, it simply portrayed a very popular and effective government health care program as some sort of monster that makes old people go blind.

If you supported the teabagging parties or attended the rallies, you were rubbing elbows with white supremacists. Is that something you're proud of. When you look around the room at the people you stand shoulder to shoulder with, do the white hoods bug you?

If you supported the teabagging parties or attended the rallies, you were rubbing elbows with white supremacists. Is that something you're proud of. When you look around the room at the people you stand shoulder to shoulder with, do the white hoods bug you?

I provided more than enough back up to show why I felt her post was misleading. Just because you ignored it doesn't mean it was there. And no, I'm not the paranoid delusional one around here. People who believe that Barak Obama is BFFs with a terrorist are. People that believed his wife was a radical black militant are. People that bought into the bullshit about death panels are. People that refuse to accept that global warming is a scientific reality are. The right wing in this country has gone absolutely **** bonkers. It is reflected to varying degrees on this board via the conservatives that post here.

Just because someone works in a field, and just because they are successful, does not mean that their point is valid. Argue it on the merits of the point, not the one making it. Her post was misleading. It painted a very negative an inaccurate picture of medicare, and did not provide context regarding private plans as a means of comparison. As a result, it simply portrayed a very popular and effective government health care program as some sort of monster that makes old people go blind.

Racist is as racist does. The same with homophobia. You generally like to argue that gay rights are something you can "disagree" with and not be a bigot. That's like saying "I'm not racist against blacks, I just don't think they should have the right to vote or marry white people". Yes, opposing marriage equality *is* bigoted. There is no way to get around it. Holding a black man to standards different than you hold a white man is *also* racist. And people do that with Obama every single day.

If you supported the teabagging parties or attended the rallies, you were rubbing elbows with white supremacists. Is that something you're proud of. When you look around the room at the people you stand shoulder to shoulder with, do the white hoods bug you?

Just because a man is a racist does not automatically make everything he says incorrect. Though, one would be wise to ask oneself questions about what his angle is on any issue he supports or defends.

That is a good idea for any political speaker though, always ask why, and who benefits.

Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.

Khross - without a doubt. And eventually, he got a lot better, stopped advocating violence, and began to find a better way to work towards solutions.

Indeed. I would argue that Malcom X's anger was justified, but his rhetoric was counterproductive, toxic, and ultimately racist. He's an example of how someone can abandon that sort of thing in favor of a more peaceful way.

Interesting how Islam brought him to a more peaceful way, and now is the target of so much hate.

Well, 'Islam' also originally brought him to his violent methodology under Black Islam and Elijah Muhammed.

The point is that true Islam is much more understanding and peaceful than its radical interpretations.

Which one is "true Islam" would depend which Muslim you ask, of course. Osama bin Laden is going to give you a different answer than the average citizen on the streets of Morocco.

While they may represent a minority, "radical" interpretations of Islam still appear to represent a significant enough percentage of their religious demographic to control several nations, which is a problem.

It's just intriguing to me that X's violence and reform from violence both stemmed from the same holy book.

I think that could be said of many people, in many religions.