And if that were the case I’d be doing more to support the First Amendment rights which you seem so quick to claim others are taking from you than you are.

Whose side is that, “Sean”? Not your side. Clearly.

Tell, you what, “Sean”, you suck up to and protect crazy right wing extremists like “Frank DiSalle” spout their toxic, vicious rhetoric that creates the atmosphere that gets Doctors assassinated and medical clinics bombed and I’ll make sure you get regularly recognized as an Official Competitor for the Neo-Broderite Concern Troll Prize.

You clearly win the local competition for Concern Troll here at OW and are clearly a front runner for a regional award with your persistent attacks of those that criticize right wing extremists.

News Reference: So now right winger “Frank DiSalle” is against free speech.

Oh, please. He said your opinion was irrelevant and unwanted and you start crying “I’m being oppressed!”. Stop being a WATB. It doesn’t help your side.

“Your opinion, in addition to being a baseless slander, was both inappropriate and unasked for .”

So now right winger “Frank DiSalle” is against free speech.

What kind of restrictions to free speech do you propose, “Frank”?

Be specific.

Would your proposed restrictions to free speech include banning your verbalized support for the violent rhetoric that encourages terrorism?

Or is your support for violent rhetoric OK but my pointing out your support for violent rhetoric not OK?

IOKIYAR? It’s OK If You’re A Right-Winger?

Right Winger’s First Rule: Rules Are For Other People.

That comment was neither addressed to you, nor did it concern you.

Your opinion, in addition to being a baseless slander, was both inappropriate and unasked for .

“Newsie’s” Firs Rule: Make Sh*t Up

…well, because when “Frank DiSalle” argues on behalf of terrorists and rapists he’s doing so with the expectation that he’s the dominant party which needs to be respected even while he’s being disrespectful.

Right Winger’s First Rule: Rules Are For Other People.

Good job .

I worked as a magazine editor for ten years, and I had a book published. Apparently no one else has any trouble understanding what I write, which suggests that the communication problem lies at your end of the conversation.

As a magazine editor I was often presented with incoherent, unprofessional writing like yours, and the job was to translate it into English. That assumes that there is a useful signal buried somewhere in the noise. When the noise overwhelms the signal and no one is paying me to extract meaning, there is no reason to make the attempt.

I realize how important it is to be dismissive of opposition as unworthy, when you have nothing to say .

Is that the point you were trying to make, Repack ?

The definitions of the words do not help when they are not arranged in a meaningful fashion, as yours were not. You attempted a metaphor that conveyed nothing, but had some stirring sounding words that appeal to macho masturbatory fantasies in people with limited analytical skills.

I’d like to buy you for what I think you’re worth, and sell you for what you think you’re worth.

Do you see how much better that works?

fore·sight (fôrst, fr-)
n.
1. Perception of the significance and nature of events before they have occurred.
2. Care in providing for the future; prudence.

strength (strngkth, strngth, strnth)
n.
1. The state, property, or quality of being strong.
* * *
5. Capacity or potential for effective action: a show of strength.

I trust that resolves your difficulties, Mr Martin

Excellent point. Let’s do away with such tax write-offs to all who give to faith-based organizations.

Unless of course we are speaking of the charitable donations made to terrorist organizations.

As I’ve seen it, the list of such organizations considered “terrorist,” much like the no-fly list, is filled with innocent names. I’m all for Obama correcting that, as well as getting somebody to work on the no-fly and persona non grata lists. It would be nice to see Abbas Kiarostami talk about his films or hear Yusuf Islam live.

What the hell does that mean? Pretty collection of words, but doesn’t really say much.

Unless of course we are speaking of the charitable donations made to terrorist organizations.

Sure it does. It’s a funny sounding furrin’ word that JUST GOES TO PRoVE OBAMA IS A TERRORIST!!!!!1111!!!

It means nothing to me? Really? Actually, it means a lot.
Spiderj, anytime a politician, any politician, speaks of money, government, and religion……in the same sentence, my antenna goes up.
Ditto for the Bush initiative.

reluctantly, I gotta agree.

Cite one. Obama’s speech did a better job of reaching out to Muslims as people than any speech I can think of in the past 25 years.

I’m assuming that you were equally up in arms about Bush’s “faith-based initiatives.” Obama mentioning the zakat means nothing to you, but it means a lot to his audience. It’s a relatively small grievance being addressed, which shows openness to discussion.

Farris, as I believe I mentioned to somebody here before (possibly you, o broken record), how lovely for you to live in a world where you’ve never found yourself at odds with a longtime friend and never had to come to a decision about whether or not the relationship can continue…even without the high stakes of a presidential campaign in the background.

I give you props for not repeating “OBAMA THREW HIS GRANDMA UNDER THE BUS!”

President Barack Hussein Obama, Cairo University, June 4, 2009

ZAKAT. Ummmm? Why is the President bringing this up? Why does he care?
Maybe you guys should look it up. AIG? Church and State?