Obama Just Compared Christianity With Islam…At National Prayer Breakfast

[Statistikhengst]

No. You just want to think he only governs for the Left. Funny, that.

Obama a leftist? Hilarious. He looks like another corporate sellout to me, just like everyone else in Washington.

Oh for crying out loud. That's baby talk. Of course when they get to Washington they sell out.

That's a no brainer.

But they do sell out left or right. Get a grip.

Left or right politics is how they like to define it for the benefit of people like you.

People like me? Too funny.

Yeah you know, thoughtless and superficial.

Now, when you go for the jugular, uh...

oh, wait, you need no advice for me about that one. Seems you have it down pat!

 

[Liminal]

Oh you are missing it. He governs only for the left.

This is not even in question. Yes you won. Yes the left won. But when you become President you are to govern all of the people.

Why do you think Clinton is so beloved? Or Reagan? Because they didn't assume the highest position of the land and go "I won you lost".

Obama said this. You mimic him. It is wrong.

No. You just want to think he only governs for the Left. Funny, that.

Obama a leftist? Hilarious. He looks like another corporate sellout to me, just like everyone else in Washington.

In 50 years, Pres. Obama will go into the history books as a very centrist Republican, based on his policies en toto.

By that time FOX News will have helped shift the political dynamic so far to the right that history books will be altered to show how Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan were actually liberals.

What part of this discussion did you miss?

As a conservative I can quote the Palestinian Chronicle.

You will fit in here little asshole. You might as well just run to the flame zone right now.

As a conservative I'm sure you can quote all kinds of things.

 

[Synthaholic]

In this point, I agree with you. During the Clinton administration, the USA and Israel offered that sonofabitch Arafat 97% of what he wanted, and he still ditched it. I remember Clinton flipping out over Arafat, and deservedly so.

Just as the Republicans are ruled by a small subset of their base, so was Arafat. Which is why they're bad leaders.

 

[Liminal]

Obama a leftist? Hilarious. He looks like another corporate sellout to me, just like everyone else in Washington.

Oh for crying out loud. That's baby talk. Of course when they get to Washington they sell out.

That's a no brainer.

But they do sell out left or right. Get a grip.

Left or right politics is how they like to define it for the benefit of people like you.

People like me? Too funny.

Yeah you know, thoughtless and superficial.

Now, when you go for the jugular, uh...

oh, wait, you need no advice for me about that one. Seems you have it down pat!

I hate stooping to their level but sometimes that's all they understand.

 

[tinydancer]

We've already derailed the thread enough, so let's keep going.

Monica aside I only have one mega issue with Clinton. And that's Bosnia.

I don't blame him even over Rwanda. That's the Canuck side of me that to this day I try to get people penalized.

I think President Clinton was awesome in the sense that despite being a politically polar opposite of me this man was "hands across the aisle" and even if I didn't believe in some of his agendas I believed HE meant them in the heart of hearts.

 

[SAYIT]

[

For one with a history degree (online?) you certainly lack historical perspective. I suspect you are blinded by your ideological prism.
Global sores fester when America "turtles." Mideast oil, while no longer critical to our well being, is a necessary evil for much of the world. Allowing others to determine the fate of that oil without our influence is a recipe for global disaster, one that will not only negatively impact us but will create a mess that we most likely will have to clean up.

Also, it's kind of ******* arrogant to say that we have a right to decide what happens to THEIR Oil...

See if you can quote anything of mine in which I say "we have a right to decide what happens to THEIR Oil."

The part where you said...

Mideast oil, while no longer critical to our well being, is a necessary evil for much of the world. Allowing others to determine the fate of that oil without our influence is a recipe for global disaster, one that will not only negatively impact us but will create a mess that we most likely will have to clean up.

Well written, eh? And yet nowhere in that did I say or infer that "we have a right to decide what happens to THEIR Oil." I did say, however, that we should exert out influence. Evidently your English language skills could use some work. Or are you just conveniently ignorant?

 

[Synthaholic]

Wrong. He is OUR president. Only, butthurt Righties don't want to admit it.

Oh you are missing it. He governs only for the left.

This is not even in question. Yes you won. Yes the left won. But when you become President you are to govern all of the people.

Why do you think Clinton is so beloved? Or Reagan? Because they didn't assume the highest position of the land and go "I won you lost".

Obama said this. You mimic him. It is wrong.

No. You just want to think he only governs for the Left. Funny, that.

Then you are a fool if you believe that. I'm not trying to be nasty here. I'm making a serious political judgement call that most politicos would agree with.

Obama's legacy will be that he will be the first President ever to only govern for his electorate.

Only.

Not for the people. Only for the people that elected him.

The First. And I pray to God the last.

Again, since you ignored it the first time:

Is that why he spent the first 6 years of his administration compromising and bending over backward to accommodate Republicans?

Considering he had the House and the Senate all as D's in his first years.

Yes he did! And did he use that total control to implement a Single-Payer healthcare system like Liberals wanted, or did he accommodate Republicans by adopting the Right-Wing, Heritage Foundation, Romneycare?

I rest my case.

But if you need more . . .

Come on don't lie. Then he had Reid blocking in the Senate for the last couple of years?

"He" didn't have Reid do a thing. Harry Reid doesn't take orders, and Harry Reid certainly doesn't need a one-term Senator explaining to him how to run the Senate.

Harry Reid blocked House bills that contained poison pills and items included for the sole purpose of embarrassing the president.

Why aren't you concerned with Boehner blocking Senate Bills? Obama's Jobs bill that called for spending on infrastructure - not controversial - has been sitting on Boehner's desk since 2011.

Where's your outrage?

And he hates conservatives. He let's it be known all the time.

By beating them, politically? OK.

 

[Kosh]

In this point, I agree with you. During the Clinton administration, the USA and Israel offered that sonofabitch Arafat 97% of what he wanted, and he still ditched it. I remember Clinton flipping out over Arafat, and deservedly so.

Just as the Republicans are ruled by a small subset of their base, so was Arafat. Which is why they're bad leaders.

Says the far left drone!

 

[Clementine]

The liberal media has completely ignored Obama's radical comments at the Prayer breakfast. I am thinking that means that a lot of the useful idiots are unaware that he equated the crusades with Islamic terrorism.

Network Blackout of Obama Bashing Christianity Continues NBC Spends 20 Minutes on 50 Shades of Grey

 

[Kosh]

Oh you are missing it. He governs only for the left.

This is not even in question. Yes you won. Yes the left won. But when you become President you are to govern all of the people.

Why do you think Clinton is so beloved? Or Reagan? Because they didn't assume the highest position of the land and go "I won you lost".

Obama said this. You mimic him. It is wrong.

No. You just want to think he only governs for the Left. Funny, that.

Then you are a fool if you believe that. I'm not trying to be nasty here. I'm making a serious political judgement call that most politicos would agree with.

Obama's legacy will be that he will be the first President ever to only govern for his electorate.

Only.

Not for the people. Only for the people that elected him.

The First. And I pray to God the last.

Again, since you ignored it the first time:

Is that why he spent the first 6 years of his administration compromising and bending over backward to accommodate Republicans?

Considering he had the House and the Senate all as D's in his first years.

Yes he did! And did he use that total control to implement a Single-Payer healthcare system like Liberals wanted, or did he accommodate Republicans by adopting the Right-Wing, Heritage Foundation, Romneycare?

I rest my case.

But if you need more . . .

Come on don't lie. Then he had Reid blocking in the Senate for the last couple of years?

"He" didn't have Reid do a thing. Harry Reid doesn't take orders, and Harry Reid certainly doesn't need a one-term Senator explaining to him how to run the Senate.

Harry Reid blocked House bills that contained poison pills and items included for the sole purpose of embarrassing the president.

Why aren't you concerned with Boehner blocking Senate Bills? Obama's Jobs bill that called for spending on infrastructure - not controversial - has been sitting on Boehner's desk since 2011.

Where's your outrage?

And he hates conservatives. He let's it be known all the time.

By beating them, politically? OK.

JFK was a Conservative (set by the far left standards of today), so do you hate JFK?

 

[Synthaholic]

Correct:

52.87% to 45.60%, +7.26%, 365-173

-and-

51.01% to 47.15%, +3.86%, 332-206.

Yepp.

That was some monumental ass-whipping.

Yet Republicans didn't say "The American people have spoken", working WITH the country's choice. They have worked against America's choice.

Like you all worked with the "country" under Obama? please get in the back of the line now. you aren't in control anymore

That made no sense at all. Put the bong down.

I have no idea who or what you are responding to, since whomever it is must be on my Ignore List.

That's the thing about Ignore Lists: I'm no longer aggravated by retards and morons, yet I no longer get to laugh at retards and morons.

Whatcha' gonna do?

Well, I do have a select few on ignore, I mean, the absolute dregs of the dregs of life. The less dreggier of the dregs I don't place on ignore; I see their putrid stuff, laugh a little and then go on. That really pisses them off, you know. One even got so pissed off, he actually PMd me and demanded that I respond to him. LOL. I deleted the convo and just went right on. Muchas Coolness!

But I'll give you a hint: the recipient of my answer likes to bake her own trailer court spinach pot okra chocolate wood shaving more spinach more pot a little more okra cigarette ash chocolate cookies!!!

guno

Ummm...Stephanie?

 

[Synthaholic]

By the way, do you lefties know one of the reasons that the right loves him? Clinton?

Because he was the only President in our lifetime that truly sought peace between Israel and Palestine?

Because he achieved that peace but Arafat rejected it?

I will go to my grave blessing Bill Clinton for having done what no other man has done.

It's obvious that you view Clinton through Canadian lenses, not American Right-Wing lenses.

Makes me believe that during Clinton's terms, you lived in Canada.

A draft dodger, perhaps???

Can you believe what TD is trying to shovel? That Republicans loved Clinton?

That's some revisionist history for ya!

 

[Synthaholic]

In this point, I agree with you. During the Clinton administration, the USA and Israel offered that sonofabitch Arafat 97% of what he wanted, and he still ditched it. I remember Clinton flipping out over Arafat, and deservedly so.

Just as the Republicans are ruled by a small subset of their base, so was Arafat. Which is why they're bad leaders.

Says the far left drone!

Do you deny that the Republicans are ruled by the most extreme in their Party?

 

[Synthaholic]

No. You just want to think he only governs for the Left. Funny, that.

Then you are a fool if you believe that. I'm not trying to be nasty here. I'm making a serious political judgement call that most politicos would agree with.

Obama's legacy will be that he will be the first President ever to only govern for his electorate.

Only.

Not for the people. Only for the people that elected him.

The First. And I pray to God the last.

Again, since you ignored it the first time:

Is that why he spent the first 6 years of his administration compromising and bending over backward to accommodate Republicans?

Considering he had the House and the Senate all as D's in his first years.

Yes he did! And did he use that total control to implement a Single-Payer healthcare system like Liberals wanted, or did he accommodate Republicans by adopting the Right-Wing, Heritage Foundation, Romneycare?

I rest my case.

But if you need more . . .

Come on don't lie. Then he had Reid blocking in the Senate for the last couple of years?

"He" didn't have Reid do a thing. Harry Reid doesn't take orders, and Harry Reid certainly doesn't need a one-term Senator explaining to him how to run the Senate.

Harry Reid blocked House bills that contained poison pills and items included for the sole purpose of embarrassing the president.

Why aren't you concerned with Boehner blocking Senate Bills? Obama's Jobs bill that called for spending on infrastructure - not controversial - has been sitting on Boehner's desk since 2011.

Where's your outrage?

And he hates conservatives. He let's it be known all the time.

By beating them, politically? OK.

JFK was a Conservative (set by the far left standards of today), so do you hate JFK?

JFK was no more Conservative than Clinton or Obama.

 

[Jroc]

There is a battle within Islam between the radicals and the moderates. Obama speaking about Christians with his stupid Rev Wright style lecture was just that not relevant and not helpful

No. He made a comparison that is not only historically correct, it was also very smart. For by doing so, he gains support from islamic governments who are combatting ISIL, which is exactly what we need. You only have to be smart enough to understand this.

Really so which ones might those be? Egypt? Which does have a president who is doing that, while not being supported by Obama? who? Libya? The islamonazi regime of Iran? who?

I wonder where Israel is in all this? I haven't heard about any Israeli Air Force missions being flown against ISIS. I wonder why? Seems like we could count on military support from Israel in a situation like this. But of course if that happened we would loose the political, diplomatic, and military support of Arab nations. Which brings me to something I've been wondering about. We are told Israel is our close ally. How does this relationship benefit us? How are they actually an ally?

Israel fights the islamonazis everyday where you been?

No, they fight the people who they took land from, who - for some reason - resent it.

Yeah that's it discuss it with your fellow clown cult member.

 

[tinydancer]

By the way, do you lefties know one of the reasons that the right loves him? Clinton?

Because he was the only President in our lifetime that truly sought peace between Israel and Palestine?

Because he achieved that peace but Arafat rejected it?

I will go to my grave blessing Bill Clinton for having done what no other man has done.

It's obvious that you view Clinton through Canadian lenses, not American Right-Wing lenses.

Makes me believe that during Clinton's terms, you lived in Canada.

A draft dodger, perhaps???

I have a wonderful story about two young men Doug and Arthur and Myrtle Beach and my mum running them to a place called Waterdown Ontario. My mother brought home two so called draft dodgers back to Canada. With my Baba helping sneak them across.

It's an amazing story. It's a big story. It's so much more than this. I fell in love with Doug. Both returned home to serve. Doug was never the same. Doug went on. I guess that's a nice way of putting it. Arthur stayed my friend over all these years.

My parents were honored by Arthurs family and become close friends till they died.

Arthur is one of those people I have on my bucket list that I want to hug again.

 

[tinydancer]

Then you are a fool if you believe that. I'm not trying to be nasty here. I'm making a serious political judgement call that most politicos would agree with.

Obama's legacy will be that he will be the first President ever to only govern for his electorate.

Only.

Not for the people. Only for the people that elected him.

The First. And I pray to God the last.

Again, since you ignored it the first time:

Is that why he spent the first 6 years of his administration compromising and bending over backward to accommodate Republicans?

Considering he had the House and the Senate all as D's in his first years.

Yes he did! And did he use that total control to implement a Single-Payer healthcare system like Liberals wanted, or did he accommodate Republicans by adopting the Right-Wing, Heritage Foundation, Romneycare?

I rest my case.

But if you need more . . .

Come on don't lie. Then he had Reid blocking in the Senate for the last couple of years?

"He" didn't have Reid do a thing. Harry Reid doesn't take orders, and Harry Reid certainly doesn't need a one-term Senator explaining to him how to run the Senate.

Harry Reid blocked House bills that contained poison pills and items included for the sole purpose of embarrassing the president.

Why aren't you concerned with Boehner blocking Senate Bills? Obama's Jobs bill that called for spending on infrastructure - not controversial - has been sitting on Boehner's desk since 2011.

Where's your outrage?

And he hates conservatives. He let's it be known all the time.

By beating them, politically? OK.

JFK was a Conservative (set by the far left standards of today), so do you hate JFK?

JFK was no more Conservative than Clinton or Obama.

Seriously you are nuts.

JFK was conservative. Or as I was in those days a classical liberal.

 

[tinydancer]

In this point, I agree with you. During the Clinton administration, the USA and Israel offered that sonofabitch Arafat 97% of what he wanted, and he still ditched it. I remember Clinton flipping out over Arafat, and deservedly so.

Just as the Republicans are ruled by a small subset of their base, so was Arafat. Which is why they're bad leaders.

Ditto dems. But what are you doing to change it?

Look when I first got out here I didn't want to be here. I was supposed to be in Louisiana and be breeding my Catahoulas living a southern gently life.

Katrina rolled in. My life changed.

I'm stuck in and blessedly so southern Manitoba. But I still find my causes.I still find purpose even politically out here.

You're about to see me lay down and act up to block a hydro line. You'll be able to go "I know that girl".

If you care Syn truly take the time away from this board and make a change.

When you see me pro Keystone I think you're going to have a freak out on what I am about to do up and coming.

 

[Kondor3]

So, you do not believe that 'they' (the victorious Allies of WWI) should not have stood more firmly against Hitler in 1938 in Munich?

So, you do not believe that we should stand firm and watchful against any serious Threat Vector emanating from a large-scale, hostile, alien belief system?

No, I think Chamberlain made the entirely right call at Munich...

Yes, I believe that you think Chamberlain made the right call, but it was helpful to have you confirm that. Thank you. I had expected nothing less.

Neville Chamberlain's implicit surrender at Munich was the Allies' very last chance to stop Adolf Hitler before he grew too strong for the rest of Europe to handle.

This is recognized as a mistake by most analysts and students of modern history, but it does not surprise me that you disagree with them.

...The Germans had a right to the Sudetenland, which was mostly inhabited by Germans...

So, the Germans had a right to the Sudatenland (part of Czechoslovakia), and, by way of extension, Austria, and the German-speaking areas of Switzerland, which were all mostly inhabited by Germans or German-speakers?

...The Slovaks didn't want to be in the same country as the Czechs and Germany already had the Czechs surrounded on three sides...

What has this to do with whether or not Chamberlain (the Allies - the British and French, specifically) should have firmly denied Hitler his next Anschluss?

The Czechs were safe for weeks - or months - behind their border fortifications - among the most formidable in Europe - until the Allies could join them on the ground.

Trouble is, the gutless, nutless British and French governments would not stand firmly against The Enemy, and, ultimately, paid the price for their cowardice, and for their desertion of a pledged ally, and their respective Peoples paid a vastly greater price within months of this abandonment and treachery, greater by several orders of magnitude.

...What Chamberlain did that was stupid was to give a blank check to the Polish Colonels that he had their back in case of a war with Germany, instead of twisting their arm to return the Danzig Corridor...

Wow.

Had you been The Deciderer in Europe in 1938-1939, you would have given Hitler all the lands in which Germans or German-speakers were a majority, and you would have gone back on your earlier pledged word to defend your Eastern ally (Poland), and you would have surrendered Danzig, to prove your weakness to the Wolf at your door.

You and Neville Chamberlain would have made good bedfellows and fellow travelers.

...Now, here's the thing. ISIL is really, really scary and I know you are wetting yourself every time you watch Fox News because you're weally, weally scared, little Kondor...

My, my, my... just a wee bit testy today, aren't we, Princess?

I watch BBC World News and France 24 and the English language editions of Der Spiegel and RT and CBS and ABC and NBC and Fox and CNN and others.

I listen to both Liberal and Conservative talk-radio in roughly equal measure.

I'm not scared... I merely add my voice to the large and loud and necessary chorus who sound the warning klaxon about Radical Militant Islam.

By virtue of your affinity with Neville Chamberlain, and your obvious candidacy for the role of Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkey, it seems safe to ignore your unprovoked and insulting remarks, but, I understand that you have to mask your Chamberlain-esque position with a show of bravado of some kind or another, so, have a field day with it.

...But they arent' an existential threat to the United States...

The trick of the exercise is to (a) recognize such existential threats in their formative years, then (b) neutralize such potential threats, before they can materialize.

But I would not expect a Neville Chamberlain -wannabe, to either recognize such a need, nor support such common sense interventions.

...If the people over there can't get it together to fight them, I'm really not going to get worked up over.

Good.

Don't get worked up over it.

As a matter of fact, stay out of it, altogether.

People with more common sense and more political nerve than a Neville Chamberlain will handle this.

 

[Mustang]

Channeling his Rev Wright..

..

"And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ."

Both the crusades and the Inquisition happened in the 13th Century or earlier, many hundreds of years before the establishment of the United States.

"In our own country, slavery, Jim crow, so often was justified in the name of Christ," Obama continued. And he mentioned the collision of faiths in India.

"So it's not unique to one group or one religion. There is a tendency in us -- a sinful tendency -- that can pervert and distort our faith."

Obama People Committed Terrible Deeds in the Name of Christ CNS News

How ridiculous. Having studied history, I know for a fact that Christianity has a violent history that makes the current Islamic atrocities look tame in comparison.