You avoided the simple and direct questions. I will repeat them here: 1. Are you defending his post where he attacks the thread starter? 2. Did you feel that was appropriate? 3. Do you feel like his thread on Tom Cruise is somehow more worthy that this thread - so much so that his comment is not hypocritical? As for your 'answer', here is my reply: If you think I have supported an attack on you, please show me and I can defend it or not. My criticism of guru in this thread does not lose merit because I did not come to your defense on some other thread. C'mon. One has nothing to do with the other. You are better than that. Second, I asked you about the Tom Cruise thread versus this thread. You avoided that and instead compared it to threads you don't like - nothing to do with the question at hand. Are you that unable to call a spade a spade? He mocked someone for posting what he deemed a non-news worthy thread when he just posted a Tom Cruise thread a couple days ago. That was hypocrisy defined. The answer you chose to give reflects on your integrity.
I replied to his post to me. I am not trying to discredit him, I am trying to give him every opportunity to explain his apparent defense of your rude hypocritical behavior. As for your comment, I already addressed you. I have nothing left to say to you.
Lost me with that contradictory statement. How is being critical anti-American? And how is it offensive to you? If BUSH is a moron that has misled this country, who has lied to ALL of us, who can't stitch a sentence together, who's policies have contributed to the worsening of our economy and much much more (the list is quite long) than how can anyone take offense when someone calls him for what he is? You have to understand that you are not dealing with angels over here. These are corrupt, dishonest crooks that have sided with the war mongers and the war profiteers. So calling them names is quite mild. They need to be held accountable for their actions!
1. No. 2. I didn't even read it. 3. Absolutely. This is a politics and religion forum, and we're short on Scientology threads. The free market at work. I was criticizing specifically the merit of your criticism. I have seen you jump on Ron Paul several times in the forum, goading his supporters, and then for you to claim that someone who acts counter to Paul would be doing him a disservice, seems illogical to me. Answered in this post. I think it is worthy. Guru is a loose cannon. But he's not my son. That said, I do not think you show Tom Cruise very much respect for his roles in Top Gun and A Few Good Men. The manner in which you ask your questions, reflects on your integrity.
Bring critical isn't. I was generally speaking of some of the anti-American talk that is passed off as anti-Bush talk. I did not mean to imply that I thought anti-Bush talk was somehow inherently un-American. That was clear from my own comments about Bush in this very thread. You are just being disingenuous again. Here is what I wrote: "I do not support Bush's policies in any way. I think he has been a disaster of a President. I think he has done great damage to the reputation of my great country. I never supported him and I think he has done many things that are in violation of the laws of this country. I do respect the office of the President. I do support my country. While I do not agree with Bush, much of the Anti-Bush talk here on DP is thinly veiled and is truly anti-American at its core and that is offensive to me." Risky Business was by far his best Movie. You still miss the point. I think BOTH threads are worthy, that being the very reason his comment were so inappropriate. This was not some thread posted as a veiled hit piece on Ron Paul. It was just an ordinary story and then Guru rudely declared that he was arbiter of what is news worthy. That fact coupled with his own thread made his comment not only rude, but hypocritical.
Fair enough. Is there a particular reason you would list them in alphabetical order? And on that subject, if being pro-life and pro-2nd Amendment are important issues for you, then surely you recognize than none of those 3 candidates are strong on either of them. Btw, I'm surprised you aren't voting in the primary for someone quite involved in the candidate discussion threads. You do know that Israel has 200 nukes, and one of the most powerful militaries in the ME? They are far from a canary in a coalmine. That implies that Israel is weak, and they wouldn't have attacked that Syrian base/plant or taken out Saddam's nuclear plant in the 80s if they weren't capable. Both times they acted against the wishes of the United States. I think the image of Israel as a waif, surrounded by wolves has purposely been played up. If there is one country in the ME I would be most concerned about as a citizen of the ME, it would probably be Israel. If they wanted to, they could smoke the entire region in half a day. I don't buy the anti-Americanism. I'm not big on preaching to people about what it is to be American, but I'm pretty sure your first duty is to the Constitution and rule of law, long before whoever is the strong man occupying the White House at any given time. There is nothing wrong with respecting the office of the President, but the anti-federalists specifically tried to design a system of checks and balances to avoid that office being the equivalent of a Hero, King or Dictator. Right, but just because you are following a policy of non-intervention, doesn't give you free license to harangue or demand answers from other posters regarding their candidate or their candidate's positions. I am a big fan of, "if you don't vote, you don't have a right to complain". Feel free to PM me whenever you like.
I did not want anyone to mistakenly infer anything from the order. I disagree. I think the next two Justices, if picked by a Republican, is likely to appoint strictly pro-life justices. I think that would swing the balance of the court and could possibly end legal abortion. I do not think there is any nominee who will materially alter the current state of gun ownership. So, on balance in this election, for the Supreme Court, I prefer the democrats over the republicans based on how I think they will pick. This is not a science. I think you misunderstand the expression. The canary is not a symbol of weakness. Canaries are known for their sensitivity. That is how I view Israel. I think the success of groups like Hamas and Hezbullah against Israel is a harbinger of what the US will face. For the exact reasons you point out. They are powerful and strong, with a mighty armed forces, like the US. Wouldn't you agree that if something bad happened to Israel is would be a sign of some kind? I would see it as a dire warning. Of the countries in the Middle East, I do not consider Israel a threat to the United States. Iran on the other hand is a threat. Do you think Israel poses a threat to the United States? (and I mean a direct threat to us. I am not asking if our support of Israel brings hatred towards us. We can talk about that another time) And we don't. Everything will work and follow the Constitution and I have no doubt Bush will simply walk out of office when his term is over. Do you think otherwise? Then why all the puffery about being a King or Dictator? Feel free to call me out on my behavior. I am man enough to stand by it or admit when I screw up. People who support Ron Paul don't have to answer questions in threads about him, but I have every right to ask questions. Usually, I don't want an answer from anyone here I want the candidate to answer. I am free to demand that all I want. Don't I have a right to point out the failings of Ron Paul if I want to? I do vote, and will vote in the Primary. You can PM me after the vote if you want to know who I end up voting for.
The great pipe dream of judges ruling against abortion. Sorry but it's not going to happen. It's what the Christian Right holds out for every election, I think the Republicans dangle it just to lead them on, and on, and on, and on... The canary is a surrogate. It's not meant to fly or be free, but in captivity, yes as a warning sign. I'll reply to the rest later, gotta run.
I gotta be careful around here talking about Israel, inevitably someone will label me an anti-Semite. If something bad happens to Israel, it will be bad for everyone for sure. But of course, if something bad happens anywhere, it's usually bad for other people. I do consider Israel a threat, but not for the reasons some folks might assume. We put ourselves in a very precarious position supporting the one country in the region surrounded by enemies. Put aside whatever moral arguments exist for or against, and just look at it tactically for a moment. Every one of our actions, influences Israel's relations with others in the region, and likewise every one of their actions influences our relations. Right or wrong, it's a dangerous relationship to maintain. No, I don't think Israel poses any more of a threat to the US than Iran does. Most of the threat of danger to America comes from Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran were threats to Israel first and foremost in my opinion. Nothing is following the Constitution now. What makes you think the trend towards disobeying the law will change? McCain pushed for McCain-Feingold which is a massive attack on the First Amendment. Clinton and Obama have supported the Patriot Act, as has Johnny Mac. I'm not bringing them up because you may support them, but that they are admittedly front runners. It's not puffery when I talk about Kings and Dictators. The Founders were very conscious of Imperial power which was why they seceded from the mother country in the first place. The checks and balances put in place, as well as the narrow "true" powers of the President reflect those perspectives. You're more than welcome to criticize Ron Paul as far as I am concerned, I just wouldn't be too anxious expecting a response.
It is not just China cracking down on porn, it is the US as well. Many adult webmasters in the US have much stricter legalities to deal with now than ever. Now every sexually suggestive image you have on your site, you are supposed to keep a record of that models picture along with her id card, address, etc. You can be audited at any time, if you can't prove she is over 18 you could go to jail. You are responsible for every single image. Even if you keep records someone could complain and say that your site is obscene. So US is much stricter than in the past, it is not just China.
Considering they are already controlling population , I doubt confiscating reading materials and movies to pass the time is going to benefit them in any way except head straight back to the bedroom