EvilMonkey

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 15, 2015 -> 08:10 AM) I didn't say there was no chance, I said there was no evidence. Unlike the shooting where there is actual evidence. You would bet 50-50 on them torching their own building but fight anyone that says there is a chance the guy shot those other people over religion. You have direct quotes from the guy being explicit he is against religions. You have nothing on the bombing. Why are the bombers 50-50 and the shooter 0? And I believe I clarified that I said there was so far no evidence that he singled them out because of one specific religion. Being a godless liberal atheist it is clear he hated all religions. But to say he singled them out because of Islam, so far, would be wrong. Is gther a chance? Always a chance. Oh, here is yet another case of Muslims making s*** up to play the victim game. http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2015/02/mu...tened-her.html/ A UT-Arlington student who claimed she was threatened at gunpoint on campus this week admitted Friday that she’d lied, a university spokeswoman said....The student also posted on social media that the man might have targeted her because she is Muslim. In a Facebook post, she referred to the killings of three Muslim students this week in Chapel Hill, N.C.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 14, 2015 -> 03:17 PM) Zero evidence that the guy shot the people for being Muslim. This evidence that they torched their own building? Really? Tex, I like you but you have to really stop this. I NEVER SAID they torched their own building. I said I would bet 50-50 that they did. You said that doesn't happen, I showed you instances where they have damaged their own stuff/hurt their own people and claimed Islamophobia. Read and quit trying changing words in your replies to make things seem better or worse.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 14, 2015 -> 01:30 PM) yep, can't trust them. Zero evidence for that btw. Not like it hasn't been done before. And as usual, CAIR and other blowhards who scream 'Islamophobia' never say a word once it was proven that the incident they got their panties in a wad over was false. A 47-year-old Moroccan imam who was caught vandalizing his own mosque with anti-Islamic statements has been fined 1000 Euros and expelled from France, La Republique reports. http://www.dailystormer.com/arab-imam-caug...ed-from-france/ Asif Mohammad Khan, 28, who is Muslim, was arrested the day of the burglaries and vandalism at the Fresno Digestive Center, 7405 N. Fresno St., and the Islamic Cultural Center near Nees and Maple avenues. http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/12/27/430392...1#storylink=cpy McALLEN, Tex., Sept. 29 - The owner of a Middle Eastern meat market who had said he was the victim of a hate crime in this border town was arrested and arraigned Tuesday on a felony arson charge that he set fire to his own business. The man, Amjad Abunar, had complained that "Go Home" was twice spray-painted on a door of his Al Madinah Market before a fire on Aug. 6 that gutted the small delicatessen. Only last week, the graffiti and fire were cited as evidence by a Washington advocacy group that hate crimes against Muslims were on the rise in Texas(False but true, eh? ) http://www.webcitation.org/mainframe.php EL CAJON — The eight-month investigation into the beating death of an Iraqi woman in her El Cajon dining room has led to the arrest of her husband, police announced Friday, putting to rest any notion that the mother of five was the victim of a hate crime. http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http:...date=2013-07-17

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 13, 2015 -> 08:45 PM) While we're up with it, Islamic Center in Houston burned by arsonist today. 50-50 it was an inside job. Would not be the first time a Muslim damaged their own centers, faked a crime and so on to gain attention, push an agenda, etc.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 13, 2015 -> 02:33 PM) Doesn't help that the POTUS' statement basically affirms the race-baiting, saying that people shouldn't be killed because of their color/religion. But Jews targeted by Muslim terrorists in a jewish grocery store were just 'random victims of violence'.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 13, 2015 -> 02:26 PM) I guess I haven't been clear. I am saying his anti-religion posts have moved it past zero evidence that it could be motivated by some anti-religious stance. It doesn't matter which religion. It could be Christian, Jewish, Islam, Buddha, etc. Are you suggesting as a cop investigating you wouldn't check out that angle and just run with the parking space story? No, I am suggesting that the Muslims running around crying about 'Islamaphobia' need to STFU for a moment or three because while there is a chance it was religiously motivated, their specific religion may not have mattered. Christian, Buddist, whatever, wrong place, wrong time.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 13, 2015 -> 01:53 PM) He is anti all religions. But he isn't against Islam? My point is there is a basis that it *could* be religious motivated. You said zero evidence, there is evidence that religion is something that sets him off, that is something, not nothing. Whether that moves the needle to 3 or 11, I won't comment on, but I don't think you can set it at zero without ignoring his anti-religion rants. There is so far zero evidence that he singled out Islam as the target of his aggression because he hated Islam and only Islam. If he hated all religion, then his attacks weren't anti Islam but rather anti all religions, and islam happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. COULD it be? Yes, it COULD. ANY attack could be. And I said that so FAR, there has been no evidence that he singled out Islam for his vengeance.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 13, 2015 -> 01:39 PM) Some of his anti-religious comments move the needle past zero. How far? Maybe not much, but it is off zero. They weren't anti-ISLAM. Religion in general, sure. Claiming he killed them because of Islam, so far, is false.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 13, 2015 -> 12:09 PM) Or why so many countries decide to start their own nuclear programs. Assured deterrence or assured mutual destruction? If individuals should have the right to defend themselves (with firearms), what gives any country in the world the right to control the destiny of others making that same decision? Isn't the world LESS LIKELY to have a nuclear war if more are armed with them? The problem of course is who decides who has the guns/weapons. Here we have an anti-religious zealot. That, in and of itself, doesn't make him dangerous. However, let's say instead of killing 3 Muslims that he killed Kirk Cameron and his family outside the premiere of "Saving Christmas." I have a feeling there would be a lot more people upset (if Christianity instead of Islam was attacked so brazenly). But you are making the assumption that is was Islam that was attacked, instead of neighbors he had a beef with. So far there has been zero evidence that it was religiously motivated, just the bleatings from the Muslim community, which you would get over any attack.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Feb 12, 2015 -> 07:41 PM) http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/12/opinion/khan...ting/index.html "Let's be real. People don't die over parking spots." Yes, they sometimes do. Sometimes they die over shoes. Or beer. Or just because. But let's be real. Every time a Muslim is killed in America, it isn't some act of 'Islamaphobia', despite how much you want it to be. (Not you, the writer) With every new act of Islamic terrorism, we are immediately bombarded with the worry of some huge muslim backlash that never materializes.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 12, 2015 -> 08:45 AM) Looks like this guy was actually an atheist, and often on social media pointed out the similarities (in bad ways) between Christianity and Islam. Doesn't seem to have been bent against some one religion or group - more against all religion period. And he liked that noted hate group, the SPLC. Along with a host of liberal websites and personalities. Makes his love of guns seem out of place.

Jenks, nuance and context only matter when they can use it to defend a position they like.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 3, 2015 -> 03:24 PM) An extremely small group of mostly upper class white suburban folk. Let's not spread this insanity farther than that. But an extremely small group of upper class white folks represents ALL white folks! (This despite the fact that they tend to be Democratic leaning and coming from the redneck hotbed of California...)

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 2, 2015 -> 02:50 PM) MarketWatch ‏@MarketWatch 2h2 hours ago President Obama’s new budget would raise $1.44 trillion in new taxes over the next decade http://on.mktw.net/1Cqc8Q0 Makes you wonder what color the sky is in his world where he can propose a budget with a 15% increase in spending with a straight face. The Republicans really should just propose a budget about 15% LESS than the last one we had. Deal with it. We all have to on a personal level. Although I do have an idea of something Obama can tax to raise some money. Foundations/endowments. Harvard Trust Fund is sitting on over $32 billion in cash, and growing. Yale's Endowment is only a mere $20 billion. But then there is the Ford Foundation with assets of $10 billion and an annual income of $6 billion. Tax it! I think this may be one tax that The Democrats wouldn't like.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 2, 2015 -> 10:48 AM) It does suck that the kids have to suffer for the parents' stupidity, but that's on the parents. So when a kid gets deported back to Mexico because his parents brought him here illegally, that sucks the kids have to suffer for the parents illegality, but that's on the parents. Right?

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jan 31, 2015 -> 04:52 PM) Americans are never at fault, blame it on foreign people, they're weird! I never said either of those, you two took it to those extremes. but if you think it has zero to do with it, you are just living with your heads in the sand.

No mention of the vast amount of illegal immigrants coming in who are bringing with them these diseases?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 30, 2015 -> 02:19 PM) A year of concealed carry in Illinois was terrible, resulting in daily fire fights with unintended victims and murders by gun-toting vigilantes uneventful. http://illinoistimes.com/article-15045-packing-heat.html The only bad thing I can recall happening was a series of CC teachers had their credentials revoked for not teaching the required stuff. The rush of people applying helped convince some that they had to take shortcuts. That wasn't good. otherwise, uneventful is a good thing.

QUOTE (gatnom @ Jan 29, 2015 -> 10:04 AM) A significant portion of my loans were 6.7% when I graduated, but I believe they just about halved that rate recently... And your rate for a person with no job, probably no or little credit and no collateral who wasn't going to be paying them back for years would have been much higher in a private setting.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 24, 2015 -> 06:48 PM) Here ya go, buddy. It's actually over 3,000 combined bills. https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/1631 All I have to say is that list proves that all congresscritters have too much time on their hands. S.Res.720 — 110th Congress (2007-2008) A resolution supporting the goals and ideals of Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month? S.Con.Res.103 — 110th Congress (2007-2008) A concurrent resolution recognizing the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the Minority AIDS Initiative.? S.3567 — 110th Congress (2007-2008) A bill to establish a Commission on the conflict between Russia and Georgia, and for other purposes.? S.Res.630 — 110th Congress (2007-2008) A resolution recognizing the importance of connecting foster youth to the workforce through internship programs, and encouraging employers to increase employment of former foster youth.? S.3317 — 110th Congress (2007-2008) A bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 101 West Main Street in Waterville, New York, as the "Corporal John P. Sigsbee Post Office".? S.Amdt.2823 — 110th Congress (2007-2008) Description: To require a report on plans to alleviate congestion and flight delays in the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Airspace? Very interesting selection of things. If everyone else's is just as wide, they just need to go home more often. Oh, and you guys keep bringing up Lincoln. Look it up yourself if you are interested.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 24, 2015 -> 12:58 PM) How many times did Abraham Lincoln fail, get fired, go bankrupt or lose a race? Shouldn't that career record have disqualified him? You're acting like she is Rick Perry or something. When was the last time she practiced law?

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 24, 2015 -> 12:49 PM) She also sponsored almost 900 bills and co-sponsored over 1100 during her tenure. You got some data for that? If she sponsored or co sponsored 200 bills by herself, in that short of a time frame, just imagine how many other bills are out there to be voted on. I thought our congress did nothing? I looked at several sites but none would give totals. I looked here, and it has 10 pages of about 50 votes on each. 500 is a lot short of 2000. And most of them are not sponsored or co sponsored. 61 co sponsors and 5 sponsored. http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/5...on#.VMQTNP7F8fY

QUOTE (Tex @ Jan 24, 2015 -> 07:07 AM) What evidence do you have that she was a crappy lawyer? Name recognition has landed a lot of candidates into a lot of positions. In fact in major American politics today, everyone is expected to start there. Also, you really insult American voters. I understand for example that most of the strong hardcore GOP voters on this board are pretty damn smart. For me to say they elected someone based on name recognition is silly. I believe all of us here have similar hopes for America, we just differ in the path to get there. For example starving children, social safety net or let churches, drug testing, and hard work take care of it. Either way no one wants to starve children. Where to live after leaving the White House. Of course politics came into it. But remember Bill left office a young guy with business and humanitarian projects still on his plate. Settling in NY made sense. Try doing that from Arkansas or Wyoming. World figures tend to live in world cities. They left the White House with her favorable rating higher than his. I believe he was a determent to her campaign which was why, if you recall, he kept a really low profile. She also received accolades from Senators on both sides of the aisle for her hard work as a Senator representing her state. She then ran a Presidential campaign that had many, many, Americans voting for her. Again, that is an insult to a lot of the voters that they only saw the Clinton name and voted for her. I'm not a big Hillary fan, I was happy Obama received the nomination, but she is not as we say in Texas, all hat and no cattle. Let's just start with this. I know the story is that HIllary got fired from the Watergate thing. While that fact itself is false, the guy had said both "If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her" and "ell, let me put it this way. I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were — we no longer needed, and advised her that I would not — could not recommend her for any further positions." So right off the bat she did something wrong. And being an influential lawyer is different from being a good lawyer. Remember, she had connections, like an ex-President, that could go a long way for influencing things. Just perhaps not in a jury box? As for leaving, you are correct, they have to go somewhere. But they hunted for a safe place, found a nice Democratic state and went to work. Obama had at least lived in Illinois longer than 6 months before deciding to run for office. And a point for Hillary for actually voting more than Obama did while in the Senate. I will disagree with you in that I believe she is all hat.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jan 24, 2015 -> 07:22 AM) . We complain about immigrants taking our lowest paying jobs while accepting immigrants who take the highest paying jobs. FWIW, I complain about those as well. The H1B-whatever program is as abused as anything.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 23, 2015 -> 11:06 PM) Newt Gingrich was divorced three times and left one of his wives after a cancer diagnosis. So we shouldn't elect someone president whose spouse cheated or vice-versa? Then Thomas Jefferson and FDR can't be top 5-6 ranked if you follow the logic of this thread. Do you guys just read the words or sentences that really pop out at you or something? I pointed out that her political qualifications were being 'smart' enough to stay married to a cheating husband so she could ride his coattails with name recognition into a Senate job with zero previous legislative experience. She was a crappy lawyer who marrie right, then carpetbagged her way into a cushy Senate job just because of her name and husband, rode THAT to a Presidential race and cabinet job and now wants to be President. I guess she did hold office longer than Obama did. edit: And Newt was a pretty slimy guy. But once again, just because the 'other side did it too' doesn't make it right.