or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by SDW2001

Of course it's a way to avoid taking responsibility. They understood that a successful terrorist attack would be seen as a serious problem for them before the election. This is especially true in light of their claims that Al Qaeda was on the run and had virtually been defeated. The video narrative along with the mob narrative made it seem like none of the hatred and violence was directed towards them as an administration, nor the American people, nor American policy. ...
  A related question.  There is no choice whatsoever in terms of race, for example.  On this, I do, in fact, disagree. There is an element of choice for at least some gays.  Perhaps it's not the majority, but some do make a conscious choice in terms of their orientation.  Personal choice matters when it comes to potential discrimination.  You said so yourself.    
Hey Mike:  Consider responding to my post.  Thanks.  
  LOL.  I say again:  Romney used direct quotations to explain why HE called it an apology tour.  Now, you can disagree with him as to what it actually was.  But he was expressing an opinion.  It can't be a "lie."   By the way, what did you think the "tour" was?  He said, on foreign soil, often on Arabic TV:     America had been dismissive, even derisive. America had not recognized Europe's "leading role" in the world.  America sought to dictate terms America had...
Obama, White House knew it was a terrorist attack hours after it occurred.        
  And you keep trotting out that same theory.  That's all the feedback loop is...a theory.  
  Let me ask you then:  Is there any element of personal choice in sexual orientation?  
  Romney explained why he labeled it an apology tour, giving direct Obama quotes to support his conclusion.  He was obviously wrong on Syria and the gateway to the sea comment.  I don't see how that's a lie, but have fun with the mistake.  It's about all you've got left.         Well put.  To be clear, he did say Syria was "Iran's gateway to the sea."  This was obviously inaccurate.  Then again, Obama said "sequestration will not happen."  His campaign walked that back...
  I just saw that misstatement about "the route to the sea."   I guess you'll make of that what you will.  He was obviously wrong in that respect, but to state he isn't able to be President because of a statement like that is going way over the top.  I mean, after all, I would think that  knowing how many states there are in the United States might be a good qualification too.     As for Obama, what you think was a good line actually made Obama look terrible.  It was...
  It's not disingenuous, and certainly not evil.  The two are linked, because both are non-traditional marriage.  If we allow one, there exists no grounds to prevent the other, or variants of the other.  It's a slippery slope, but it's not a slippery slope fallacy.  It's a real concern.         That's probably true.         And you're stating that you value homoesexual marriage more than polygamist marriage.  You're throwing the polygamous community under the bus!  :)...
New Posts  All Forums: