Tyler DImportant point. Whereas a good portion of the Christian
world had their dark ages and atrocities hundreds of years ago, what a good
portion of the Islamic world now needs is the same transformation here in the
21st century. They need a strong leader of some kind to lead them to the
civilized ways religious people should be living. Too bad there is not a
"Pope" of the Muslims.
@patriot – “I feel sad for an innocent child who is born into these
Muslim…”I do too…Many in the Muslim
world are sadly building societies modeled directly from the Old Testament,
complete with stonings for a myriad of offenses including theological crimes.For whatever reason the Christian world has largely transcended the
barbarism often mandated by their oldest sacred book, although this wasn’t
always the case (e.g., 500 years of burning heretics in Europe). Sadly, much of the Muslim world has yet to experience their renaissance.
Let’s hope they do soon for the sake of their own people and the world.
So much for civil dialogue, this has to be the most worthless exchange of ideas
I have seen on a thread in years and thats saying a lot.
It's the job of the legitimate news media to be the "voice against
atrocities," not Obama's.He's busy enough leading the
nation in a positive direction after year of Republican malfeasance.
@no fit in SG,Re: "No matter what our President does, either in his
public or private life, is deemed WRONG by many of those who comment here on
this forum"...I understand your frustration. I was around
during the Bush years.====I have missed numerous posts.
I don't pretend to read them all... so there's no way I could say
that 100% of them are pro-obama or anti-obama.===Tyler D
was looking for one "right-wing" commentator who didn't criticize
Obama 100% of the time. I'm one example.I consider myself
"right-wing". And I have defended Obama many times (one specific time I
can remember is the article that wondered if Obama would rise to the level of
Jimmie Carter). I pointed out numerous ways Obama is better than Carter and
will be remembered well. But I have also frequently criticize Obama... so I
get lumped in with the "right-wing" that's supposed to mindlessly
attack anything Obama does.I don't think that's fair or
Tyler DDon't know at what time I said so about Obama, but I have
mentioned it before on this site. By the way, I've heard both Bill
O'Reilly, and Sean Hannity, of FOX give Obama credit for these things, and
possibly others. FOX News is certainly not a 50/50 balance, but it has the
opposing point of view as much or more than any other news outlet. And
I've seen O'Reilly take the Republicans/conservatives to task as
strongly as the Democrat/liberals. no fit in SGThe same
goes on about the Bush, and the current Republicans on other sites. And you
don't have to go to the NY Times or the SF Chronical to get it. If you
want more anti conservative/Republican talk, look no further than the Salt Lake
Tribune. To read some of them, you think you were reading the aforementioned
@2 bits – “The "uber" was because you claimed that 100% of
the articles are against Obama.”Either you missed my point or
I did a poor job of making it. What I meant was if a commenter (and
I meant people like us commenting on articles, not article authors) never says a
positive word about the president – and there are many on this board
whether you’ve noticed or not – it implies (by that logic) that the
president is always wrong (i.e., my 100% comment). Since I view it
as logically impossible for any non-mentally deranged human being to be 100%
wrong all the time (and it sounds like we agree on this), I feel justified in
labeling those folks partisan right-wingers.And when an entire
network does this (Fox or MSNBC) I think this is bad for the country, or at the
very least, for all those who only tune into that one network.Questioning and even criticizing the president is a different matter, and I
would say it’s our duty as citizens to do so (I would never advocate
blindly following a “dear leader”).Hope that
2bits,Afraid you may be missing numerous posts here on the DN.No
matter what our President does, either in his public or private life, is deemed
WRONG by many of those who comment here on this forum.I believe that
contributes to the contention, frustration, and anger so often seen here in the
@Tyler D,The "uber" was because you claimed that 100% of the
articles are against Obama (and obviously they aren't).That's an uber-radical perspective.===You did
mention the DMN (commentators and articles). You said, "Can you
provide even one example of right-wing commentators here on DN ever saying
anything positive about this president"...To me,
"Commentators" are people who share their opinion or write oped pieces
for the paper. Commentators are people who work for the paper or the network
(Glen Beck, Rachel Maddow, etc). But I can see how people commenting could
also be called "Commentators".But how would I know if any
commenter was a "right-Wing" commenter or not? I don't keep
track.Do they automatically become a "Right-Wing commenter"
if they question Obama?If so... that could be the problem. Then for
sure 100% of the "right-wing" comments would be saying something
negative about Obama (because that's your criteria for labeling them as
such).===No disrespect intended. Just pointing out how
ridiculous it is to pretend that 100% of the comments are anti-Obama.
("right-wing" or otherwise)Nobody actually said he's
wrong 100% of the time.
@2bits – “You are evidently blind to them, and only see the ones
that do not praise your dear leader.”Did you even read my
response or were you just determined to use me as a straw man foil for your next
comment?I never mentioned DN articles, only DN
commentators…And I used Fox simply as an example of an overall
lack of perspective, and never said it pertained to you in a negatively personal
way… I would appreciate you showing me the same courtesy. I
find it disturbing that anyone who doesn’t agree point by point with the
party line must be “uber” on the other side. How does that square
with my comment about Bush, or do you not take me at my word on that point?What else did you base your “uber-left” characterization of
me on? If it’s other comments as well then you would know I have argued
non-left positions in the past. Or were facts just not particularly
relevant when using me as your bogeyman?@SCfanThanks for
your comment… did you say so at the time?
Tyler DHere are some examples from the right. Namely me. Obama
continuing to use drone attacks to kill terriorists. Great job! Obama finally
getting us out of the war in Iraq. Good job, could have come a little sooner.
Obama giving the green light to rescue hostages from Somolia. Great job! Obama
giving green light to get Bin Laden. Great job! Obama giving green light to
rescue Captain Phillips. Great job! Obama being the best dressed President in
history, especially his choice of suits and ties. Great job! Or at least great
choice of a valet. I just wish Obama was doing that great in a
number of other areas that I think he is weak in.
Tyler D,It's very possible that what is missing is perspective. I see non-negative articles about the administration, what they are
doing, positive ACA articles, etc, in the DMN almost every day. You are
evidently blind to them, and only see the ones that do not praise your dear
leader.You asked for one example... Jay Evensen. He frequently
writes positive articles about what Obama is doing. Ever read Frank
Pignanelli and LaVarr Webb on Sundays? They always include the left's
slant in there.There are many other examples. If you really
can't think of a single one... maybe your perspective is questionable.===I said nothing about Fox. I don't know if they are
fair or not, I don't watch them so how would I know, or care? Do you
think MSNBC is "fair and balanced"?? Define what you mean
when you say "Right-wing media". Is it just Fox? or the DMN? Or is
it all media?I guess from uber-left-field everything looks like a
right-wing attack on your dear leader.I know how you feel. I felt
the same way much of the time when Bush was in office.
Would those who disparage this article rather have it censored? Those who speak
under the assumption that critical thinking about Mr. Obama's decisions is
heresy are so partisan that they disqualify themselves from rational discourse.
They act under the presumption that Mr. Obama could do no wrong, just as some
believe he can do no right. Knee-jerk adherents to political dogma are the bane
of US politics. Thanks DN for keeping up a dialog.
@2 bits – “When are people going to learn that you can't say
something non-positive about the Obama Administration... without the usual
trolls getting after you?”Perhaps because what is lacking is
perspective… For example, do you think Fox takes a relatively
even handed approach when opining on politics, or do you think their tag line -
Fair & Balanced - is actually quite ironic (and maybe even *wink, wink*
meant to be)?Despite the fact that he was not my favorite president,
I sometimes defended Bush from what I thought were knee jerk and unfair
attacks.Do you honestly believe the right-wing media shows any such
deference to our current president? Can you provide even one example
of right-wing commentators here on DN (and we know who they are) ever saying
anything positive about this president (which would imply that it is logically
possible for one human being – the president - to be 100% wrong all the
EsquireApparantly your knowledge of history begins in the 1990s. Ronald
Reagan liberated millions and millions of people with the policies that led to
the dissolution of the Soviet Union. And now, with this weak President, Putin
is seeing an opportunity to get some of them back. There must be a book out
there called "Democrats Always Good, Republicans Always Bad, No
Exceptions". And you must read it weekly.
When are people going to learn that you can't say something non-positive
about the Obama Administration... without the usual trolls getting after you?Watch out DMN.... you broke the rules (non-positive story about the
Again, the poor victimised christians. You seek a voice against atrocities and
ignore North Korea entirely. Sorry; right idea, wrong message.
You found a way to again attack the Obama Administration. Congratualtions. Are
you proud of youreselves? While the rights of minorities around the world
should be protected if possible and there should be a voice for them, this
Administration has done more than any prior Republican Administration, and
perhaps more than the Clinton Administration (President Clinton has expressed
regret that we didn't intervene in Rhawanda). In the end, the U.S.
can't save everyone, deal with every problem, that arises in the world.
Where were you, editorial board, when the U.S. invaded Iraq, and a direct
consequence of the U.S. invasion was the wiping out of a vibrant Christian
community in that country? In the end, your hand-wringing has a partisan tone
to it, and it undermines your credibility as you selectively apply your