Voice against atrocities

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    March 27, 2014 11:52 a.m.

    Tyler D

    Important 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.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    March 27, 2014 9:08 a.m.

    @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.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    March 26, 2014 7:25 p.m.

    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.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    March 26, 2014 5:52 p.m.

    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.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 26, 2014 2:38 p.m.

    @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 accurate.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    March 26, 2014 2:38 p.m.

    Tyler D
    Don'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 SG

    The 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 papars.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    March 26, 2014 2:14 p.m.

    @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 clarifies…

  • no fit in SG St.George, Utah
    March 26, 2014 1:31 p.m.

    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 DN posts.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 26, 2014 1:12 p.m.

    @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.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    March 26, 2014 12:21 p.m.

    @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?


    Thanks for your comment… did you say so at the time?

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    March 26, 2014 11:53 a.m.

    Tyler D

    Here 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.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 26, 2014 11:52 a.m.

    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.

  • 4601 Salt Lake City, UT
    March 26, 2014 11:20 a.m.

    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.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    March 26, 2014 11:06 a.m.

    @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 time)?

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    March 26, 2014 10:56 a.m.

    Apparantly 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.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 26, 2014 10:14 a.m.

    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 Obama Admin).

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    March 26, 2014 8:34 a.m.

    Again, the poor victimised christians. You seek a voice against atrocities and ignore North Korea entirely. Sorry; right idea, wrong message.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    March 26, 2014 8:18 a.m.

    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 standards.