Dixie, Im interested in your opinion...

maineman said:
you still are arguing about the pronouncements of a man you don't know and have never read.

what a fool you are. Go read what Virgil Goode said about the Quran...and about Ellison and about muslims... or better yet, shut your fucking piehole
Click to expand...

Yeah, and I am arguing with a guy who doesn't know him either, and just proclaimed him a bigot, without presenting anything to support the charge. Because Virgil Goode said something about the Quran, Ellison, or Muslims, doesn't mean he is a bigot... it's not like he called them bigots without any proof!

You stated... "Virgil Goode is a bigot." I asked you how you knew this, and you claimed to have read a paragraph or something, before you determined it. I asked you to post what it was, that made you proclaim this man a bigot, so that we can all evaluate whether it is indeed the comments of a bigot, and you are unable to produce anything. Prissy at least tried to post some bullshit about illegal immigration, and pass that off as bigotry, you won't even bother trying to lie.

Now, I don't know if this guy is a bigot, he might be, I suppose if pinheads can elect a Muslim, neocons could elect a bigot, but most bigots I know of, have hoisted themselves on their own petard. They quickly become political pariahs, and never ascend to status of a US Congressman. I am also not arguing HIS point of view, I don't even know what it is, other than, it differs from yours. The criteria I use for determining if someone is a bigot, is substantially more than your opinion, and if you want to make that argument, feel free to present your evidence at any time. Until then, Virgil Goode has not been proven to be a bigot here, and that dishonest statement will be challenged.
 
OrnotBitwise said:
Sadly, you're wrong. I really despise this guy, so I admit my bias. He's pretty much everywhere however. I see newspaper and magazine columns by him pretty much monthly and see his pronouncments quoted almost daily.
Click to expand...
He's "pretty much everywhere" where you live maybe. He certainly hasn't been "everywhere" in any place I have been. I have never heard of him. He is unknown... Less than Glenn Beck, less than popular. Totally unheard of in any circle that I have run in, and believe me there are far more right-wingers in my circle than in yours, a vacuous hole of non-entity lost in a sea of more popular people. That he is significant where you live doesn't make him huge across the land.
 
Dixie said:
Yeah, and I am arguing with a guy who doesn't know him either, and just proclaimed him a bigot, without presenting anything to support the charge. Because Virgil Goode said something about the Quran, Ellison, or Muslims, doesn't mean he is a bigot... it's not like he called them bigots without any proof!

You stated... "Virgil Goode is a bigot." I asked you how you knew this, and you claimed to have read a paragraph or something, before you determined it. I asked you to post what it was, that made you proclaim this man a bigot, so that we can all evaluate whether it is indeed the comments of a bigot, and you are unable to produce anything. Prissy at least tried to post some bullshit about illegal immigration, and pass that off as bigotry, you won't even bother trying to lie.

Now, I don't know if this guy is a bigot, he might be, I suppose if pinheads can elect a Muslim, neocons could elect a bigot, but most bigots I know of, have hoisted themselves on their own petard. They quickly become political pariahs, and never ascend to status of a US Congressman. I am also not arguing HIS point of view, I don't even know what it is, other than, it differs from yours. The criteria I use for determining if someone is a bigot, is substantially more than your opinion, and if you want to make that argument, feel free to present your evidence at any time. Until then, Virgil Goode has not been proven to be a bigot here, and that dishonest statement will be challenged.
Click to expand...

He suggested that Ellison should not be able to take the oath on the Quran. He suggested that if we didn't do something to stop illegal immigration, that we would have more and more muslims elected to Congress, which he felt was a bad thing. Ellison is not an illegal immigrant. Americans are free to chose Islam as a faith choice and stopping illegal immigration does not remove that choice from any American, just like it did not remove it from Ellison. Even if we stopped all immigration, there is nothing wrong with Americans embracing Islam and wanting to use the book of their faith to take oaths upon. To suggest that there is something wrong with the Quran - something UNAMERICAN about the Quran - is, itself a statement borne of bigotry and intolerance that flies in the face of the freedom of religion that we stand for.

And the fact that Keith Ellison took that oath on Thomas Jefferson's Quran is delightful - especially since Jefferson lived in what is now Virgil Goode's congressional district.
 
but like I said...if you want to argue with me about the implications of what Virgil Goode said, it would make a lot of sense if you would come to the discussion with something other than a chip on your shoulder and an empty space between your ears.
 
Dixie said:
Prissy, it sounds like the guy doesn't like illegal immigration. I wouldn't say, this alone, makes him a bigot. I'm sorry, but the last I checked, it's still illegal to be an illegal immigrant. Being opposed to something illegal, is not bigotry, it doesn't matter what your reasoning or rationale is, being opposed to something which is against our laws, has nothing to do with bigotry.

I've never even heard of this guy, but you pinheads have said that he is some big shot right-wing talk show host... well, last I checked, bigots don't get very good ratings on the radio or TV in this country. I have no idea whether he is bigoted or not, but I'm fairly sure he is not espousing the views of a bigot on the radio, because he would soon find himself unemployed.

This is why I challenged the hypocrite to show us what he said that proved he was a bigot. Odds are, he is not both "popular" and a "bigot" while hosting a talk show in America. Now, I fully understand, you don't like what he has to say, he doesn't share your views on things, and he doesn't say things in the politically correct way you think he should, but none of this makes him a bigot. In fact, when we look up the definition of bigotry, it's hard to argue that your level of intolerance, and stubborn insistence that your ideas are always the only ones which are right, places you squarely in the definition of a bigot. Isn't it ironic?
Click to expand...


Prissy, it sounds like the guy doesn't like illegal immigration.


You didn't read his quote. He wants to limit ALL immigration, legal and otherwise. And specifically, he wants to make immigration more "white", by limiting diversity immigration.

And he most certainly tied muslim-americans by implication, like Keith Ellision, to the attacks on 9/11.
 
Im with you Damo. The Constitution is what I would use, and what I hope my representatives use.
 
He suggested that Ellison should not be able to take the oath on the Quran.

That's not bigotry, sorry.

He suggested that if we didn't do something to stop illegal immigration, that we would have more and more muslims elected to Congress, which he felt was a bad thing.

I would say, since most Mexicans are Catholic, we'd probably have more Catholics elected than Muslims. Whether it's 'bigotry' to not think it a good idea to have Muslims running the country during a time of war with radical Islamofacists, is a subjective opinion.

Ellison is not an illegal immigrant.

Great, but does that make Goode a bigot?

Americans are free to chose Islam as a faith choice and stopping illegal immigration does not remove that choice from any American, just like it did not remove it from Ellison.

This is true, and I don't agree with Goode's observation here, but it still doesn't make him a bigot.

Even if we stopped all immigration, there is nothing wrong with Americans embracing Islam and wanting to use the book of their faith to take oaths upon.

Immigration is not the issue, and never has been. We are all the product of immigrant ancestors, and I have never heard anyone espouse an opinion that we should stop all immigration. Illegal immigration is against the law, and being opposed to something that is against the law, doesn't make someone a bigot. Damo also pointed out, there is no actual oath taken on any book, the Quran included.

To suggest that there is something wrong with the Quran - something UNAMERICAN about the Quran - is, itself a statement borne of bigotry and intolerance that flies in the face of the freedom of religion that we stand for.

No, there is really nothing wrong with suggesting there is something wrong with another religious belief. You do this on a daily basis with me, and I doubt you consider it bigotry.

And the fact that Keith Ellison took that oath on Thomas Jefferson's Quran is delightful - especially since Jefferson lived in what is now Virgil Goode's congressional district.

Well, I am glad you are so delighted! The fact that he did this, proves that we do not live in a bigoted society. The fact that not a single right-winger has posted a thread about this, is more evidence there is not much bigotry in the right-wing.
 
maineman said:
but like I said...if you want to argue with me about the implications of what Virgil Goode said, it would make a lot of sense if you would come to the discussion with something other than a chip on your shoulder and an empty space between your ears.
Click to expand...


As you can see, I am perfectly willing to argue with you about what Goode said, I'm just glad you finally posted something to discuss. The only chip on my shoulder, was some blowhard liberal chump, calling the man a bigot without showing us the evidence.

As for my "empty space", it's obviously superior to your 'empty space' because I don't assume people are bigots, based on a few pull quotes. I believe you actually have to know someone, and know what is in their heart, to make this determination. And according to my religious beliefs, even when I have determined this man to be a bigot, I am supposed to forgive him for it, and pray for his salvation and repentance, not ridicule and scorn him publicly.
 
you might not think that suggesting that there is something unamerican about taking an oath on the quran is a form of bigotry, but I would beg to differ. When you say, "Whether it's 'bigotry' to not think it a good idea to have Muslims running the country during a time of war with radical Islamofacists, is a subjective opinion." is a correct statement. It is subjective.. it is an opinion (like your "opinion" that everyone has a God, for example) and I stated it. For you to suggest that having Americans who are muslims holding elected office is a bad idea when we are fighting a war with radical islam is the same sort of thinking that put japanese americans in internment camps during WW2. It is a clear example of your inescapably bigoted belief that all ragheads are alike and they are all our enemies, and to be safe, we need to preclude ANY of them from participating in American democracy because they cannot be trusted.... kinda like your ancestors felt about blacks.

Watching you try to run away from your own bigotry is like watching a guy with one foot nailed to the floor trying to get out of his own way.
 
Dixie said:
As you can see, I am perfectly willing to argue with you about what Goode said, I'm just glad you finally posted something to discuss. The only chip on my shoulder, was some blowhard liberal chump, calling the man a bigot without showing us the evidence.

As for my "empty space", it's obviously superior to your 'empty space' because I don't assume people are bigots, based on a few pull quotes. I believe you actually have to know someone, and know what is in their heart, to make this determination. And according to my religious beliefs, even when I have determined this man to be a bigot, I am supposed to forgive him for it, and pray for his salvation and repentance, not ridicule and scorn him publicly.
Click to expand...

Oh...I forgive him... I pray for his salvation and his repentance...and I do not consider correctly characterizing his statements as bigoted is ridiculing or scorning him in any way. It is no more ridicule or scorn than watching a man drive by going 50 mph in a 25mph zone and calling him a speeder. Suggesting that taking an oath on a quran is unamerican is a bigoted statement made in a country where those sorts of things ought not be condoned and certainly where they should be exposed.
 
For you to suggest that having Americans who are muslims holding elected office is a bad idea when we are fighting a war with radical islam is the same sort of thinking that put japanese americans in internment camps during WW2.

No, I see quite a distinct difference between not voting for a Muslim and putting Japanese-Americans in prison camps. In any event, you would have to conclude the nation is far less bigoted today, than in 1944.

It is a clear example of your inescapably bigoted belief that all ragheads are alike and they are all our enemies.

I have never stated this, and I have never indicated or suggested this in any way, shape, or form. You continue to try and pin this viewpoint on me and claim it is my own, but you have never found a quote from me to support this slanderous lie. It's interesting to note here, my American Heritage dictionary defines a "bigot" as, One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ. I'll just be damned if YOU don't fit this definition to a tee! Ironic, huh?
 
suggesting that electing American muslims to public office is a bad idea given the fact that we are fighting a war against islamic extremists is pretty telling.

And Goode did not refrain from voting for a muslim. He criticized those that did and suggested that it was unamerican for Ellison to take an oath on a quran. that makes him a racist and a bigot in my opinion.

It certainly suggests that there is some similarity and kindred spirit at work that transcends country and patriotism.
 
Suggesting that taking an oath on a quran is unamerican is a bigoted statement made in a country where those sorts of things ought not be condoned and certainly where they should be exposed.

I'm sorry, but here in America, we have this little thing called "Freedom of Speech" and I don't believe the liberal Congress has indicated we can't condone it, as of this date and time. There is nothing inherently bigoted about the statement, as Damo points out, it's "un-American" to be sworn in on ANY book, since that isn't how we do it in America.

Your comment is dripping with the typical liberal contempt and hypocrisy. You want to make the rules about what people can and can't talk about, and you want to determine what they are entitled to talk about and what they deserve scorn and ridicule for talking about. You want to be the sole arbiter on who is right and wrong, and anyone who disagrees with your profound and experienced viewpoints, is immediately met with a flurry of personal insults and attacks on their credibility. You want to tell us what is and isn't acceptable, and if we disagree, we are all racists or bigots, or whatever pejorative you can throw out at the moment. Like I said, the only thing missing from the dictionary definition of a bigot, is a picture of YOU!
 
Well... First of all, I refuse to perpetuate the oath on the Quran myth... Ellison was criticized for something far less important. For taking a photo-op with a Quran. The Oath is taken sans any books... pretending otherwise is something only this guy and the left-wingers seem to be doing.

Those who do criticize him for doing such are off-base. Those people elected him fairly and he can photo-op with whatever book he wants. The Constitution is VERY CLEAR there is no religious test for this office, attempting to apply one for a silly photo-op is grandstanding and foolish.
 
"I have never stated this, and I have never indicated or suggested this in any way, shape, or form. "

of course you have. You think that arabs and persians are one in the same.... you clearly stated that you felt that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - a persian - was an arab nationalist.

You make no distinction between those arabs who are our enemies and those who aren't.... you consider islamic extremists to be synonymous with arab nationalists... you consider the FACT that Saddam trained palestinians in their struggle with Israel to be synonymous with training Al Qaeda operatives in their struggle with the United States (which is NOT fact). Every follower of Islam is suspect in your eyes. None can be trusted. THey are all our enemies or potential enemies...even those who are born and raised in the United States.... you think that suggesting that no muslims be elected to office in the US simply by nature of their faith is NOT a bigoted sentiment. that is ridiculous.
 
No, there is really nothing wrong with suggesting there is something wrong with another religious belief.

Dixie, Virgil Goode is a constitutional officer of the United States. He's not some anonymous poster on a political forum. He should not be making religion a test for public office. He suggests that having muslim-americans as congressmen is a threat to the nation. Constitutional officers should not engage in religious fear-mongering.
 
Dixie said:
Suggesting that taking an oath on a quran is unamerican is a bigoted statement made in a country where those sorts of things ought not be condoned and certainly where they should be exposed.

I'm sorry, but here in America, we have this little thing called "Freedom of Speech" and I don't believe the liberal Congress has indicated we can't condone it, as of this date and time. There is nothing inherently bigoted about the statement, as Damo points out, it's "un-American" to be sworn in on ANY book, since that isn't how we do it in America.

Your comment is dripping with the typical liberal contempt and hypocrisy. You want to make the rules about what people can and can't talk about, and you want to determine what they are entitled to talk about and what they deserve scorn and ridicule for talking about. You want to be the sole arbiter on who is right and wrong, and anyone who disagrees with your profound and experienced viewpoints, is immediately met with a flurry of personal insults and attacks on their credibility. You want to tell us what is and isn't acceptable, and if we disagree, we are all racists or bigots, or whatever pejorative you can throw out at the moment. Like I said, the only thing missing from the dictionary definition of a bigot, is a picture of YOU!
Click to expand...

of course representative Goode can say whatever he wants to.... he does have freedom of speech - as do I. I am free to call him a racist bigot and I feel compelled to do so. Racist bigots may "have a place at the table" but I'll be damned if I will just meekly pass them the mashed potatoes without saying something about their bigotry. That is my right.
 
"as Damo points out, it's "un-American" to be sworn in on ANY book, since that isn't how we do it in America."

So your beloved Dubya - the hottie in bluejeans - is "un-American" for taking his oath of office on a Bible? really? Where was he doing that, if not in America?
 
I'm betting when he said "Arab Nationalist" he had more meant "Muslim Nationalist"... If he didn't say "muslim Nationalist" to begin with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top