Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

The Sacking of Ray Rice

BK24 Wrote: Sep 11, 2014 1:48 PM
New, or SSDD?
In response to:

The Sacking of Ray Rice

BK24 Wrote: Sep 11, 2014 1:32 PM
So pro athletes are a pack of self-centered thugs. Yawn. This was old news 90 years ago when Ty Cobb was sharpening his cleats. Genuine gentlemen like DiMaggio have always been the odd men out in this crowd. Oafs like Namath, Woods and now Rice are the real exemplars of the breed.
Those ISIS people aren't too bright. If they'd just held off beheading Americans until after the election, Obama could have gone on ignoring them. But now he feels he has to "do something" about them, & they might end up losing a few dozen people between now & the election. What a pack of morons.
Do the leaders of Syria and Kurdistan show as much concern for securing our borders as our leader shows for securing their borders? Just asking.
In response to:

The Root of 9/11: Bad Theology

BK24 Wrote: Sep 11, 2014 11:33 AM
No nation has ever freely, peacefully converted to Islam. It has always been brought by an invading army who enforce Islam at the point of a sword, and now a gun. There are no Islamic nations. However, there are many nations under Islamic occupation. The people who live under the occupation are not free to resist or even question the occupiers' law. Can you imagine a guy in Amman or Teheran saying "You know, those Americans aren't such bad guys after all" Or - Allah forbid! - "You know, that Jesus guy might really have been onto something." Of course not - he'd lose the tongue from his head or maybe his whole head. Before we look at "all those millions of Muslims," it might be well to wonder how many of them, if freed from the occupiers, would turn away from Mohammad's bogus homemade god and worship the true God though his Only Son.
americathebeautiful - Okay, let me rephrase: he decides to go through the motions of waving the flag, etc. And I'll have to hand it to his speechwriter - the last few sentences of last night's speech would've sounded pretty good coming from anyone else.
No nation has ever freely, peacefully converted to Islam. It has always been brought by an invading army who enforce Islam at the point of a sword, and now a gun. There are no Islamic nations. However, there are many nations under Islamic occupation. The people who live under the occupation are not free to resist or even question the occupiers' law. Can you imagine a guy in Amman or Teheran saying "You know, those Americans aren't such bad guys after all?" Or - Allah forbid! - "You know, that Jesus guy might really have been onto something." Of course not - he'd lose the tongue from his head or maybe his whole head. Before we look at "all those millions of Muslims," it might be well to wonder how many of them, if freed from the occupiers, would turn away from Mohammad's bogus homemade god and worship the true God though his Only Son.
Are the leaders of Syria and Kurdistan as much concerned with securing our borders as our leader is concerned with securing theirs?
His party's looking pretty shabby going into the election, so he decides it's time to wave the flag, call out the troops & get tough. (Or am l just being cynical . . .?)
In response to:

Ignorance Fuels the Calls for War

BK24 Wrote: Sep 04, 2014 8:13 PM
d13 - "attach" = "attack?" Is that what you want a president to do - disregard congress & constitution & go his own unlimited, unrestrained way? According to the law of the land - and until we formally repeal the constitution, it IS the law - the congress identifies the nations enemy, declares war on said enemy, then turns to the president & says "Sic 'em, boy." The president can only wage a war that the congress has declared. And before you roll out the list of times it didn't work that way, let me say 1) I already know them and 2) each one was illegal.
Previous 11 - 20 Next