Coptic Christians Protest Obama, Egyptian Govt. Outside White House, Morning Shows Ignore It
Hundreds of Coptic Christians traveled to Washington D.C. yesterday "from as far as New York and Chicago" to call on President Obama to push Egypt's government to protect their brothers and sisters from persecution.
Kudos are in order for the Washington Post for devoting a 14-paragraph story on page B3 of the October 20 paper. Editors also published a large photo from the demonstration, headlined, "At the White House, Coptic Christians demand an end to 'horrible nightmare,'" on the front page of the Post to direct readers to the Metro section story.
Unfortunately none of the Big Three network morning shows -- ABC's Good Morning America, CBS's Early Show, and NBC's Today -- noted the protest, which among other things called on President Obama to enforce "a bill that Congress passed in July that would create a U.S. envoy to the Middle East for religious minorities," according to the Post's Pamela Constable.
With the breaking news today of Muammar Qadhafi's death and the media's predictable victory laps for Obama's Libya policy, don't expect any media attention to the plight of the persecuted Coptic Christian minority in Egypt anytime soon.
- Ken Shepherd's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Give me one reason
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 8:20pm.
Give me one good reason this President would care about the plight of Christians anywhere in the world?
Now, get some loser smearing his feces on a police car? Now there's cause for attention!
Yeah right
Submitted by KornKing on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 10:45pm.
Guessing you saw the guy shitting on the cop car all over the lapdog media
It's sad this so-called Christian president in a nation
Submitted by gmaniac1 on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 6:18am.
that is based on Judeo-Christian values is not advocating for them around the world. It's obvious this guy doesn't want to offend muslims all the while vilifying Jews (not self-loathing ones) and Christians here and abroad!
Bush would not be standing idly by while Egyptian Christians were being slaughtered. But then again he has a pair whereas Obama has yet to drop.
would a born again Christian
Submitted by misterbee241 on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 11:09am.
call his savior a liar, as Obama has done on at least two occasions that i know of?
I'd say no.
Obama tells Egyptian
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 10:09pm.
Obama tells Egyptian Christians to show restraint as they're slaughtered
“The President is deeply concerned about the violence in Egypt that has led to a tragic loss of life among demonstrators and security forces,” Obama said in a statement released this week. ”Now is a time for restraint on all sides so that Egyptians can move forward together to forge a strong and united Egypt.”
And what were the "demonstrators" protesting? The burning of a church.
Makes me embarrassed to be an American.
Of course the actual statement was much different and much
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 10:41pm.
more reasonable before the execrable weasel zippers put its disgusting spin on it. Whoever runs that website is an absolute disgrace to honest reporting.
Statement by the Press Secretary on Violence in Egypt:
The President is deeply concerned about the violence in Egypt that has led to a tragic loss of life among demonstrators and security forces. The United States expresses our condolences to the families and loved ones of all who were killed or injured, and stands with the Egyptian people in this painful and difficult time. Now is a time for restraint on all sides so that Egyptians can move forward together to forge a strong and united Egypt. As the Egyptian people shape their future, the United States continues to believe that the rights of minorities - including Copts - must be respected, and that all people have the universal rights of peaceful protest and religious freedom. We also note Prime Minister Sharaf's call for an investigation and appeal to all parties to refrain from violence. These tragic events should not stand in the way of timely elections and a continued transition to democracy that is peaceful, just and inclusive.
Jer
Yeah, Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 10/20/2011 - 11:17pm.
like the "President" and all his minions are into telling things straight with absolutely no discernible spin.
It is to laugh.
MD
a restraint on all sides...
Submitted by kata on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 12:25am.
I must have missed that news article - did the coptics also set fire to something?
Sarcasm duly noted, kata...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 1:49am.
But the answer to your question is "No"--at least as far as I know the only 'fire' was that which burned a Coptic church. The ruling military junta claims that several members of its security force were killed by the demonstrators, but the claim is highly debatable and a reason the announced investigation of the incident is a hopeful sign. The video evidence indicates the government security personnel were the aggressors.
The post-revolutionary political environment in Egypt is fragile, uncertain, and at times chaotic. The statement released by the administration was obviously carefully worded, and, in my opinion, entirely appropriate. Yes, it called for restraint on all sides. It also specifically identified the Copts while recognizing the rights of religious minorities and supporting peaceful protest.
The cretins at weasel zippers are smear merchants and partisan hacks. Think Daily Kos. Same coin, different sides.
Jer
Fragile??
Submitted by jon_torlin on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 6:45am.
Jer, you sure about that? This manchild threw his support behind the muslim brotherhood who were the instigators of all these riots and "uprisings" that they have caused and anything else to the contrary was ignored, such as the Christians trying to do an uprising in Iran.
This so-called call for restraint is the same kind of crap that they were doing to Israel telling THEM to restrain themselves despite the fact that they were the ones being rocket-bombed practically on a daily basis by the Palestinians who are the agressors.
Essentially, this call for restraint goes ignored by the agressors, which in this case, is the brotherhood who want to enact Sharia and are well on their way to get it. What's your take on that group?
-Jon
I want to be perfectly clear about this:
Submitted by upcountrywater on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 10:30am.
Training materials that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive, and they are contrary to everything that this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice stands for,” Holton said Wednesday. “They will not be tolerated.”
Such training materials “pose a significant threat to national security, because they play into the false narrative propagated by terrorists that the United States is at war with Islam,” he added.
The chickens of restraint, have come home to roost. Iran is peaceful, man.
Run for your lives it's a white Christian hick in a pick-up, with gun racks in the back.
You Didn't Build That.
what?
Submitted by kata on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 9:59am.
They are trying not to offend the people shooting the people throwing rocks?
WZippers supplied not one, but two links to the original article at the White House Dossier which in turn went straight to the whitehouse.gov website. The only victims of partisan hackery would be the people too lazy to click.
kata...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 3:34pm.
Well, if you wish to place it in that context, at least it represents a more responsible perspective than the one advanced by the adolescent, hate-mongering know-nothings at weasel zippers. However, I have already explained the reasoning underlying my opinion that the administration's statement was appropriate, and I stand by it.
FTR, I clicked on and read both of those links at WZ before my initial post. It's my practice to do so prior to commenting [clicking on one or more relevant links embedded in the sourced material], and any occasional omissions--and there have been--on my part are the exception rather than the rule. There was no such omission in this case. But, I agree with you that there are many who are indeed too lazy too click and never make it past the odious slop which sites like weasel zippers ladles out by the barrel.
[weasel zippers is the fine, upstanding website which posted an outright lie that Obama had purposely ignored the many fatalities and horrific destruction caused by tornadoes on the day they swept through MS, ALA, TN and GA a few months ago and proceeded to call the President a "despicable prick" which generated the usual chorus of "F*ck the Bastard" epithets from the WZ comment gallery--maybe the same ones who had joked about it being too bad it was Osama taken out by the SEALs rather than Obama.]
Jer
appropriate for the gun firing folks, I suppose
Submitted by kata on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 4:30pm.
not so much for the fleeing rock throwers.
As for the rest : Being married to a 23 yr navy serviceman, I am enjoying the respite from being the wife of a baby killer and a world destroyer. I can't complain.
kata...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 4:54pm.
Let's assume, and it may very well be true, that contrary to the claims of the interim government, the demonstrators did not kill any security personnel, or if there were deaths among the latter, they were caused by someone other than the Coptic Christians. Do you then believe the Copts should now seek vengeance, even encouraged to do so, rather than be included in one of the "sides" by whom the administration urges restraint.
"As for the rest": As for the rest of what?
Jer
"the rest"
Submitted by kata on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 5:08pm.
of the Obama hater / Seal Team 6 arguments. I stay out of them. I am enjoying the vacation from having to defend my husbands' job - so I am not taking your bracketed bait.
Ok you got me - the forward thinking diplomats should be praised for heading off the possibly that the currently pacifist "The army has its tanks but we have our prayers," Coptic Christians might possibly turn terrorist.
Oh, I see
Submitted by CobraMan on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 2:54pm.
Oh, I see, so Obama recognizes the rights of the Copts but he feels they need to restrain themselves from protecting those rights from ATTACK.
Yea, that statement is carefully worded alright. It's worded in such a way that Obama can appear to sympathize with the Copts,while doing absolutely nothing to help them. After all, even he needs to show restraint here, correct? Isn't he one of these "sides" he's talking about? He did, after all, pick a side when he SUPPORTED the demonstrators, the ones who are now trampling the rights of the Copts that Obama said he recognizes.
That's typical of Obama, appearing to support popular movements and then abandoning that support when those movements turn ugly.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Good evening Cobra
Submitted by cocodrie on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 2:58pm.
This is Obbable 's peaceful religion and our tax dollars at work.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
Here is an article that tells
Submitted by motherbelt on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 7:39am.
Here is an article that tells how this particular massacre took place.
The Coptic Christians responded with a call for three days of prayer and fasting
The horror!
Yes, they'd better start showing some "restraint."
This is the same as the "cycle" of violence that Israel always seems to perpetuate by daring to respond to attacks.
Yes, Weasel Zippers did use an inflammatory headline, but headlines are supposed to grab one's attention, and that one certainly did.
And they put it crudely, but that's basically what Obama's implying: the Christians have to tone it down too.
No matter what "context" Weasel Zippers left out, Obama DID call for "restraint on both sides." All his blather about the "rights of minorities" etc can't whitewash that.
Exactly what are the Coptic Christians supposed to restrain themselves from on their side: demonstraitng? protesting? Maybe they should just disappear and quit aggravating the situation?
How about just calling on the Egyptian government to quit slaughtering Christians?? Is that so hard to do? IMO, calling on the people who are being slaughtered, to show restraint, is deplorable.
Obama is trying to be, as Evan Thomas said, "above the world, sort of God." Here's more of what Thomas said about him that day with Chris Matthews:
"He's going to bring all different sides together...Obama is trying to sort of tamper everything down. He doesn't even use the word terror. He uses extremism. He's all about let us reason together....his shtick is he's the teacher. He's the teacher. He is going to say, ‘now, children, stop fighting and quarreling with each other.’ And he has a kind of a moral authority that he – he can – he can do that-
Once again, he's voting "present" and playing the game of moral equivalence.
And I think that's shameful, when ANY group are being slaughtered. All his pretty words can't change that. Neither can another "teaching moment" about the "fragile" situation in Egypt by Jer, Evan Thomas, or anyone else.
Jer, who's "spinning?
Submitted by CobraMan on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 2:41pm.
Jer, who's "spinning," as you accused? The President actually said "now is the time for restraint on ALL sides." It looks to me that YOU'RE the one who's spinning here.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Who's spinning, Coba? That would be you.
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 2:34pm.
Inasmuch as you appear to be suggesting I mischaracterized the President's statement with regards to his urging restraint on ALL sides.
That's a difficult argument for you to sustain since I quoted the entirety of the statement verbatim in my initial post and referred to the specific words on which you have focused again in my reply to kata as follows:
"....Yes, it (the statement) called for restraint on all sides...."
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2011/10/20/coptic-christians-p...
Jer
→ I have to agree with Jer
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 3:02pm.
History is replete with proof both sides should practice restraint.
All of these antagonists had it coming, and it's time we recognize it.
What an asinine comment, Cool...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 3:56pm.
But it's just another example in a long string of 'Classic Cool Smears' of that genre`--the absurd logic dripping with sarcasm, intended to slime by implication the character of the target. It has become your signature m.o. I stopped being surprised at this tactic a long time ago.
Jer
Cool Arrow uses---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 6:50pm.
humor considerably more than most posters here do; and his lack of 'bad' language is most laudable.
The action of characterizing Cool as a "slime merchant", especially by a Democrat who leans liberal, would be pitiful if it weren't so silly.
MD
Correction, Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 7:16pm.
I am describing a debate tactic--imo, a disagreeable and objectionable form of argumentation--which Cool has employed on a number of occasions in the past. I am not characterizing Cool as a "slime merchant". I like him, but I dislike that method of discrediting an opponent's position.
And, I think he's very clever and funny.
Jer
Correction noted, Jer,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 12:03am.
my mistake.
You implied he was a "smear" merchant; not a "slime' merchant..
Each a one syllable word, starts with "s", and contains three identical letters.
Easily confused, all right.
Don't agree with your contention that calling someone out for using certain tactics, like what you consider 'smearing' others, is not the same as calling them a purveyor of "smear".
If, and I say if, an opponent's position is correct, forthright, and upstanding; then sticks and stones may break his bones, but words will never hurt him.
All is fair in love, war, debate, and name calling. o)
MD
Whatever, Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 12:46am.
Cool implies that I believe Susan Smith's two young boys and Andrea Yates five children deserved to be drowned and Nicole Brown deserved to be brutally murdered. But I'm the villain for objecting to Cool's insinuations. Got it.
Jer
Oh, also Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 1:03am.
Here's another one:
→ You're prob right, Jer
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 10/03/2011 - 11:02pm.
Since those kids were getting raped anyway, the best thing for Reno to do was to initiate their execution.
Good thing they were just trailer trash, I guess.
You win.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2011/09/30/media-cast-bush-r...
Cool suggested I was endorsing the execution of "trailer trash" kids. You defended him that time too. Oddly enough, even cajun blasted Cool's callousness, but you chose not to chastise her. How come?
Jer
Cuz Cool is cool, and not everyone is---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:52am.
perfect every day in every way.
I have no beef with cajun, but if you want to forward me a list of my fellow conservatives that you feel it necessary for me to chastise; do so.
I promise to glance at it before I consign it to the round file.
MD
And what is your beef with me?
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 3:31am.
Other than the fact I objected to being accused of supporting or promoting the drowning of infants and toddlers and the execution of trailer trash kids. And that the accuser is cool. And that my politics differ from yours.
Here's a thought: Instead of defending that behavior cuz he's cool and a conservative and slamming me because I'm not a conservative, why not just refrain from commenting?
Jer
Here's another thought, Jer,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 7:29am.
try and refrain from dictating how I comport myself on these threads.
Get real - if you actually believe that you were being accused of supporting or promoting the drowning of infants and toddlers and the execution of trailer trash kids, you place way too high a value on yourself as a target of conservative digs or diatribes.
You are aware, are you not, that posting here is voluntary?
I have no particular beef with you; you have been getting 'slammed' as a lib for the entire time I have been reading this site; primarily because the politics you espouse and the way you go about it seriously pisses some people off.
I know of no conservative on this site who thinks anything good about Obama, and you know that as well, yet you continually defend the worthless piece of shit and by doing so poke your finger in conservative faces just as you do when trying to make a case for your other heroes, the Clintons.
Damn right I don't agree with your politics; and I find it rather odd that you think you should get treated with kid gloves after inserting yourself into a thread and asserting your lib stance as though it is to be accepted as gospel with no attendant recriminations sent your way.
I have stated before that if you throw verbal punches - your liberal views, beliefs, and dogma, - on a conservative site - then expect shots in return.
Either be prepared to protect yourself at all times when in the ring, or stay the hell out of it.
Mess with the bull, you are liable to get the horn.
Man up.
MD
Why don't you man up, Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 3:54pm.
I don't expect to be treated with kid gloves. Any left-leaning poster would be out of his or her ever-loving mind to expect kid-glove treatment at NewsBusters But I've engaged in countless passionate exchanges with not even the slightest complaint from me when they are conducted--as most are--without the type of crude and baseless associations which Cool makes far too often. I'll say again: I LIKE Cool. [As far as I know we're still on each other's buddy list.] But I don't like that tactic, and when he employs it, I intend to call him on it.
And real "men" and real "women" wouldn't be applauding him or defending those tactics simply because they share the same political philosophy.
BTW, I wasn't "dictating" how you comport yourself. I merely posed a serious question.
Jer
P.S. When YOU put up with crap like the following 'kid-glove treatment' I received just a short distance down this thread, then come back and lecture me about manning up. You wouldn't last ten minutes at a site where you had to deal with this type of garbage:
"...HYPOCRITE you psuedo lawyer(I'm NOT a lawyer, but I play one on tv). My god you are SUCH A FREAKIN HYYPOCRITE! Just STFU!!!!!!! You dance around this kind of talk and attempt to stay just slightly above the fray but you are still a bottom dweller not matter your "friends" on this site. Talk shite out of both tongues to justify your being on this site as somewhat above the fray.....YOU ARE A F**KIN LIAR AND A HYPOCRITE Jer!!!! PROJECTION! STFU!!!..."
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2011/10/20/coptic-christians-p...
...
Submitted by kata on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 4:10pm.
My husband gets into a car each day to commute more than an hour to work on the typically hectic Seattle freeways.
He used to come home and say : "The people [who drive] out there... are idiots."
To which I always said to him "Sweetie, that never changes. People never change. The only thing that surprises me, is that it still surprises you."
If you don't expect, Jer, to be treated with---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 8:14pm.
kid gloves ---
Why do you whine so much when you get hammered by those who feel you insult them with your Democrat Party views and liberal bent?
You LIKE Cool; but attempt to set yourself on a higher moral plane by asserting the "type of crude and baseless associations which Cool makes far too often" are somehow beneath you.
You are not the 'pristine poster' you would make yourself out to be.
I don't have to put up with 'crap' because I don't insert myself into a liberal site and purposely agitate the posters there with my positions relative conservatism.
I'm smart enough not to put myself in that position.
It isn't that I don't relish the give and take; it's just that I have viewed the insanity that is rampant amongst the liberal comment makers on those sites. Attempting to debate with those maniacs would be even more a waste of my time than trying to shovel back the tide using a pitchfork.
Chutzpah = a liberal Democrat voluntarily posting on a conservative site and then wailing when he gets whaled on because he ain't feelin' the love.
MD
Bing freakin
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 8:20pm.
O!
Well, Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 10/24/2011 - 11:09am.
There is of course your position--which I am confident is also the position of a fair number of conservative members here and which may be described as the Tenebrous Doctrine, viz., THIS IS A CONSERVATIVE WEBSITE, BY AND FOR CONSERVATIVES ONLY. ALL LIBERALS SHOULD LEAVE IMMEDIATELY!
And then there is the position which was enunciated by Noel Sheppard and read by me over four years ago which stated in essence that liberal commenters and their views were welcome here and would be respected. That was a major consideration in my decision to begin posting at NewsBusters. I am just as confident that it is also the position of a fair number of conservative members at this website..
You prefer an echo chamber where you can exchange with like-minded souls your mutual and infinite loathing of all manifestations of liberalism free from the intrusion of any discordant note. Understood. So why not just pretend I'm not here, and avoid reading or responding to my comments? I promise not to bother you.
Jer
Nice try, Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 10/24/2011 - 9:02pm.
but you are whining again, and your suppositions are not only wrong, but full of shit, as well.
Nice try, though - portraying me as one with Tenebrous and in disagreement with Noel Sheppard.
I don't prefer an "echo chamber"; I just refuse to be seen as appearing to sanction your liberal bullshit by ignoring it.
Echo chamber, indeed.
How trite.
You post as a Lib-Dim on NewsBusters, wherein a bunch of conservative thoughts are bounced around that are in both general and specific disagreement with your liberal Democratic take on life and politics - and you decry the treatment you receive on site.
As I said before --- chutzpah.
To the nth degree on your part, as you argue and debate your side with continual put downs and snarky-assed remarks to conservatives who get under your skin, but turn around and obscenely suggest that you, as a liberal here, deserve immunity from broadsides in your direction.
You funny guy.
If you can't take it, don't dish it out.
MD
Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 10/25/2011 - 3:31am.
To the nth degree on your part, as you argue and debate your side with continual put downs and snarky-assed remarks to conservatives who get under your skin, but turn around and obscenely suggest that you, as a liberal here, deserve immunity from broadsides in your direction.
You have made this same or similar tiresome accusation so often it has completely lost whatever emotional and polemical force it may have once enjoyed. My repeated requests--pleas--to you for evidence to back up the accusation have been consisently met with a variety of dismissive excuses. Once more, my intent is--and has always been--to never inititate personal attacks or "put downs", [although I will readily admit to reserving the right to responding to them in kind], and therefore I again invite you to provide examples of where I haven't adhered to that policy. You have yet to supply a single shred of proof that what you claim is actually the case. Please show me. Otherwise your level of credibility on this issue will continue to be stuck at absolute zero.
Regarding the so-called obscene suggestion by me that as a liberal here I deserve immunity from broadsides: Thoroughly laughable BS.
So, with respect to your allegation against me, I'll turn around your edict: If you can't or won't back it up, don't dish it out.
Jer
And as per usual, Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 10/25/2011 - 6:53am.
you reply with the same tired old bromides ---
What dismissive excuses?
Are you referring to what you continually ignore - the fact that few here agree with what you have to say as a liberal and when a "debate" ensues that becomes heated, you just can not grasp that it is your staunch liberalness and Democrat Party member stance which alienates you from the majority on this site when it comes to political discussions?
Do you actually believe that I am concerned that MY credibility doesn't peg YOUR meter ?
While I would expect anyone who felt they were being assailed, whether fairly or not, to respond in kind; you now presume to don the mantle of righteousness and insist that you have never become snarky, picayune, and petty with your replies unless pushed to do so as a reactive measure?
Evidence?
Your very posture as a Democrat and your views from a liberal perspective are red flags that you refuse to admit to waving in conservative faces around here; and whether you choose to realize that fact or not, posts by you in that vein are insulting enough to some that they rebut you with forceful verbiage.
You instigate the very situation(s) you then decry.
You remind me of a younger sibling who pokes, pushes, and prods until an older brother or sister jerks a knot in their head; whereupon they run to mommy to complain about being picked on.
Unbelievable.
MD
Okay, Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 10/25/2011 - 7:05am.
It's obvious I'll never get any examples or objective evidence from you--only more unsupported opinion. So, I'll try a different approach:
Name some lib commenters at NB who post in a manner you consider appropriate so I can be more like them and win your approval. Even one name would be helpful.
Jer
Jer, if you were to change your---
Submitted by matthewdean on Wed, 10/26/2011 - 12:42am.
style, you would not only be no fun to joust with, you would no longer be true to what you believe in.
I know you better than that.
Carry on.
MD
Coptic restraint?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 9:19pm.
Unless, of course, you can point out to me what more the Coptics could do, short of submissively baring their backsides to the Egyptians for a little k-9 amore'.
You know d@mned well there's no difference between the brutality against the Coptics and the dragging death of James Byrd. It's nothing more than group-hate against a weaker enemy.
I'm not being a smear merchant, I'm pointing out the asininity of calling for restraint from both sides when the weaker wasn't spoiling for a fight in the first place.
Restraint? From what?
Good gosh almighty Jer
Submitted by gfrrman on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 1:30am.
your party is THE" 'Classic Cool Smears' of that genre`--the absurd logic dripping with sarcasm,intended to slime by implication the character of the target."I stopped being surprised at this tactic a long time ago." WHEN????? HYPOCRITE you psuedo lawyer(I'm NOT a lawyer, but I play one on tv). My god you are SUCH A FREAKIN HYYPOCRITE! Just STFU!!!!!!! You dance around this kind of talk and attempt to stay just slightly above the fray but you are still a bottom dweller not matter your "friends" on this site. Talk shite out of both tongues to justify your being on this site as somewhat above the fray.....YOU ARE A F**KIN LIAR AND A HYPOCRITE Jer!!!! PROJECTION! STFU!!!
g
Huh, I'm one of those "friends"
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 1:44am.
Got something to say, feel free to say it directly.
SPINE
Submitted by gfrrman on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:05am.
...'nuff said. Coward is a coward .. that direct enough??
g
Not really
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:30am.
You still come across as a vague coward. You hide your digs in a nondescript post, then just as vaguely throw out the coward line.
If you're calling me a coward, then provide proof. I called you out directly. You hid behind a shady post that could have meant anything.
And just know, a post along the lines of "Yes, YOU Restless 1 are a coward" won't cut it. Provide proof. Links would be necessary. Either do the research, or run along.
RESTLESS1
Submitted by gfrrman on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:39am.
..sometimes you, as does Jer(on regular basis)(you and jers snide "nondescpript post","Vaguely""Shady post") have a reading comprehension problem. So go back and READ. That's all...just read and comprehend. You missed it....READ!! and Comprende' grow some girls.
......nondescipt G
I comprehend just fine
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:52am.
Better than most as a matter of fact.
.sometimes you, as does Jer(on regular basis)(you and jers snide "nondescpript post","Vaguely""Shady post") have a reading comprehension problem.
Is this supposed to mean something? You made an accusation, or two. Back it up big man.
You, are just dodging now, and wasting my time, and hoping nobody will notice . Provide proof, or run along.
'nuff
Submitted by gfrrman on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 8:51am.
said
g
cut
Submitted by gfrrman on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:48am.
paste..........crickets.....point????..................................crickets
ad nauseum
g
Thanks RESTLESS, but don't sweat gfrrman...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:13am.
it's been several months since he's shown his ass like this. He was overdue. I'm sure it won't be the last time.
Jer
Thanks, Jer
Submitted by gfrrman on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:22am.
for covering for me with your usual "lawerly smarminess" that infects this blog. You are a useful idiot that .......never mind.geez.............ANYONE that would believe you are a lawyer........goooooooooooooooooood help.
but keep up the charade.
g
Anything else, gfrrman?
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:40am.
Or have you got it all out of your system for now. If not, let her rip. Hopefully, we can then look forward to another respite for several months before your next blowup.
Jer
OOOh, Jer
Submitted by gfrrman on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 8:49am.
I have a business to run and make $$$. I am sooooo hurt by your weak,snide,smarmy comments.
...lawyer my a@@@.
.... a day ahead and $$$$ more
g
Could you clarify, Jer?
Submitted by UpNorth on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 4:00pm.
What kind of restraint does Obama think the Coptic Christians should exercise? Or, what do you think they could do to show restraint? I mean, they did restrain themselves from continuing to live, by dying. What more do liberals think they should do?
Should they restrain themselves like the Christians in Nigeria did, after the elections there?
UpNorth...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 5:02pm.
I've tried to make my position clear and state my reasons for it. I don't know how I could further clarify it. So, let me ask you: What do you think the Coptic Christians should do, if not show restraint [along with all other parties]? Launch a campaign of retaliatory violence?
Jer
→ The Copts acted stupidly?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 9:51pm.
Jer, you honestly don't see that The President used that phrase "on all sides" to indicate to his Egyptian hate-buddies that he isn't taking sides on the issue of dead Coptics?
Restraint from what? How much murder should they put up with?
Won't be long before that question is moot, now will it?
This is another mystifying example, Cool...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 11:16pm.
Where/How/Why do you come up with this stuff?--"The Copts acted stupidly?"
I just don't get it.
Jer
Really?
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 11:33pm.
You don't get it? Think Cambridge police department, and how stupid the 0's comment about the "cops acted stupidly" sounded then.
His comments here top that one on the stupid meter.
Touche` RESTLESS...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 11:45pm.
As I said, Cool is clever.
Jer
Not even his best work
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 11:52pm.
Cool is one of the best when it comes to ambiguous, cryptic remarks. This one didn't even crack the top 25. You should have gotten it on the uptake.
As an aside, Texas Tech is taking it to Oklahoma right now. As a Texas fan, I'm enjoying it so far.
Okay, RESTLESS...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 12:28am.
Word play normally doesn't slip past me. But it did this time. Now, excuse me while I continue gnashing my teeth.
Jer
Meh,
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 12:36am.
I'm more interested in why TT has fallen in love with going on fourth down. Gave away 3 points, and then went with a fake punt. They are stuck on stupid right now. Add in that they have abandoned the running game, which they have done well to this point, and it looks like an amazing comeback for the Sooners.
Touchdown TT!!!!
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 1:04am.
Three possession game.
Wonder why the Longhorns couldn't play like this???
ETA: Oooops, two possession game now. What was that white boy doing???
RESTLESS...is the game over? If not, what station?
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 1:14am.
I was watching Albert Pujols' single-handed destruction of the Rangers earlier. [Three homers]
Jer
TT wins
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 1:38am.
Boneheaded play calling and all.
Rangers are experiencing what they did last year. Big bats came through in ALCS, and are non existent in the WS.
Two more at home, hopefully with good results, and an celebration on the road.
Funny thing is, being from San Antonio, and not having a big baseball following here, I always felt a little lonely in following the Rangers. I'm enjoying their success, and seem to be joined by a heretofore non existent fan base.
I like the Rangers, but
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 2:09am.
I've been a Cardinal fan forever. Really amazing. In early August they were 10 1/2 games out of a wild card spot and I don't think there was anyone who didn't believe the season was over.
Jer
Not me, Jer
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 9:22am.
I was a Giants fan as a kid, but I'll readily admit Bob Gibson was the best pitcher ever.
Gibson was definitely near the top...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 3:41pm.
Fastball, curve and slider..and total command over all three pitches. Plus he could bring the heat. Great athlete...he played for the Harlem Globetrotters for a year. I still haven't gotten over the 1968 season; the year Gibson was absolutely unhittable. [He pitched something like four straight shutouts...gave up one unearned run in his fifth start...followed by another two or three consecutive shutouts. His ERA was under 1.00 going into his last start of the season, had a bad outing and finished at 1.12. He completely dominated the Tigers in his first two starts in the WS, striking out 17 in one of the games, but lost the 7th and deciding game to Mickey Lolich. It was the same year Denny McClain won 31 games. Broke my heart.
I was a junior in college and still harbored dreams of a career as GM of the Cardinals.
Jer
Not only that' Jer
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 3:55pm.
There are those who will try to include McLain as part of the reason for lowering the mound by 6", but it was the sheer intimidation of Gibson throwing heat from on high that brought it on.
Just my opinion.
Your opinion, Cool, is fact...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 4:12pm.
although it must be said that it was an era of great pitching (e.g. Koufax..no telling the records he would have set if the arthritic elbow hadn't cut his career short) and low-scoring games.
But I've heard a lot of hitters say Gibson was the most intimidating pitcher they ever faced. He never smiled at, chatted with, or buddied up to players on the other teams. Asked why, he said: "Because they are the enemy."
Jer
Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Wed, 10/26/2011 - 12:50am.
Best line ever by Gibson, fondly recalled by Tim McCarver, who caught Gibbie for a number of years -
McCarver said he approached the mound during a game cuz Gibson kept shaking off his signs, and when he asked why, Gibson replied, '"I know about pitching AND catching a ball; you know about catching a ball, but the ONLY thing you know about pitching is that YOU can't hit it".
LMAO.
MD
rofl
Submitted by kata on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 12:16am.
well played Mr. Arrow.
Ahhhh. Uncle Jer got pwned by hizzelf.
Submitted by The Vet on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 4:19pm.
Uncle Jer: This is another mystifying example, Cool... Where/How/Why do you come up with this stuff?--"The Copts acted stupidly?" I just don't get it.
Doink. Off to the corner for one hour. Yes, OK, you can bring the Cisco.
Well, if they don't stand up for themselves,
Submitted by UpNorth on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 11:22pm.
I really can't see the Muslim Brotherhood standing up for them. Or the Sunni's or Shia, either. But, other posters have covered their options quite well, in hardly any time at all, they'll probably be gone, so they won't embarrass our Leader, by dying.
The position of some seems to be that, if only those Christians would just shut up and know their place, there would be no problems.
UpNorth...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 12:35am.
There were also scenes of solidarity in downtown Cairo as hundreds of Muslims stood with Copts amid broken glass and rows of riot police. By late Sunday night, though, most Copts had disappeared from the TV building and Tahrir Square, where about 150 Muslim men chanted: "With our souls and blood we protect Islam."
Read more: http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2011/10/09/2222461/22-killed-in-egypt-as...
Apparently there was at least some Muslim support.
Jer
"With our souls and blood, we protect Islam"?
Submitted by UpNorth on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 11:14pm.
That's protecting Christians? Or, is this much like the mantra of the talk shows, you know, "some say" there were Muslims protecting the Christians?
My take-away from the chant was that Muslims were welcome in the square, Christians, meh, not so much.
The Christian Church
Submitted by gfrrman on Sun, 10/23/2011 - 1:42am.
is now a thing of the past in Egypt....EXTINCT.....next O Great savior O-One?... TOLERANCE???? Non-existent.......
g
When Sheehan and a couple
Submitted by Slyrr on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 12:03am.
When Sheehan and a couple other loons squatted in a ditch to protest Bush, every liberal media group in the country sent cameras, helicopters and huge crews to watch. It was the most hilarious profile of liberal media bias I'd ever seen. Someone took a photograph of Sheehan and her tiny group of followers, surrounded by hundreds of people who were NOT protestors, but liberal media hacks busy turning her pathetic molehill into a liberal media mountain.
Eggs
Submitted by JustAl on Fri, 10/21/2011 - 8:15am.
A few must simply be broken to make the omelet of the trans arab caliphate. Wasn't it Stalin who first spoke of the need to break eggs?
Wrong spot
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 10/22/2011 - 9:20pm.
Reposted