Thrown out of an FBO...

Wadya want. A medal...or a chest to pin it on?

mike

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...


mike regish wrote:

Yep. Ok. You win.

mike

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...


Win what? I was just pointing out who absurd your claims are.



Win...what?

mike regish wrote:

Evidently it was...

I'll go slow just for you.

I'm not gay, yet I believe that gay people should be able to marry.

Ok.

That's just one.

How does that fit your definition of me below,

That has nothing to do with what I wrote about. I was describing your seeming
inability to tolerate others without making your own prejudicied, rude,
insensitive comments.

and how does it not fit you,

Because I don't go around proclaiming about how I cannot talk to people who
don't have the same view points as myself (which I actually do all the time)
and I don't try to label people as bigots to shut them up because I don't share
their opinions. I don't manufacture intolerant claims of others, and then when
called upon what I am basing my nonsense on just say that someone else should
research to support such false, intolerant, statements.


who cannot be content to just let gay couples live in a committed
relationship that will have absolutely no effect on your life.

Who said that? Your own prejudices are shining through. Again, I do not care
about gay marriage per se. Marry away, but make it legitimately legal. I do
care very much about when justices don't follow judicial rules and I care very
much when constitutional due process is abolished.

You are quick to exclaim bigot and intolerant and racist.



Look in the mirror, J.

Sure.



mike

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...

That you are intolerant of others who don't talk and believe and think
like
you? That wasn't hard to figure out, Mike.

Er, um, Mike. Radical muslims are everywhere. Many countries in the
middle east, Europe, and yes even in the USA. You are perhaps of the
mindset that you can talk reason with those who want to kill
Americans. Nope. The best thing is to identify and kill them. And
people like that will always be somewhere in the world just like there
will always be criminals. Accept that fact and be prepared to defend
our country (which means killing them first) and we will stay free.

Ron Lee




"mike regish" wrote:

Um...those "radical" muslims were in Afghanistan. It's not even spelled like
Iraq. Look...Iraq ends in a "Q". See it? Afghanistan ends in a "stan". "Q".
"STAN" I put them real close so maybe it would be easier for you to see the
difference.

mike

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...

W is somewhat liberal IMO. He is hardly a Reagan conservative but he
does stand by his convictions and is an honorable man. He has done a
fair job of fighting the muslim radicals who want to kill Americans
but he is wrong on the illegal worker (erroneously called immigration)
amnesty program, protecting our borders, Katrina relief, etc

Ron Lee

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...
I have no need to wish.

Lack of need is no indication of lack of doing.

No maybe about it. By definition.

Whose definition?

By the definition of the words. "Generalization" has a specific meaning,
that is to generalize, or to infer a general conclusion. The word "blanket"
means to cover completely. *Completely*.

A "blanket generalization" is a generalization that applies the
generalization completely.

You stated no quarrel with that generalization in this same thread.

Well, first of all, I'm under no obligation to respond to everything I
disagree with. Do not infer that I condone everything to which I don't
explicitly disagree.

Secondly, the question at hand is whether Jay should have had any reason to
expect the other person to respond negatively and whether Jay should have
thought twice before stating the generalization in the first place. Unlike
others, I am trying to stay focused on that question. Offensive
generalizations posted by others within this thread have nothing to do with
the actual topic at hand, and I see no reason to waste my time on them.

You were claiming that blanket generalizations are "so offensive." How
so?

I find it amazing that I should have to explain why a blanket generalization
is offensive (and in particular, insulting generalizations...I admit, most
people aren't offended when they are part of a group that someone claims has
some positive characteristic, but that's not what we're talking about here).

This is basic kindergarten stuff, IMHO. Anyone with a proper upbringing
should understand why it's not nice to say mean things about someone, and
especially about a large population generally.

If you can't comprehend this, then I believe it is hopeless to try to
explain the specifics of the situation to you. You don't even understand
the underlying concepts.

I understand just fine, thank you.

Clearly, you do not. You're welcome.

"Do not...". There is not even any indication of what you think you are
talking about.

Of course there is an indication. It's the reason I quoted your text.
Again, I find it amazing this needs to be explained to you, but since your
comprehension level is so low, here it is, spelled out:

"Clearly, you do not UNDERSTAND JUST FINE." (Note words taken directly from
the quoted text to which my text referred).

Pete

mike regish wrote:

Um...what about the 15 from Saudi Arabia? Now they're freakin' everywhere?

mike

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...
mike regish wrote:

Nice mature thought process you have there, but wrong. There are/were
radical
muslims in numerous countries, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
United
States, France, Sudan, Iran, Yemen and others that want to kill Americans.



You mean, the terrorists from September 11th? They are dead, Mike. There is no
point and never has been any point since Sept 11 2001 to find them, nor has
their been any point to only go after terrorists from one country. If somebody
is trying to kill you, why would only want to find them in one country, to wit
Afghanistan? When Pearl Harbor was attacked, did the USA just find Japan, and
hunt them down and forget about anything else? No! We did realize that there
were other threats out there, and we better start to deal with them, hastily.
And actually the USA defended Europe from Nazi Germany and their friends in
Italy, Albania, etc. first.

mike regish wrote:

Intolerance is about the only thing I can't tolerate.

Oh...yeah, there's religion, too.

mike

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...

Pot, kettle, black. You preach tolerance and then accuse others of
bigotry.
You make unfounded accusations and then when you are called on it, you
just duck
and say to go search something to prove what *you* claimed. You say that
you
are "progressive" but then admit that you are so intolerant that you
cannot even
talk to someone who has other views than your own narrow mindset.


So when you are intolerant, do you not tolerate yourself?

And why cannot you tolerate someone's religion?

mike regish wrote:

Wadya want. A medal...or a chest to pin it on?

mike

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...


mike regish wrote:

Yep. Ok. You win.

mike

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...


Win what? I was just pointing out who absurd your claims are.



Win...what?


Thank you for the message of tolerance and acceptance, Mr. Regish.

Ron Lee wrote:

Er, um, Mike. Radical muslims are everywhere. Many countries in the
middle east, Europe, and yes even in the USA. You are perhaps of the
mindset that you can talk reason with those who want to kill
Americans. Nope. The best thing is to identify and kill them. And
people like that will always be somewhere in the world just like there
will always be criminals. Accept that fact and be prepared to defend
our country (which means killing them first) and we will stay free.

Unfortunately, Mr. Regish seems to only want to go after the terrorists who are
either already dead or only happen to have trained in the same country that the
dead hijackers trained in. If radicals want to kill you, why would you only want
to go after the radicals in one geographic location at the moment?

Peter Duniho wrote:

"Jessica Taylor" wrote in message
...
I have no need to wish.

Lack of need is no indication of lack of doing.

Irrelevant.



No maybe about it. By definition.

Whose definition?

By the definition of the words. "Generalization" has a specific meaning,
that is to generalize, or to infer a general conclusion. The word "blanket"
means to cover completely. *Completely*.

A "blanket generalization" is a generalization that applies the
generalization completely.

Yes, blanket, as in "generalizations are so offensive."



You stated no quarrel with that generalization in this same thread.

Well, first of all, I'm under no obligation to respond to everything I
disagree with. Do not infer that I condone everything to which I don't
explicitly disagree.

Secondly, the question at hand is whether Jay should have had any reason to
expect the other person to respond negatively and whether Jay should have
thought twice before stating the generalization in the first place. Unlike
others, I am trying to stay focused on that question. Offensive
generalizations posted by others within this thread have nothing to do with
the actual topic at hand, and I see no reason to waste my time on them.

You were claiming that blanket generalizations are "so offensive." How
so?

I find it amazing that I should have to explain why a blanket generalization
is offensive (and in particular, insulting generalizations...I admit, most
people aren't offended when they are part of a group that someone claims has
some positive characteristic, but that's not what we're talking about here).

Actually, you made a blanket generalization that generalizations are offensive.

This is basic kindergarten stuff, IMHO. Anyone with a proper upbringing
should understand why it's not nice to say mean things about someone, and
especially about a large population generally.

Now you are making another generalization about "anyone with a proper
upbringing."

If you can't comprehend this, then I believe it is hopeless to try to
explain the specifics of the situation to you.

That's not nice, Pete.

You don't even understand
the underlying concepts.

Incorrect.



I understand just fine, thank you.

Clearly, you do not. You're welcome.

"Do not...". There is not even any indication of what you think you are
talking about.

Of course there is an indication. It's the reason I quoted your text.
Again, I find it amazing this needs to be explained to you, but since your
comprehension level is so low, here it is, spelled out:

"Clearly, you do not UNDERSTAND JUST FINE." (Note words taken directly from
the quoted text to which my text referred).

Clearly, I do, and I also note that you continue to make generalizations while
railing about generalizations.

Well, there's about a billion of 'em. Better get started.

mike

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...
Er, um, Mike. Radical muslims are everywhere. Many countries in the
middle east, Europe, and yes even in the USA. You are perhaps of the
mindset that you can talk reason with those who want to kill
Americans. Nope. The best thing is to identify and kill them. And
people like that will always be somewhere in the world just like there
will always be criminals. Accept that fact and be prepared to defend
our country (which means killing them first) and we will stay free.

Ron Lee