Now, please reconcile the scary stealth factor ("creeping Sharia") claimed in your little creepy-sounding audio-visual presentation

I put "creeping Sharia" in quotes because I'm quoting that phrase directly from the video.

Now I'm wondering: Did you watch it?

I coined the expression "little creepy-sounding audio-visual presentation" in reference to the video.

Again, I have to wonder: Did you watch it?

Or is it that you don't understand an English-language sentence when it's longer than 10 words?

Seriously, dude, you're dumber than a box of hammers. Shockingly, frighteningly stupid.

LOL! I so SCARED!

You are still completely unable to make a coherent—let alone convincing—point, david.

I am guessing that's because you are simply not smart enough to make one. That's admittedly unapologetically harsh, but since you frantically promote yourself as an intellectual failure on a daily basis in this public forum, I feel entitled to say publicly that I am skeptical you'll ever succeed in making even one valid point on behalf of your own argument.

So I'll give you some help: You are trying (but failing) to articulate that "religious terrorism" is the most insidious threat free societies face.

I disagree, but whatever.

Now, please reconcile the scary stealth factor ("creeping Sharia") claimed in your little creepy-sounding audio-visual presentation with the terror method of suicide bombings (which would be the opposite of "stealth," if you took 2 seconds to think about it) as a way to take over the world.

That's your first assignment.

Next, please explain for us why Muslims themselves don't agree on what Sharia is in practice.

Only after you have adequately explained these logical contradictions within your own fear-mongering blogs will I consider trembling in my boots. Until then, I could not respect your intelligence less with each blog you post.

Thanks.

I don't disagree with your shock at the sad state of affairs in this country, but do you have any specific references in mind for this blog besides Guns N' Roses? (I haven't been keeping up with the news.)

Oh well. Maybe next time.

When you write a blog about how bored you are, don't be so surprised when you get douchey comments. You're wasting everyone's time talking about being bored. Here's a newsflash: We don't give a shit if you're bored.

So thanks for adding absolutely nothing to the discussion that you care so much about.

I never look at Newt (or Sarah or Michelle or anyone on the Right or Left) as a free agent. I look at them as having a role in a party that wants power, that wants to win elections to gain that power. And each party doles out roles to the people who are willing to perform those roles.

Therefore, I don't really care to examine what Newt might know about history, because his job is to ignore what he knows about history and recite his lines.

More than anything, however, I don't think it's productive to talk about a hypothetical "ignorant" audience. Democrats love to do this, and then they scratch their heads about why they lose elections. The answer to why the Democrats lose is they denigrate the American public, and the American public hits back at the polls. Nobody likes to be called stupid, and I never hear the Republicans call the American people stupid. Only Democrats do.

If the American public is "ignorant" about Obama or the issues, whose fault is that? It's the Left's fault.

You know what else? There was a very strong feeling of wanting to be with people and not separate. I couldn't have identified that feeling when it was happening (too subtle compared to the other feelings), but I realize it now.

People were basically in shock. But even so, I couldn't believe the non-reaction from the higher-ups. I thought it was an in-my-face lesson about how not everyone is good in an emergency, not everyone has basic common sense. Maybe especially corporate managers, but also, as I learned later, even presidents.

You know who was fantastic? Rudy Giuliani, believe it or not. He was so visibly shaken yet he stepped up to the plate (or so it seemed at the time) that he was a comfort to listen to when he gave press conferences. Might be the only thing he ever finessed in his life!

On a smaller and more localized scale: There were also repeated bomb scares in Midtown Manhattan in the days and weeks following 9/11. Probably elsewhere in the city as well. I know because I worked in Times Square, and the office I worked in was evacuated several times because of threats called in to nearby office buildings.

The reason I mention this is not to garner sympathy, but to demonstrate that there are plenty of sickos within our own borders, of course. But why deal with any problems in our own country when we can focus on problems (hyped and/or fabricated) in other, weaker countries?

My employer (well-known global publishing empire) wouldn't let us leave Times Square until 3:00 that afternoon, and being stuck in an office building in a landmark destination seemed royally fucked-up to me at the time. (NB to any "clear thinkers" who might want to chime in at this statement: Don't even talk to me about "public safety" or "crowd control" when the public's safety has already been breached and when all the police were dispatched elsewhere. We New Yorkers were completely on our own, people, and we did great.)

That experience has become symbolic, however, for being stuck in a country whose leaders had (and continue to have) all the wrong responses to a crisis.

There's more I could say but no time (or technology) to say it. Thanks for writing this post and thanks for keeping your head, oleeb. Please continue to articulate the clarity of your perception and beliefs as often as possible. This is an awesome post!

True. It's also important to remember that the cartoons were published repeatedly, in multiple countries over the course of several months, not just once in Denmark.

Protests were peaceful after the first publication.

However, when governments bungled their response is when the shit hit that particular fan.

And we hardly ever sleep!

Then in May, the New York Post (Murdoch) ran a sensationalized headline about it (typical of their headlines), and Pam Geller (who doesn't even live in that neighborhood; she lives on the Upper West Side) freaked out on her blog as well as on Sean Hannity's radio program (Murdoch), and a national controversy was born.

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/16/ground_zero_mosque_origins

Murdoch stoked this story, but CNN, NBC, and MSNBC were all too happy to give Pam Geller air time over the summer! But people need to read up on this woman. She's a fucking asshole.

http://mediamatters.org/research/201007140035

And think about the Rupert Murdoch-affiliated resources involved in swaying public opinion: FOX News Channel (includes O'Reilly, Hannity, Van Sustern, Huckabee, Cavuto, and Beck), FOX News Radio, the New York Post, Dow Jones & Co. (includes the Wall Street Journal, Barron's, MarketWatch, SmartMoney, Dow Jones Indexes and Newswires) and HarperCollins Publishers, which publishes some of the books by FOX News personalities. Most all of this is headquartered in New York City. Does NYC speak for the rest of the country? Nope. Media is a bubble, just like Washington D.C. is a bubble. So I can't really agree that FOX validates what people are already thinking. I would say FOX keeps throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. Most of it doesn't stick, but they keep throwing it over and over again.