Thank goodness we always have you to point out the Indian in the woodpile. Otherwise, we might have people expressing ideas that aren’t like ours.
I see. You apparently don’t care if what you post here is accurate. In order to be valid it only has to fit your prejudices. Idiots like you are the bane of this board.
Your the one who posted the link, bucky. I’m not going to do your fucking research for you. It’s up to you to validate their accuracy.
Even if you do, the page is still pretty much worthless, since it mixes unattributed, undated, context-free ‘quotes’ from people with very different viewpoints and political agendas.
Tell you what, I’ll spot you the first one attributed to Ann Coulter, 'cause I’ve seen the column where she made that statement. Now, how 'bout the rest, and for those that are accurate, what do you propose be done about them?
I’m not the OP, but if you really want to play that game, sure thing. I bet I can prove that more are accurate than you can prove are inaccurate. I’ll start.
Ann Coulter
Bailey Smith
Beverly LaHaye
Bob Dornan
David Barton
David Trosch
Fob James
I was even nice enough to stop before getting to Freddy’s quotes, of which I’m pretty sure no one doubts the veracity, just to make it a bit easier for you in the first round.
Your turn.
OK. The James Watt quote is made up. He may have said lots of stupid things, but I’m pretty sure “We don’t have to protect the environment, the Second Coming is at hand” has been debunked. So we’ve got that one, the Bush one about God telling him to go to war as well (which from what I’ve seen is a translation of a translation of a what someone recalls him saying two weeks later), the Rehnquist quote which (IMHO) is about interpretation of the law and not his personal beliefs.
As for the rest- I’m shocked- shocked!- Ann Coulter/Fred Phelps/Randall Terry have such hateful and stupid things to say.
The James Watt quote was indeed bogus. The source given for the Bob Dornan quote a few posts above was just an assertion, not a documentation. The Rev. Bailey Smith quote is indeed sadly accurate but also irrelevant- it’s over 20 years old, has been apologized for repeatedly by him with the apologies being accepted by Jewish leaders who knew him, was immediately decried by every major conservative religious figure (including Falwell & Robertson), and besides- have you ever heard of the Rev. Bailey Smith in any other context than when that quote gets paraded around?
The James Watt quote was indeed bogus. Another fake quote attributed to him was recently cited by Bill Moyers “When the last tree is cut down, then Jesus will
return.”
What Watt DID say (and this is a paraphrase) was something like “As Interior Secretary, I have the responsibility of being steward of the environment until Christ comes back.” Kinda odd, but not the smoking gun of Fundy Loonyness.
The source given for the Bob Dornan quote a few posts above was just an assertion, not a documentation.
The Rev. Bailey Smith quote is indeed sadly accurate but also irrelevant- it’s over 20 years old, has been apologized for repeatedly by him with the apologies being accepted by Jewish leaders who knew him, was immediately decried by every major conservative religious figure (including Falwell & Robertson), and besides- have you ever heard of the Rev. Bailey Smith in any other context than when that quote gets paraded around?
Yeah, but does Freddy really count? Can’t we just all disown him preemptively? I mean, you wouldn’t quote Lyndon Larouche as a voice for Democrats.
I’m actually glad you brought that up and agree completely. When quotes like those in the OP are bought up, they seem to be either derided or defended along party lines. Idiots are idiots, regardless of their party affiliation. Freddy is probably the worst of the bunch above, yet is a registered Democrat. That doesn’t stop me from calling him a hateful sack of fecal feasting fungi. Why wouldn’t everyone on all sides do the same?
Well seeing that “recent” thread mentioned by UncleBeer, the fact that I put the words “target” and “distraction” it seems quite obvious I meant that jews were picked on for specific reasons. They unfortunately make for good targets and distraction. I usually bookmark all threads I respond too… but being human I obviously failed to return to that one.
Well you seem not to care if the quotes are or not accurate !
I never said I didn’t care… just that they seemed legit. I’ve seen plenty of Dan Quayle quotes attributed to Bush Jr and I wouldn’t post fakes. DMC actually bothered to run after some of the quotes… thanks…
Now if one has to painstakingly research every quote due to anal retentive board members its going to be a hard time posting in the SMDB BBQ pit.Yes, April is ancient history. :rolleyes:
I (not Uncle Beer) dug through the GD ruins and excavated that gem to highlight the fact that while you’re shocked, shocked at extremism among selected American Christians, you’re not above causing offense to people of a different religious through shopworn stereotypes.
Your “specific reasons” are invalid in a great many cases. How about an acknowledgment of that?
I wasn’t offending jews in case you didn’t notice… but that jews do stick out and that the Nazi regime chose them as the perfect scapegoats is what I was talking about. Emphasis on scapegoat… the OP was about why right wingers hate jews.
Even though I think you’re being unfairly jumped on here (hell, you didn’t make the quotes up, you linked to a site which contained them) and that you sure as hell don’t deserve any scorn for not returning to that thread to answer (anyone who wants to continue down that trail will quickly see a ton of links to threads in which they forgot to return), I still don’t think your answer here gets you off the hook in an “obvious” manner.
I don’t understand what your statement in that thread was supposed to mean, and while this topic was admittedly a hijack, if what you posted was indeed inflammatory, then pitting others for making inflammatory statements is not really going to get you a lot of support.
Care to further enlighten those of us who are willing to give you the benefit of doubt?
My turn for what? Proving or disproving these is not my problem.
What, I’m a Republican, or maybe even a Christian, now? News to me.
Here, let me repeat let me repeat the main point of my previous post:
In other words, it’s a bad source. It has no particular value. Objecting to it has nothing to do with party affiliation, it has to do with at least some of it being crap.
My post above was started prior to this, so we’re narrowing it down somewhat, and I think I might even have an inkling as to where you’re coming from, but am not quite there.
Define “stick out” and we’ll be a lot closer to understanding.
If you wish to call a cite into question, it is indeed your job to show some evidence. Hell, I don’t get all giggly about the potential veracity of some of them, but quite a few of them are indeed completely accurate, and while I happen to be aware of at least one of them being unsubstantiated, you haven’t offered a single iota of evidence of the cite having problems, other than hand-waving.
If you care to show me where I claimed this was a universal truth, with no exceptions, then your question might have merit. My statement was neither directed at you, nor in reference to you. I also was quite clear that the partisanship was demonstrated by both sides when it happens.
While you might find the page itself worthless, the pitting is still very much warranted, as a large number of them have been demonstrated to be just as inflammatory when attributed, dated, and shown in context. I’m not sure what the fact that they have different viewpoints or political agendas has to do with anything. I’d guess that the various members of the Taliban weren’t all Borg-like in their group-think.
I don’t necessarily consider it a flawless source.
While that might be true, you haven’t yet made a case for it. Some of those people have downright scary ideas. In and of itself, that’s not so bad. Some of them have power and influence. That is bad.
And the rest of it?
“Stick out” as having different clothes, hairstyle, tend to be highly educated and have different religious practices. I don’t think they were specifically hated by right wingers as in the OP but that they were the perfect target due to “sticking out”: ie: For being different. Poor working german took to the idea quite easily.
Naturally a few high german leaders had personal issues with Jews… but that isn’t a right wing thing necessarily. Jews were universally picked on.
I wasn’t offending you when I called you a mother fucker. :rolleyes:
So do you hold or retract your claims that Jews have lots of money and stick out like a sore thumb?