Episode – “Meet the Jaffers”
Synopsis: When JJ’s parents arrive for the wedding, JJ’s mother Noora tells Rayyan a huge secret, but swears her to secrecy. Only problem is, can she keep a secret from JJ.
Airing Monday March 16th 2009 !
How will Noora and Rayyan get along? What is the big secret? Will she tell JJ?
Little Experiences ... 
Show has been Online 🙂
Enjoy all
They are REALLY milking this, aren’t they? Isn’t there just one more episode before the end of the season? Are they planning on hanging on til the NEXT season?????
NO! although i do not want JJ to marry Rayyan, at this point i don’t care if she and Rev. McGee elope. As long as they end this and go on to something else.
lol.
btw, where have i seen “auntie nunu” from? she looks so familiar! oh yes, i remember…she was the coroner on that Canadian vampire series, Blood Ties.
Richard, stop video spamming! You’re slowing down the page.
Steve needs to see Nahida is a direct threat to the country. The company of friends she prefers is proof! She doesn’t relate to normal people. How does he explain that?
Nahida, can I ask you something if you haven’t gone to bed yet? How do you love people in other countries so deeply while still maintaining complete loyalty to yours? And the same with Steve and his own ideology v.s. yours? How can you love him? And how do you reconcile things your understanding of immigrants needing to get to your country, or of loving people in other countries, and tighter borders?
Excuse me, things like your understanding*
I haven’t gone to bed yet. Surprise, surprise.
Your whole question has to do with borders, you know that? National borders and ideological borders. What is there to reconcile, Selina? The most beautiful things awaken mysteriously along the borders: the changing of the leaves on the border from one earthly season to the next, the dusk as the border that turns the day into the evening, the shore near where I grew up my whole life is the border between the land and the sea, the boundaries of the moon in its changing quarters rocking the tides where the atmosphere meets. The border is ardent desire, a state of longing, a midway of desperation to reach each other but somehow unable, prevented by the very thing you are yourselves, a beautiful but selective construction–the contraints of your own temptations shaping your way. The border is falling in love but unable to speak of it, aware of the presence the other still, making quiet, soft, and loving acknowledgment. The border is love refined.
…What the HELL did I write last night?
Why is it that I never drink, yet am rarely sober?
Oooh I think I read something like this somewhere.
I think it’s time to go to bed and wake up at 12.
The border is a passage, a way, to a different realm of existence–and in that, there is interest in both preservation and passing, because the way to something is so significant.
I will NEVER be as mature as you. EVER.
Don’t you want him to love you, too? Aren’t there things you want to tell him?
If only you knew how childish I am. Isn’t this whole thing childish in itself?
Well, yes, of course. But I understand that he doesn’t, and I understand he rather not. And the least I could do, after all the trouble I’ve caused (we are talking about it still, I mean really) is accept his boundaries and what makes him uncomfortable. I am terribly sorry for this.
Let’s stop now. It’s 2:12 A.M. I am going to force myself to go to bed.
Nahida, asked you this before but dont think you saw. How do you pronounce your name?
And I bet you’re up…
Exactly as it’s spelled. Nah-hee-dah All the ‘a’s are soft.
Saying my own name to myself out loud is a level of intimacy I don’t think I’ll ever be ready for.
Early rise, late to bed…
Are you healthy, wealthy, and dead?
Oh and you say it so that there’s not any emphasis on any particular syllable.
I’m definitely not wealthy.
Maybe a little dead?
That’s cause you never went to bed!
I did go to bed last night, but only slept for 2 hours. I had a dream about Ronald Reagan, though I never knew him except through his letters. He told me about his trip to an allied country. He said, “Nahida, a partner is a competitor, you remember that.” Then he told me he was getting a haircut.
How strange. I don’t know if that’s something he would say.
Wow, so true.
He was a great man indeed.
I miss him.
We need someone like him soon or all chance of restoring this once great nation will be lost.
There’s no such thing as “Friends” in international affairs. Just allies and that can change from time to time.
The problem I have with today’s immigrants (and perhaps it was true in the past as well but I wonder if to this extent) is that they all to often retain loyalty to the “old country”. And I strongly believe that one can not be loyal to two countries at the same time as interests will inevitably conflict.
Richard is right. And Nahida doesn’t even seem that outraged about this. Doesn’t that make you wonder?
After watching my government tell my private insurance what they can or can not cover in my reproductive healthcare, tell my hospitals what they can or cannot provide by blurring the lines between right and access, tell me when I am or am not pregnant and deny me the care I paid for, allow my employers to violate my privacy and interrogate me as to whether I am using contraceptives for sexual activity or for hormone imbalance, am I outraged to see these very men forced to make a purchase in which they have no choice, suddenly concerned about government confiscating private insurance?
No. I only laughed manically.
Do you feel the country died yesterday? I felt it months ago.
Nahida has always sounded American to me. I have talked to foreigners before so I can tell the difference. And when I say American I mean in her heart and soul, not merely the legalities of citizenship.
Obama on the other hand is a foreigner. Again, I am not talking about the legalities of citizenship but his heart and soul.
Nahida, listen to the second Reagan video I posted.
He said it better than I ever could.
Actually I think this show explains it pretty well.
[audio src="http://stevedeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/deace_podcast_062812_hour2.mp3" /]
You’re going to piss him off eventually. I don’t have what I want YET, but I will, Nahida.
He lived his whole life hating the Left, and he will hate you too and want nothing to do with you. And then there will be justice for women like you, who enslave men and torture them. You’ll finally know what it feels like.
He lived his whole life hating the Left. One woman can’t undo that.
He really is being kind now just to be polite.
You may be beautiful, but there’s nothing else about you he could possibly find attractive.
One woman never had neither the intention nor even the thought of undoing that.
And for the second time, you got what you wanted. And also for the second time, drop those absurd charges against my sisters; they have done no such thing.
You know Nahida, I am feeling today like I felt on 9-11.
There’s a deep emptiness in my heart. A sense of horror. An understanding that what I thought this country was has just changed. A fear that my country will never be what it needs to be again.
I don’t know if I am still in shock but this emptiness and horror consumes me.
Grant, great audio program. This Steve Deace certainly nailed it. The Republic is dead. Perhaps it has been for a while but this confirms it.
I am sorry for what you are feeling, Steve.
I don’t feel it now. I felt it at a different time.
Quite frankly I don’t see this as nearly as unforgivably and inconceivably invasive as the intimate violations to my privacy, personhood, and reproductive rights in healthcare by government systems. I felt so bitterly smug yesterday. A cruel, grim sense of satisfaction. But not with you. I was saddened at your reaction. I think I’d prefer you angry than like this. I was hoping you would be angry, like I was. Anger is easier.
Nahida, I wish you knew the America I knew, during the Reagan Adminstration.
It was really the greatest country on earth back then.
But now the light of liberty is snuffed out. I can’t tell you how I feel. I didn’t even feel this bad on 9-11. I have never felt this bad. We are going into the Independence Day holiday and I don’t know how I can celebrate it.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/america_fades_the_world_gets_darker.html
Well, I remember the day he died. I was 13. My mother was very, very quiet. She drove me to school and said, “The best Republican president we will ever have just died, Nahida, and the ones who follow him will kill us all.” (My mother votes conservative on practically every issue but detests the Republican party; as a child I never understood it and chalked it up to her being vigilantly anti-war. The end of America my mother feared was one resulting from moral degeneration.)
“But you weren’t even in this country when he was president,” I stated pointedly. “You missed him by about four years, a whole term.”
“And you weren’t even born when he was president,” she retorted, “so how are we different?”
Well as sorry as I was that he died, I didn’t miss him then like my mother did. There was something that seemed absurdly out of place about it all, awkward, like I was looking for something I didn’t quite understand. Years later, I would discover what it was. I suppose simply hadn’t known him. I read his letters when I was a few years older and shocked myself by dissolving into tears. Particularly knowing he had Alzheimer’s–which is just about the most haunting thing to observe happen to someone. I remembered a video I had watched in a science class about Alzheimer’s, the empty shell of a body left, with all functions still maintained, but the person mysteriously missing. It was the cruelest possible disease to everyone else still alive; a mockery. As long as the body lived, there would always be a desperate search for what it once contained. And that happened to the man who wrote these letters. These letters. Where could he have gone? How could he have abandoned us, so discreetly as to leave no dead body as evidence that his soul had gone–but a living one?
I would have loved Reagan unwillingly. I think it might have been impossible not to love him, but I would have done it unwillingly. There are things I would have taken issue with. I don’t believe trickle down actually works (maybe because I’m alive now and wasn’t then and everyone attempting it in Reagan’s name is failing miserably), I probably wouldn’t have been too thrilled with his budget cuts on mental health while he was the governor of my state, and I definitely would not have been thrilled with the fact that he opposed legislation that would illegalize discriminating against someone on the basis of skin color for housing–his motives for “personal freedoms” weren’t; he was infringing on the very freedoms of those who would have been denied the right to live where they please, and I would have thought him a fool for not realizing this simple logic, would have taken it as evidence of the racism he denied existed within himself. Not much–enough of it to hint that he didn’t fully see “Negroes” as deserving citizens; had they been white he would have recognized immediately that “your freedom ends where mine begins.” You have personal freedom until it overlaps with someone else’s. Nothing else could explain this gross overlooking but that mentality. I would have been relieved, of course, when he came to his senses, which he did. I would have been enraged that, during the time he was governor of CA, he changed his mind and became anti-choice and therefore anti-woman, but that was after he had already signed a pro-choice bill and there couldn’t have been any practical damage. I would have detested him far more for this than for his previous stance on fair housing. He would have allowed women to die. This one issue is so significant that if there were a candidate who shared with me on every other issue but this one, I’d vote for the other. If he were a man, that is. If a woman, I would be a little more flexible. I can’t stand arrogant men sailing off centuries of patriarchal oppression and standing by, disposing of the bodies of women like instruments. An unspeakable violation of “personal freedom” that he supposedly supported.
Of course, those are really just three things. I think, over all, I might have been happy. I would have loved him as a person, even if I had issues with him as a president. I know that, reading what he wrote and feeling strangely like I miss him even though I never knew him. I had not expected to actually cry. But he had seemed so alive in the words.
Campaign ads were way classier back then I see.
We are going into the Independence Day holiday and I don’t know how I can celebrate it.
I always can, no matter what happens. Or at least, I have yet to be broken. I think this because of my concept of America, which isn’t manifested in reality but in values;–it’s illogical, I’ve always told myself, to celebrate a reality when there have been few points in the nation’s history in which its values of hard work and liberation have been fully manifested into its reality. But as long as they are upheld as an objective, the values of America as the foundation will live regardless of how unfulfilling the reality is, and continue to live past the life of the nation itself. Land, and people, are impermanent, but principle–even abstract–is the life-force itself.
This is simply how I am; overly idealistic to the point where it will inevitably destroy me. I have noticed that my approach to various concepts is similar to a religious one. I would continue to celebrate America regardless of how unsatisfied I am with its state of reality the same reason I continue to practice Islam regardless of how unsatisfied I am with its state of reality–my commit and loyalty are to the values. The 4th of July is the birth of the nation–the abstract dream–after all, not the tangible reality. Often, I wish I weren’t bound to things this way. At times it seems like such a cruel thing to do to oneself. A religious thing. It is much easier to love what you can measure for certainty. To love what is reachable. There is some compassion in this in this practicality. Relief.
Sometimes I wish I were a more practical woman, but I am not practical enough to wish it often.
I just finished reading the decision: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf
Regardless of how one feels about universal healthcare, I’m having trouble pinning exactly how this is against the Constitution; it seems to have been written to be carefully in line with Supreme Court precedent on Congressional regulation of health. As creative and convincing as the oppositional arguments were, on precisely what grounds is it Constitutionally invalid when it was written to fit the frame of Supreme Court precedent on health / Congressional power issues? In that sense wasn’t Roberts, who always swore he placed precedent before ideology, remaining true to his oath?
Roberts is a very evil man (or perhaps he is mentally ill, I hear that some drugs he is on might be effecting him).
How can you tax someone for NOT doing something?
What if someday the government says you must buy a Chevy Volt. Oh, I take that back you don’t have to, but if you don’t we will “Tax” you $50,000.
This isn’t the first bad ruling of the Supreme Court. It is just the one that kind of pounds the nail into our nation’s coffin.
By the way, have you ever read the “Federalist Papers” and the “Anti Federalist Papers”? They explain the reasoning behind how this country was founded.
One thing that has always stuck with me is George Washington’s explanation of what government is about. “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master..”
For liberty to exist government must be contained into a well defined and limited sphere. When it breaks out from that sphere then Freedom Dies!
Oh, and your mother was right about Bush. Bush Sr was bad and as we saw yesterday Bush Jr. was worse! I despise the Republican party.
Nahida, could you explain how RTelier got what he wanted? I honestly don’t understand that statement.
Do you see now, Steve?
I have not gone, everyone. I’ll face his revulsion.
No, Honestly I do not.
Because what he wanted was for you to stop wanting me Steve.
Federalist Papers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:Federalist_Papers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalist_Papers
The Anti-Federalist Papers
http://librivox.org/the-anti-federalist-papers-by-patrick-henry/
http://librivox.org/the-federalist-papers-by-alexander-hamilton-john-jay-and-james-madison/
Evil? Well, he was appointed by Bush so he may very well be, but I’m not familiar enough with him–and if he is, is it really for this reason? I understand your stance on this ideologically, but you also said it was unConstitutional, and that is what I was asking. Roberts swore he would place precedent before ideology (not to say that one is better than the other; frankly, if we all stuck to precedent we’d adhere to the most inhumane of practices and systems–tradition is not moral by merit) and that is what he did, regardless of whether it was the right decision or the wrong one. He wasn’t deceptive. He was quite conservative (in the classical sense) you just needed him to be liberal (in the classical sense.) It’s not argumentatively a violation of the Constitution; only ideologically. To be honest (I don’t know if my own opinion came through before or not; I wasn’t trying to make any sort of statement) I believe health care is a right (like any liberal), not a privilege, but I definitely wouldn’t have wanted it like this. I’m kind of annoyed I even have to have car insurance (and that is only mandatory if you drive a car, so it’s not even unfair–just a qualifier.) Still, Roberts gave you exactly what he said he would.
Because “women like me” deserve to know what it feels like, since we are so heartless apparently, RTelier’s objective (besides his initial objective of getting you to admit what you did) was to ensure you would never want me.
And he doesn’t. You’re right, I probably got what I wanted already. You’re a radical feminist, a liberal, and you prefer foreign friends. You ruined his life with that just like you feminists ruined mine. And the more you keeping talking, he’ll see your faults and hate your personality, because women who look like you are CONCEITED and shallow. You don’t look twice. You don’t even look once.
Based on what he’s put first his WHOLE LIFE, all you’ve got going for you are your looks.
Nahida, you have no idea what a right is.
These people do!
[audio src="http://stevedeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/deace_podcast_030212_hour3.mp3" /]
More on rights. I doubt you are going to finish this audio Nahida as it is going to make you so mad.
They say we should pay for Prostitutes for people like RTelier.
[audio src="http://stevedeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/deace_podcast_030212_hour1.mp3" /]
Grant, you are not going to VIOLATE MY RIGHTS TO PRIVACY AND AUTONOMY FOR THE PAST SIX MONTHS AND THEN TELL ME I DON’T KNOW WHAT A RIGHT IS.
Go to Hell.
You got exactly what you deserved yesterday.
Maybe now you’ll think twice before shoving medical devices into places they don’t belong and allowing employers to violate your privacy by interrogating you on why you’re taking specific medication. How does that feel? HOW DOES IT FEEL?
You’re such a baby. SUCH a baby. You think this is a violation of your rights? You haven’t seen violation. Men will NEVER know violation like I know it.
Pay for his prostitutes? Men are the reason we ARE prostitutes.
Don’t tell me about rights.
You have NEVER had to fight for yours like I have. Ever.
I am so angry. Grant, don’t EVER speak to me again.
From what I can tell from the audio in question what the WOMAN was saying was that if sex is a right so much so that others must pay for someone’s contraception, then shouldn’t it be a right for men to get the government to pay for Prostitute.
And yes, it was a woman who said that if you listen to the audio.
What is your definition of a “Right” and how can anything that you must depend on others for be a right. Here’s an example. You have a right to free speech bur you don’t have the right to force a newspaper to print your opinions.
Unbelievable. Grant, you owe her an apology.
What made you think it was okay to say something like that? Did you even know who you were speaking to?
That shouldn’t even matter, would you let someone talk to YOU like that?
Selina, just don’t. He’s too overwrought with male privilege and entitlement to even COMPREHEND the enormity of what he just said to me.
I am not going to tolerate anyone that CONDESCENDING.
Gosh, you would think Nahida as much as anyone would understand the concept of “Consent”.
If you need someone else’s consent then it isn’t a right.
You have got to be kidding me.
I didn’t LISTEN to the audio Steve. And I won’t listen to it, especially not after what Grant said. I wasn’t TALKING about “other people” paying for contraceptives. Did I mention that anywhere? Did I even utter the word “contraceptive”? I stopped EXACTLY where Grant had the nerve to say I didn’t know what a right is.
You’re the ones blurring the line between rights and access. This is what you have always done. You cannot conflate them, and then tell me that you are only denying me access, not a right.
You will especially not tell me I don’t understand what a right is after you have attempted to make it legal for me to undergo unnecessary transvaginal probes before a surgical procedure and to make it legal for my employer to ask me why I am using contraceptives, whether they are for sexual activity or other purposes, in a gross violation of my autonomy and privacy that men will NEVER have to endure. I will NOT tolerate this after being told that I am pregnant two weeks before conception, that if I miscarry I am a murderer, and that men can have all the free Viagra they want WITHOUT their employers asking if they are using it for medical necessity or just to have sex. I will NOT tolerate this after months of a war on women. And I will certainly not tolerate it from Grant, or you, or anyone else who has access to everything they need and has NEVER known what it feels like to be unable to tell your own doctor that you’re a woman, or to be considered in a state of perpetual pregnancy by your insurance lest your rights be violated. You have no idea what it feels for your whole damn existence to be considered a pre-existing condition, because you are measured by the standards of the opposite sex.
But you are just beginning to now.
Those doctors have already been PAID. If they don’t want to do their jobs, they can find another. If we still had tests before allowing people to practice their right to vote in order to limit their access, you would deny it was an affront to their rights!
It’s such a fun game the Right has been playing.
“Oh, sure, you have the right to the morning after pill if you paid for it; you just don’t have the right to actually be able to make that purchase if your doctor is personally against it.”
You’re telling me I don’t understand the concept of rights? Of course you would. You would LOVE for me to believe that. You’ve been attempting to redefine it in application for long enough.
It would have been perfectly conceivable for Grant to have left the link without adding insult to months–YEARS, a HISTORY–of injury. I would have listened to it without his idiotic remark. And now I certainly will not. I can’t humor the false analogies of the Right, who believe that a woman controlling her menstrual cycle is the equivalent of a man seeing a prostitute. Or that an Arab festival is a civil rights rally. I discredited that guy on the spot there, but I would have listened without Grant’s atrocious condescension.
When someone tries to violate your rights so extensively that they tell you you must pay for a colonoscopy in order to fill a cavity, you will be on level ground to tell me I don’t know what a right is.
I know better than Grant. I know because I have had them pried from my hands.
I wouldn’t have passed this if I were on the Supreme Court.
But I am SUPER EXCITED it passed. What a serving of poetic justice! Outraged that you’re forced to pay for something? Feeling the government is way too close to your very personhood to the point where they’re shoving their hands into your wallets? The fact that 3 of the 5 judges were women just makes it so much sweeter. You haven’t felt anything. You haven’t felt anything until they are cutting off your fingers.
Your party allowed this to happen. This started with the extreme violations of privacy that continued on American citizens unjust and unnecessarily. You’ve allowed the government into your very phone lines. And into the reproductive business of half the country. You’ve desensitized the American people to what this means.
When a fetus cannot survive outside someone else’s body because it requires that woman’s blood supply and nourishment from every organ to live, anti-abortionists shame her into providing for it with her very vitality at the risk of her death. I sincerely hope they are as enthusiastic about shaming those who refuse to become organ donors to the fullest extent while still alive, because other actual full human beings–not just embryos–will die without their generous supply.
When someone tells you that while you are still alive you must donate every possible organ of your body to another who needs them to live even if it could kill you, you are on level ground to tell me I don’t know what a right is.
Do you know what a right is?
How can anything that needs someone else’s talent/effort and or property ever be a right!
No I doubt you would listen to this program.
[audio src="http://stevedeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/deace_podcast_030212_hour1.mp3" /]
It is bad enough for you when you hear men say it. But to hear a woman say it would probably drive you crazy.
You go on and on about what Rights are but you have not spent the time to understand America and the philosophical underpinnings of America like I have Nahida. And it isn’t because you can’t. Like I said you are a genius.
Here I linked to you the Federalist Papers, and have you even taken the time to read them. Forget reading them, I have even given you audio files that you can put on your MP3 player and listen to while doing other things, and you don’t seem interested.
http://librivox.org/the-federalist-papers-by-alexander-hamilton-john-jay-and-james-madison/
A right isn’t a right just because you want it to be, Nahida. As condition of birth you are owed respect for your inalienable rights, but that’s ALL you are owed. You aren’t owed other people’s property. You aren’t owed other people’s talent, their efforts. That’s infringing upon THEIR RIGHTS!
Your Liberty To Swing Your Fist Ends Just Where My Nose Begins.
*rolls eyes* Why do rightwingers think “I doubt you would listen to this” is going to make me listen to it?
You’re right, I won’t. Not because it’s a woman. I have already told you I much prefer hearing the most disgusting advocations of violation from a woman than a man. It is more tolerable, not less.
But because of your *incredible* hypocrisy on when something is or isn’t considered a right. Your definition is not consistent–it’s tight when it applies to someone else and loose when it applies to yourself. Did you even read the 50 comments I typed?!
Oh, Steve, I already knew you weren’t Grant. Even if you agreed with his sentiment you wouldn’t have said something that is so disastrously the epitome of dumbfuckery. You would have just given me a definition and told me I was wrong. Even if you missed the whole point of my argument and thought I was saying something I’m not actually.
Surely you can see why such a statement would be *beyond* offensive?
I love you. I am certain that if it weren’t for you I would despise the entire Right at this point because of what they have tried to do in the past year and a half, even if I told myself over and over on principle that it is illogical and indecent to feel that way about half the country. And now I never could because of you. You have saved me.
Here, read them again:
“Oh, sure, you have the right to the morning after pill if you paid for it; you just don’t have the right to actually be able to make that purchase if your doctor is personally against it.”
[…]
If we still had tests before allowing people to practice their right to vote in order to limit their access, you would deny it was an affront to their rights!
Do you have the distinction yet?
When someone tries to violate your rights so extensively that they tell you you must pay for a colonoscopy in order to fill a cavity, you will be on level ground to tell me I don’t know what a right is.
Have you got why I was so offended now?
When someone tells you that while you are still alive you must donate every possible organ of your body to another who needs them to live even if it could kill you, you are on level ground to tell me I don’t know what a right is.
How about now?
Your party allowed this to happen. You’ve allowed the government […] into the reproductive business of half the country. You’ve desensitized the American people to what this means.
Do you see my issue now?
Don’t tell me the definition of a right is different for you than it is for me. I believe healthcare is a right because you have DEMONSTRATED that it is with your gratuitous policing, not because it fits my understood definition. I was the one who, when speaking of Reagan, said a right is a right until it overlaps with the right of another. I said it HERE. First. Before you, and before Grant. You want me to stick to that? You stick to it first.
This has done nothing.
Steve, during the first podcast, as they were discussing Sandra Fluke, they approached her argument with one that she never made yet again. (I am really sick of this.) She did not even once mention her sex life, but they calculated how many times she would have to have sex for birth control to cost as much as she stated. Not only did they boast about calculating this, but they calculated it incorrectly—women’s birth control is not taken according to the number of times she has sex, so to say she would have to have sex three times a day for birth control to cost as much as she stated and then joke about how she must be attending a terrible school with a lax curriculum, without it ever occurring to them that their calculations must be off (or to check whether the method of birth control they have used as the standard was the one to which she was referring—birth control treating POCS is different than treating other ailments) is not only highly intellectually dishonest but entirely dodging the issue. The only reason conservatives would continuously revolve around this nonexistent point for their arguments is because slut-shaming is highly effective: had Rush Limbaugh (as he was defended in the podcast) actually listened to Fluke, he would have been entirely unable to make the analogy to prostitution that he made, because she was not asking for birth control for sexual activity, but for ovarian cysts—which she specifically stated. It was much more convenient for him to rely on patriarchal double standards to accomplish that work for him, simply because the subject was birth control; after all, Hannity made no such analogy to the coverage of Viagra—there wasn’t even a single argument on the premise that fertility is “normal” (which is highly faulty but understandable as premise) as to why that drug should be covered but not birth control, which prevents fertility. This argument still would not, however, excuse the hypocrisy of the conservative proposition that employers are allowed to interrogate women to distinguish between those who are using birth control for necessity or for sexual activity so that it may be covered accordingly (to the whims of the employer), as conservatives do not also propose employers shuffle through the medical records of their male employees to distinguish between those who are using Viagra because they intend to have children (fertility as medically “normal”) or simply because they are having sex.
In fact, the entire framework of this argument is incoherent: you don’t want the government to interfere with your private purchases (like insurance), but by insisting that birth control not be covered rather than left to the individual at the range of option for insurance plans, you are allowing government to do exactly that.
On civil versus inalienable rights (second podcast): suppose every doctor decided they were religiously against medication for heart attacks, asthma, and urinary tract infections? This is not new. You must have heard it before. (I have heard everything they said in the podcasts before.) Surely you can see how absurd it is to uphold this? Why should any exemption exist for those against birth control, particularly since the woman on the other side of the counter’s life may be at even higher risk than the results of asthma and urinary tract infections? Those who cannot perform based on their religious beliefs should not hold those jobs in the first place. I’m not going to be hired to waitress at a restaurant and then refuse to serve alcoholic drinks to those who order them! Can you imagine the outrage? I suppose the right to practice my religion—supposedly an inalienable right—would still be championed by conservatives then?
When I said that healthcare is a right and Grant decided to be a presumptuous douchebag about it, I was saying specifically that it is demonstrably a right, not denotatively, based on the mechanisms of the conservative ideology. I already said everything in the comment above. As long as conservative anti-abortionists assert that a fetus, something that cannot survive outside the womb and needs to reside within my boundaries, has the right to the productions of, and consumption to, my body even at the risk of my own death, I will believe that healthcare is a RIGHT—I will believe that I am entitled to the care I require, even at the expense of others, and that I myself pay for. And I will believe that conservative anti-abortionists who do not affirm that everyone needs to donate their organs to save the lives of others who demand them are HYPOCRITES. You’d stop swinging your fist at the degree that you can feel the air from my nose, but I’d suppose you’d be fine living off my very bodily existence?
Do I need this argument? Of course not. I can be pro-choice without it, based on other arguments. But it is pretty solely because of this that I believe healthcare is a right (contemptuously), and you cannot give rights selectively to fetuses because you suspect they “might just” be too close to human, at the risk of others who are (inarguably) humans and in violation of their bodily rights. This is BEYOND punching someone in the nose.
Why should I fund churches with my tax money, while they have tax exempt status, so that religious individuals could force their beliefs into the functions of my life and limit my freedoms? I’m not allowed healthcare on “their” dollar (because I’m not paying too apparently) but I have to fund their religious activities?
I have often heard conservatives argue that liberals place overly idealist Utopian objectives before the functions of practicality, and that’s why they want to fund a bunch of programs that sound nice and fuzzy but don’t actually do any good and consume unbelievable amounts of money. This is what they are doing now. Your applications are not only impractical in manifestation but (while I would normally admire the fast adherence to principle) exceedingly hypocritical.
Do you know how EASY it would be for me to be a conservative? I live the lifestyle. I probably live a more conservative lifestyle than most conservatives do. Half the country could go to hell—denied abortions and gay marriage and accessible contraceptives—and it wouldn’t affect me at all. I’ll probably never get an abortion, I’m a straight woman, and I’m pretty low on money at the moment but if I needed contraceptives I could afford them. Why should I care?
Because I don’t want to tell people how to live, whom to marry, or punch them in the nose. Or force them to harbor other “human beings” in their bodies because I value life so much—that’s easy when I’m not “paying” for that life myself, isn’t it? Everyone who’s pro-life better not have both kidneys.
My browser is acting up, and this comment isn’t appearing in the feed to the side. Can you see it?
Oh never mind it was the server.
Did we move away from this after your chickens come home to roost thing?
When that woman said that inalienable rights always trump civil rights she was WRONG. She was demonstrably wrong. I already gave examples in the comments above. With the waitressing and alcoholic drinks, and–even before I heard the podcast–with the right to vote. You have the inalienable right to vote (as manifestation of freedom of speech), Steve, but your right for your vote to be counted is a CIVIL right. And a civil right is still a right. And a civil right is functionally as important as an inalienable right. And it is not trumped by the racist, sexist, or religious beliefs of others.
And that is another reason it is entirely conceivable that healthcare is a right. (Even outside of me being contemptuous.)
Every argument made on the program was completely unsound; otherwise, they would have held in all circumstances, and I doubt conservatives would be willing.
That is because the right to religion is an inalienable right of belief, not of practice.
The practice of religion is a civil right.
They can’t deny you the vote, but they can believe you shouldn’t have it. They can’t deny you the medication, but they can believe you shouldn’t have it.
They can practice their religion until it gets in my way without my consent.
What if I were against Muslims having guns? I believe Glenn Beck had taken a different position on that than he would on the “right” to deny someone contraceptives.
The Right can say that they’ve hardly been violent, that they succumbed to the rhetoric only after the Left, that abortion clinic bombers and the like are lone wolves, but that is only the violence that can be seen. In these past months they have no idea what they have tried to take from me. They deny a war on women is even happening. But it is more intrusively violent that I can even describe, against a demographic that has always been “owned” and oppressed, and it will not stand. I will not believe, from seeing this and other things, that the Right have not contributed to the provocation of the Left at least as equally before I lived.
And what has the Right against women to declare a war on us and violate our most basic rights to privacy and bodily autonomy and even suggest infringing on civil rights like the vote and (successfully) on fair pay? We have smashed no windows. In our liberation we have practiced none of the barbaric cruelties of men–concentration camps, the raping and killing of enemies, the physical beating of the opposition, jeering and belittling and shaming–and in fact endured these things through the peaceful suffragist movement to the peaceful slutwalks. The civil rights credited to men (of color) have turned violent but never a women’s movement. The civil rights credited to men (of the poor) have turned violent but never a women’s movement. The Left has been ruthless and so the Right must act the same? And what justification is there for these gratuitous attacks by the Right on women’s bodies and privacy?
I will never forgive them. I will never overlook this. I will never “understand” that this is justified.
I was so horrified and disgusted by Mark’s “innocuous” statement that blacks have lower IQ. This is the psuedo-“intellectual” racism of the alternative Right–and Steve believes it is solely harbored in the Left, responsible for eugenics and the Holocaust! Violence has no ideology. It is its own. Hatred has no ideology. It is its own. When a rightwinger suggests a race has a lower IQ and it is reflected in our society, when a leftist suggests conservatives are missing the “irony” gene and have larger hypothalamuses, there is no difference between them.
Eugenics that was something that was popular with the progressives of the early twentieth century. That may have been WAY before my time but I read history.
Oh, and this guy was WAY POPULAR with the Left in his day. Perhaps even now in academic circles.
By the way, first I said years, then I corrected myself and said decades, let me correct myself one last time and say GENERATIONS. Yeah for Generations we have played the “nice guy” as the Left has done some of the most horrendous of stuff. So if the Right gets ruthless in upcoming years, well IT IS ABOUT TIME.
Yeah, it’s been building for QUITE A WHILE!
Is that all, Steve? Everything I said just went over your head, and you have no logical counterargument.
The Right has no excuse for this war on women. NONE. And no excuse to be ruthless (and neither does the Left.)
Despicable.
You can turn away from any evidence of a Nazi mentality and science without morality from the Alternative Right, but that will not make it go away.
Mark said that this program says that Blacks have lower IQ. And I think he agreed with this program. Now I don’t agree with Mark or this program but I do find it ironic that it is hosted by noted Leftist Morgan Freeman (who also happens to be African American).
How is that even against ANYTHING I just said? Did I hold the Right accountable OVER the Left?
Did you even read my comments Steve?
I am growing weary of this intellectual dishonesty.
You were angry that I’d never heard that idiom and assumed it was because I had dismissed the Right as racists and you continuously refused to see the principle of my dismissal–but you’ve heard so little from the Left that you admitted you would not even know me, AND you agreed with Grant that I didn’t know what a right is without recognizing that the logic behind the sentiment I expressed. I’m betting I talk to the Right more than you talk to the Left, Steve, and Mark is not the first racist douchebag masquerading his hatred as intellectualism. There is an entire neoconservative branch of people like them. I encounter them all the time in feminist spaces. They tend to be libertarians.
The overlapping of the Left and the Right!
You can’t make this assertions that it’s only the Left anymore Steve. Not after what I’ve seen.
Oh, I know what the Left is Nahida. After last week they have made themselves PERFECTLY CLEAR (if they weren’t already so clear).
They are the greatest evil our Nation has ever faced. Responsible for Both Hitler and Stalin! And Castro to boot!
Have you looked up what “Fast and Furious” is yet? Besides some movie?
Steve, you have no idea. Repeating something doesn’t make it true.
You’re growing defensive. It’s suddenly not Roberts anymore, is it? It’s the Left! This is what happens to you. This is all I’ve seen of you until recently when you took an ounce of responsibility. And it doesn’t even matter how many times I criticize the Left–once I attack the Right THIS is what you do.
I’ve listened to the programs and argued against them, I reread the papers, I told you why I didn’t care about Obama’s reverend, and as long as you insist on acting like this Steve I don’t feel the need to look anything up to appease to you. I am the Left, and if you’re going to be this selective, I have every reason as well.
I am not the Left you knew. I am not the Left you know. I am the Left you never allowed to defend itself while you buried yourself in textbooks and journal articles and documentaries to confirm your own ideology. I am the Left you ignored, I am the Left you never spoke to, I am the Left you never wanted to understand and never intended to care for, but I am still the Left that exists. And if you insist that I don’t count, if you can’t see your own strawman fallacy, there is nothing I can do.
Repugs SUCK!
[video src="http://media.gbtv.com/open/gbtv/2012/06/29/rth_22685635_1200K.mp4" /]
Oh, I have 100 years of understanding of the Left and quite a lot of experience too!
They are America’s greatest evil. And they have all but destroyed this once great country of ours!
The truth about Egypt!
[video src="http://media.gbtv.com/open/gbtv/2012/06/29/rth_22683419_1200K.mp4" /]
To whom are you speaking, Steve? Me? Wouldn’t you rather watch something about me?
Spare yourself the efforts of trying to convince me. Why waste time conversing with a Leftist when you know me so well? You could be spending it doing much for valuable things, reaffirming your ideology without once considering that these arguments are unsound and for everything there is a valid counterargument and instead dismissing my statements as pure ignorance. You know me already, after all.
You had your mind made up the day you met me, Steve, and I never had any intention of changing it. I was never out to save your soul like you were to save mine. You don’t owe me the considerate reverence of validity through acknowledgment. But you know what? I don’t owe it to you either. I’ve only given it unwillingly, because I cannot control this process of acceptance where somehow–because the universe has cursed me–I love without the valuable and necessary ability of restraint and control, to selfishly to engender understanding of the other and thus save myself from the crimes of blanket generalities. An insincere love, a defense mechanism. Or a sincere one, my nature. I can’t tell. It’s almost insane. The brink of madness. A strange pain and hopeless aching. It is probably the selfish former. And it will continue regardless of whether you acknowledge the truth of responsibility or admit a level of defeat, and it will prevent me from despising the members of a specific grade of your ideology. But it will not entitle you to me countering every impulsive and delirious inconceivably one-sided point that you pull on whim.
Hate me, Steve! Believe I am bringing about evil! If it is difficult to reconcile with your affection, believe that I do it unknowingly and out of ignorance of history–believe this incorrect presumption before you ever admit that provocative racism and violence and other evils are fostered on your side as well, or that there are sound counterarguments I can offer to the constructions of your logic! Take that way if it is easier and you are too tired to change your opinion. I have no interest in changing you. I have no interest in you validating my identity as the Left enough to approach me without strawman fallacies and argue with the reality of me rather than the imaginary Left you’ve created. And obviously, neither do you.
I can only thank you for what you’ve given me unintentionally–the transformative effect of cruelty, and the alleviation of love (through the power of a single exception) in thwarting blind hatred–and close it here.
I warned you not to love someone more than they love you.
I warned you he would never take you seriously.
One woman can’t undo a lifetime of what he’s taught himself. Not even a woman like you. And it’s great.
I love how heartbroken she sounds.
She said she knows Steve doesn’t care about her, and it was true. But then after that she started to believe he did care. I could tell. Steve was really kind again, she let herself be fooled, then she was hit hard by the reality that if he can’t take her seriously, it means he doesn’t. And that’s why she sounds heartbroken now.
I didn’t think it was possible , but it happened. This victory is the sweetest.
I kind of feel bad for her. Only a little bit. I predict Nahida will live a short life. She’ll probably commit suicide because of what people put her through. Didn’t she say she thought about it before?
But women like her made me suicidal too.
I gotta thank Steve for coming through for me. I knew he would.
It is NECESSARY to destroy her to protect the country.
She was a threat from Day One. Every ideology she abides by is evil and so she MUST be evil. Good people don’t choose what she did.
I don’t know how Steve ever STOPPED thinking she was a threat. If anything, the more information that came out about her made it even clearer. She lied about where she was born and even said she has more foreign friends than Americans. We can not trust Muslims, we can not trust Feminists, and we can not trust Liberals. She was always a danger.
Even with her personality alone. Did Steve hear her say rarely socializes? She sounds psychopathic doesn’t she! Why can’t she relate to normal people? Like I said a person who is not capable of empathy can’t be good.
You know, so many Muslim are under the impression that in order to truly be Muslim one must want to bring shari’ah law to the country in which one resides?
Finally we get a Muslim to admit that this is indeed the goal of most Muslims.
Do you know how batshit insane my imam is? I attend the mosque I do because it’s conveniently located.
Again, WOW a Muslim admitting what goes on in that Mosque of theirs. Preachin’ that Jihad, encouraging them to attack America.
And she attends because “it’s conveniently located”.
Sounded kind of like she had aspirations to be a religious leader too.
Forget just not trusting her – she needs to be arrested and detained!
I kind of feel bad for her. Only a little bit. I predict Nahida will live a short life. She’ll probably commit suicide because of what people put her through. Didn’t she say she thought about it before?
She’d make the PERFECT suicide bomber. It fits TOO well.
Of course she’s psychotic. Did you hear about her childhood? I don’t blame Steve for not taking anything she says into account. Someone like that can’t think logically.
Well I don’t think she’s psychotic any more than very attractive women tend to be psychotic.
She is kind of a slut though.
She’s a threat to this country. If she did kill herself it would be the most patriotic act she could offer.
As long as she doesn’t take any TRUE Americans out with her.
Kirk, did you hear her say she reads enemy propaganda?
Typical Leftist.
I remember during the 1980s how the Leftists were all supporting the Soviet Union.
And a typical TERRORIST. Actually, I do hope she kills herself.
http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002gcS
“We spent 30 years playing by our opponents’ rules of engagement instead of forcing them to play by ours. During that time, we imagined that all we had to do was be right, present our views logically, and provide reams of documentation. We were under attack, whereas we thought we were merely under disagreement. We said we just needed to understand each other. The truth was, our adversaries understood us better than we knew. “
It seems that in her personal life she is actually an extremely kind individual. I find it odd indeed.
I don’t think she represents a threat to America in that she is going to become a suicide bomber, but there are subtle ways to destroy America that in the end can be even more effective.
I like to think she doesn’t know what she is doing, but then again, perhaps she does.
I am hoping that once she gets outside the University Environment she will become more reasonable.
You may not understand why the Jews “allowed” it to happen, Steve, but I do.
If she did kill herself it would be the most patriotic act she could offer.
Would you believe me then? Will you believe me then?
My imam is batshit insane. But not about taking down America. Who cares what I actually meant, though? Who cares which Muslims I was talking about when I said that about shari’ah law. Take him. And take me. Years from now, say it was the Left. They just jumped to conclusions. Like they always do. Then say I just wasn’t ruthless enough.
Because with the mentality I just found myself in reading these comments, I wouldn’t even try to stop you.
Reasonable, Steve? I already tried to have a conversation with you.
Did you hear about her childhood? I don’t blame Steve for not taking anything she says into account. Someone like that can’t think logically.
Is that it? Is that why you didn’t listen?
If I killed myself, would the act of patriotism convince you too?
Don’t talk about how they “allowed” it to happen. Have you heard of “battered woman syndrome” Steve? You will never understand the mentality that results from being harassed–or oppressed. If you are ready to advocate ruthlessness, it means you have not truly suffered.
Even the civil rights movement because ruthless after they had moved passed the degree of oppression that engendered the original peacefulness of the protests. After they forgot just a little how it felt.
Are you still not hearing me Steve?
You have never hurt me this deeply before. I didn’t think it could get worse than what you said in the past.
I’m done talking to you. There’s no point when you aren’t listening. There isn’t even anything left for me to say. I’m so angry at myself for believing you when you said you cared (just the last time you said it) that I’m not even interested in what you’re thinking now. It would be neither devastating nor relieving to me. I can’t feel anything anymore.
Because the Jews didn’t want to “do evil”. Well like I said, some might consider that noble, but not in my book.
If I killed myself, would the act of patriotism convince you too?
Just might convince him, yeah.
You’re finally getting what you deserve, Nahida. You’re not even really fighting, and he doesn’t think you’re “noble” either. Face the truth, he always hated you and never cared.
All this character defamation is actually working on him! He thinks you deserve it, won’t listen to you, and doesn’t want you. Because it’s working.
Do you hate him yet, Nahida?
No. Not even close.
I am not like you, RTelier.
I am sorry your heart has been broken. I am even more sorry that it healed so crookedly.
Broken hearts often heal in crooked ways.
Steve can think I’m as pathetic, unworthy, undesirable, and deserving of hatred as he wants. As long as it is only my own character, I will not turn into what you are trying to make me.
Your looks have REALLY gotten to your head, Nahida.
I am telling you he thinks you’re a Nazi terrorist slut who should go kill herself and you’re still acting so conceited even though you BELIEVE me.
That’s right. I believe you when you say he thinks I’m a Nazi terrorist slut who should go kill herself and I am still going to act this… “conceited.”
Oh, hell. Maybe you’re right. Maybe it is conceit. Maybe I think I’m too good to stoop to your level. Which in fact does make me exactly like you.
I don’t really care about the philosophy behind it. It would hurt him if I returned these things. And he is only hurting me. And as long as that is true I will not betray my promise to him.
I don’t believe that RTelier and you know I don’t.
I just believe she is very, very misguided.
I will feel very sad if she gets “caught in the crossfire” but this battle must be fought. Like I said it has been generations in the making.
Richard called you a psychopath because of your introverted. Said you weren’t capable of empathy. Albert said because you were abused as a child Steve as every reason not to listen to you. And he was fine with it. The character defamation worked, and if you don’t hate him now you deserve the pain you’re feeling.
You’re a slut, Nahida. What kind of person wants someone she hasn’t even met? There’s no other word for you.
Actually, Steve, I really believe you think that. And she believes it too. You haven’t even really been talking to her in the past couple of days. Just talking past her.
You’re the man who said he’d commit a war crime for her, and you’re throwing her away as a casualty.
I believe I defended her to some extent.
But I also know she can defend herself as well.
Look, RTelier, Beautiful women don’t have to give you the time of day if they don’t want to. Why shouldn’t they choose someone in their “own league”? Sure such stuff can hurt for us who aren’t as beautiful but in the end it’s the way of the world.
Just like if someone who smart and well educated can use that in order to make more money, why deny them that?
When we do, we bring us all down.
Aren’t you really engaging in socialist thinking when you attack Nahida’s beauty?
Oh, I know she can defend herself. She’s done it very well, over and over again. But what you’re too blind to see, and what she can’t accept, is that the person she’s defending herself against is YOU. Those were your people.
That’s what she called me too, a socialist. But she was wrong.
She’s a slut. No other kind of woman but a slut would want someone she never met.
Technically, they are also mine. But I am just angry she still cares about you when everything you stand for goes to that extent. It’s always the wrong guy.
RTelier, your positioning of Steve as the attacker is an abuse tactic against him. I will warn you now to stop, only once. If you persist you will face consequences.
Steve has chosen passively to disengage with me by disregarding my logical arguments these past couple of days and resorting to rhetoric. I am aware of this and will be disengaging with him now. You needn’t intervene.
By the way, I do have a life.
Yesterday I went to a picnic.
And now I have some work I really need to get done.
Get over Nahida’s beauty. Sure she wouldn’t give you the time of day (though the kind of person she is she just might) but then again you wouldn’t give the time of day to a woman who you didn’t find attractive. Men do this much more than women.
Also to Nahida, get away from the net for a while. Go shopping. And if a guy offers to buy you some $200 shoes, take him up on it and of course offer him nothing in return. I guess some men really get off on that. It’s called “Financial Domination”. And in the end, the fact that they are denied is what really turns them on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotic_humiliation
Of course I know you aren’t going to do that, and I understand why. You really aren’t that type of person. But as to getting off the net, yeah I think for a few days that would be healthy for you.
Y–… I–I… was that it?
If it turns him on? I am absolutely the kind of person to do that. I merely resist.
I’m not online as much as it seems. I just happen to be on my desktop more than usual lately doing other things and this is just here. I went to a picnic yesterday too. It was unimpressive.
Actually, I’m going to go spend money now. Have fun working.
NO.
I ALMOST HAD IT.
NAHIDA COME BACK HERE. COME BACK.
I listened to the audios in question, and yeah, I find it hard to understand why Nahida reacted the way she did.
When you need someone’s consent to exercise something, then it isn’t a right. In regards to health care you are saying that you are owed the skills of the doctors, the supplies of the hospitals, the rooms, etc. In fact you are denying the doctors, the hospital administrators, etc. their rights.
Your rights end when you start violating the rights of others.
By the way, I posted links to the Federalist Papers and the Anti Federalist papers, both the text versions and audio files. They make for an interesting read (or hear). I think it will give Nahida a better understanding of what the discussions are really all about.
Oh, I am not Grant. I know it gets confusing here at times.
Anti Federalist Papers.
http://www.wepin.com/articles/afp/index.htm
,
Federalist Papers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:Federalist_Papers
Remember this story.
http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/Wall-Street-protesters-gourmet/2011/10/19/id/415056
It ended like this
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/zuccotti_hell_kitchen_i5biNyYYhpa8MSYIL9xSDL
A security volunteer added that the cooks felt “overworked and underappreciated.”
I have always thought that Occupy should have FORCED the cooks to continue to work – regardless – at gun point if necessary. After all the occupy people had a RIGHT to this gourmet food!
I bet Grant is Steve.
Even if he isn’t, I bet Steve’ll think you’re being oversensitive. Maybe even “hysterical.”
Grant probably did it on accident, but I know exactly how to poke a feminist with a stick.
You have to admit, it’s not far from something Steve would say.
Oh, and you. I have been far too kind with you.
He’s just so broken-hearted, I told myself. I could only sympathize, I told myself.
So angry that you felt Steve got away with something, you were too entitled to see I forgave you too. That was already level, it should have been enough even by your entitled woman-hating logic, but it wasn’t enough for you. You wanted him to not want me so violently that it would break my spirit and kept trying even after you won.
Don’t like women? Go suck a cock.
There. THERE. Now you definitely have what you wanted. He’s going to be so disgusted I could say something like that, and I have just begun crying at the thought–against every attempted resistance of pride mustered in the alleged conceit of “women like me.” Are you happy now? I’ve just made myself entirely undesirable in a single sentence. Are you finally happy now? Has your hatred of me been satisfied?
You’re a whore, Nahida.
I wanted you know how it felt to be so upset you’re rejected that you broke down. And now you finally have. I have to admit, that was harder than I thought. You kept your cool for a long time, even for a woman who looks like you.
So yeah, NOW I’m happy.
Oh.
Ohhhhh.
How could I have let myself become someone like this?
I can’t stay here. I can’t turn into this. But how will live with the fact that I’m so weak? That instead of being able to retain any ounce of dignity on the face of indecency I left to avoid turning into this? How cowardly.
I can’t stand to see Steve’s reaction. I have to go.
Steve’s about to revoke your snowflake certificate.
On the plus side, at least RTelier finally left thanks to Nahida. YES.
But so did Nahida.
I want Nahida’s eyelashes.
Unless she’s wearing falsies. Does she wear falsies?
She doesn’t wear false eyelashes, no. They’re really that thick. But she’s wearing mascara probably.
“But I am SUPER EXCITED it passed. What a serving of poetic justice! ”
Gosh, I just said I feel worse than I did on 9-11 and you say something like that?
I am glad we weren’t discussing things when 9-11 happened. What would you have said to me then. “God Damn America”? “The Chickens have come home to roost”?
You leftists think that you can be offensive as you want. You can call legislation rape, you can laugh when we feel the lowest, but no for us to say something that even slightly offense to your sensibilities and you treat us like Nazis who have just committed mass murder.
As offensive as we might have become, it doesn’t come even half as close as what the Left has done. Laugh at Sharon Tate’s murder. Make “Fork” signs, hell, let’s make those people college professors!
I’m sorry, Steve. I really am. I wasn’t thinking of how you felt. And I wasn’t thinking specifically of you. I was so angry at… well I’m not going to repeat myself. Of course if I imagine how you feel now is how I felt about all those things I just described, I realize it is such a cruel thing to say. You know I also said I would never have actually let it by right?
I am sorry.
I don’t feel worse about this than I did on 9/11. I do whenever I read infringements of women’s rights on the news, but since you made the former comparison I didn’t quite register the correct feeling. I must have struck you through the heart! Gosh, I would be screaming and sobbing if you said something like that to me when it involved what I cared about like this. And I did, when you did. I am very sorry.
(Calling that legislation rape was not an analogy. That is actually what it would have done.)
Say something, Steve, please.
…I’ve never heard ‘the chickens have come home to roost’ before but I can figure what it means.
Of course I wouldn’t have said that.
Have you gone, Steve? It was in retaliation to Grant after what he said and everything that meant. I know you’re thinking that doesn’t make it remotely less offensive to you! That’s what I have always thought when you did the same. Poetic justice. I remember you using that phrase, and resenting that all you could offer were “justifications.” I am horrified with myself for “justifications” being what I am grasping at now. But I simply can’t stop talking because an apology doesn’t seem enough! What else is there to say? I am sorry, a million times, that was completely unwarranted, and there are of course no excuses or justifications.
You never heard “the chickens have come home to roost” before, Nahida?
Oh there’s a God.
I’ll read them, okay? Even if the definition of a right was never something I disagreed with and you’re completely misinterpreting what I was pointing out in regards to the original argument when you ask whether I know what it means. I’ll even sit through that excruciating program.
Good, The Federalist Papers are important for all Americans to read. Don’t forget to read the Anti- Federalist papers as they are the other side of the argument, but in other side what gets me is both sides supported freedom and liberty. The question was just how to bring it about. So so different from these days.
Oh, and here’s the link to that program.
[audio src="http://stevedeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/deace_podcast_030212_hour1.mp3" /]
Oh, and here’s the other one.
[audio src="http://stevedeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/deace_podcast_030212_hour3.mp3" /]
Okay this is already torture based on the unbelievable levels of pure unadulterated wrong.
Two hours of this. Two hours. It would be a lot fewer if they stopped complimenting each other for five minutes after every point of hypocrisy.
The guilt is festering. How long am I waiting with it before you relieve me, Steve? Hours? A day? A month? Never? Just tell me. Say you won’t forgive me! It will devastate me but please please don’t leave me unknowing. I am counting the minutes.
You never heard “the chickens have come home to roost” before, Nahida?
No, I haven’t Steve.
You saying that really makes me angry.
…But why? I honestly haven’t heard it before.
Well I just looked it up. It means what I thought it did. Apparently it’s been used extensively and I’ve been living under a rock.
I told you I don’t socialize…
Don’t. I know you’re going to say I’m well-read enough for it to be inexcusable. =-=
(The reason I never said anything about the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers before was because I already read them, years ago when I was about 10, but I read them again anyway since I’d forgotten.)
It’s what Obama’s pastor, the guy whose pew he sat in for twenty years, said about 9-11!
Yet somehow you never heard it huh?
Look I am so right about Conservatives and Liberals. We might be in the same country but we live in different worlds. You didn’t even hear about him saying that, Huh? America has never, ever been so divided, not even during the Civil War!
There’s just no common ground! None! And it is only going to get worse!
You probably never heard of “Fast and Furious” either, have you?
Except for perhaps it being a bad action movie.
We don’t live in the same world. Conservatives and Liberals, there’s absolute no common ground!
Absolutely no common ground!
I wasn’t even making a Clinton reference. I was referring to something quite recent.
Look, Conservatives and Liberals can’t even agree to what IS IS (okay that’s a Clinton reference)!
Listen to the Michael Savage show. He nails it here!
I didn’t mean to pull a trigger, Steve, I honestly just thought it was any other idiom and was commenting on it meekly.
I can’t listen to Michael Savage.
Because he yells.
You probably wouldn’t understand this, but I can’t listen to men screaming that angrily without feeling physically threatened. (You already know why.) I go into some strange state of trance where my mind is just protectively half blank. I’ve forced myself to listen to him before but I am not doing it again.
I’m sorry I haven’t heard it, and I’m sorry you’re angry with me for never hearing it. And maybe this was a mistake.
The point is you said you never heard it. Which means you never really heard abut Rev Wright in order to understand what an evil man he is and what an evil man Obama is.
You just thought we hated him because he was “Black” (that is half black, his mother’s side of the family OWNED SLAVES). Right, That was just good enough for you!
Okay, don’t listen to Savage I understand.
But do you know what Fast and Furious is (don’t look it up and NO I am not talking about the movie)?
No, Steve, I just don’t believe someone’s reverend has anything to do with them.
Do you know how batshit insane my imam is? I attend the mosque I do because it’s conveniently located.
No.
I can’t believe you would really think I would just think you were being racist.
I tuned out EVERYTHING that had to do with his reverend. It’s totally irrelevant. Because I agree with nothing my imam says. Nothing. And I still attend his services, and have been attending for about 6 years. There isn’t another option nearby.
Weather underground – yeah before my time but heard about it.
The lies that the New York Times told about Stalin (and won a Pulitzer for) way before my time but I read history.
Sharon Tate – Before my time.
Calling Vietnam Vets “baby killers” Kind of sorta before my time but I remember some of the after effect
Judge Bork, Clarence Thomas – NOT BEFORE MY TIME – Remember it like yesterday.
Battle in Seattle, Not Before my Time. IS IS Oral Sex in the White House, raping Juanita Broaddrick NOT BEFORE MY TIME.
Occupy, Rev Wright – NOT BEFORE YOUR TIME.
I am just saying this has been building long before my time even and so don’t be surprised! You are just seeing the end result of something years in the making. We have tolerated so much crap for so long if someday we do go totally ruthless, just remember all that brought us to that point.
And Reverend Wright is still totally irrelevant to me.
Obama has ALWAYS HATED AMERICA.
And it really doesn’t matter where he was or wasn’t born. His Mom hated America, his grandparents hated America, his dad who he didn’t even meet but once I think but studied every piece of writing he could get a hold of hated America, and his surrogate father (some wonder if not his “real father”) Frank Marshall Davis hated America. And some people wonder if his mother left his step father (did he adopt Obama is Obama really Indonesian) because he didn’t hate America enough.
He went to a church that hated America. His wife hates America.
I remember one scene from the 2008 campaign where all the candidates were standing respectfully for the Pledge of Allegiance. Well all but Obama, and you could just see the disdain on his face.
And this is the man I must vote for in order for us to have even A CHANCE for our country to be saved. I will never forgive the Republican party for that.
Steve, seeing that we each completely read the Trayvon Martin incident differently and still do, I have a hard time believing I would miraculously see your position if I’d lived as long.
I am not going to say anything about Juanita Broaddrick, because even though the woman didn’t say she was raped until ages later, I suspect that would be the one thing I agreed on with you (because there are reasons women don’t say so right away and feminists should have taken this into account and not viewed it as suspicious on her part) and because I still think Julian Assange is a rapist. And Stalin is gross.
Occupy, Juanita Broaddrick, and Stalin. I’d probably have a vastly different perspective on the others. Calling Vets baby killers is reprehensible but I can’t say I would be okay with the Vietnam Massacre incident.
You haven’t heard about “Fast and Furious” and you really don’t care to find out about “Fast and Furious” do you.
It is easier for you to think that we are just “hatin’ the Black Man” right?
Jesus Christ, Steve, I didn’t even know it was a movie.
Did I lose it on you for not knowing what rape culture was (you still don’t probably) and thinking that just because a rape accusation is supposedly the worst possible thing that could happen to a man means that we can’t live in one? (What a male-centric perspective.)
And again, Reverend Wright still irrelevant.
See the comment I posted right before your last.
Well all but Obama, and you could just see the disdain on his face.
Okay now you’re just grabbing at anything. What if he needed to sneeze?
Stalin was a great man. An agrarian reformer. Don’t you read the New York Times? Their Pulitzer Prizing winning reporter Walter Durranty says so.
Oh, I know that’s not the current liberal position on Stalin. I remember when I heard a liberal say something negative about Stalin. It was 1995 or around about that time. I was shocked.
Even when liberals admit they are wrong they do so a dollar short and a day late. And mind you that liberal wasn’t admitting they were wrong. He just acted like that was always their position (even though when you read back you find out that in the day when it counted it wasn’t).
By the way, the New York Times HAS NEVER returned that Pulitzer.
“hatin’ the Black Man”
Um. This TOTALLY just offended me that you would use the vernacular like that, but as I doubt you’re in the mood to care–fine.
Just believe what you want, Steve. I can’t keep repeating that I don’t care about his reverend. And that there was no way I could support the other guy.
I mean first heard a Liberal say something negative about Stalin.
It was like “what you are saying this about Uncle Joe” (that is what they used to affectionately call him). I wasn’t shocked about what he said because yes, I always knew it, I was shocked that a liberal would say it.
But of course 1995 is a little to late for any of that to matter right? I know they will renounce Castro someday too. Perhaps 50 – 60 years after his death when it doesn’t matter.
Or perhaps they won’t because we are becoming Cuba as we speak. So perhaps they will allows idolize him like they do that murderer Che.
Here’s something Reagan once said:
“Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, “We don’t know how lucky we are.” And the Cuban stopped and said, “How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to.” And in that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there’s no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth. ”
And now we have lost freedom here in America. And indeed, there’s nowhere to escape to, there is absolutely no hope at all.
I understand why you didn’t want to listen to that Michael Savage video I had posted, but I kind of wished you did in order to hear the desperation in the voices of his callers.
Actually, you are right.
There was no way I could support the other guy either. I wasn’t going to hold my nose for McCain so I voted Third Party. You wonder why I hate the Republicans, well some of it is because they are at least in part responsible for Obama. They picked the worst candidate they could to run against him. No, actually they picked the SECOND worst candidate. This year they picked the worst candidate to run against him.
But don’t ever forget how evil Obama is. And don’t forget how much he hates the USA!
He is not evil, and he does not hate America.
You thought I hated America once too. Maybe you think that again. Hell, you even thought I sympathized with terrorists because I commended Al Jazeera’s journalism. And I still read their news. In Arabic.
WHAT are you talking about? We’ve been renouncing Castro since I was in the fourth grade!!
Steve, you said that if we’d gone to university together you wouldn’t even KNOW me. Did you even talk to enough liberals to know what they did or didn’t renounce and how early?
Years in the Making? I should say DECADES in the making.
So, yeah you should judge our actions on that. We have tolerated so much crap for so long, we have been “Ladies” and “Gentlemen” for so long as every last thing that made us great as a country has been destroyed. So, if we become totally ruthless, well the Left has taught us well. Just consider it a form of flattery that we have finally decided to imitate the Left.
Have you nothing to say to what I just said?
I can’t reason with you at this point Steve. Of course, you would say that’s because I’m incapable of reason. You’ve tried that already, right?
Are you kidding? I know of Liberals who go to that “great paradise” (Cuba) all the time. When was it that Michael Moore went to Cuba? You have to forgive me as the years do tend to blend together at times, but I am pretty sure it was AFTER you being in the Fourth Grade.
By the way in the 1960s the New York Times had great things to say about Castro just like a generation previously they did about Stalin.
Going to Al Jazeera is giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
The only time I go on websites like that is to ridicule them.
By the way, have I told you that Russia REALLY hates the Jews? I mean really, really hates the Jews. You should tell your friends from Tel Aviv to stay away from Moscow – though they probably already know that.
First of all, I don’t like Michael Moore.
Second of all, just because you like the scenery of a country doesn’t mean you would marry its shitface dictator.
And third of all, you’re not talking to Michael Moore. You are talking to me. And I talk to real people. When I’m not keeping to myself.
Alright then, Steve, that’s what I’m doing. Comforting the goddamn enemy.
If you go to that website without understanding that you are reading enemy propaganda, then yeah, you are giving aid and comfort to the enemy. It is as simple as that.
Oh EVERYTHING is propaganda. Stem cell research! Global warming! Videos of Muslim kids holding up the Constitution!
If you’re so hellbent on believing I’m pure evil, Steve, go ahead. I have no intention of stopping you. After all, it’s what I’ve been hoping for again anyway.
In fact, I feel content.
I am deeply sorry you will continue to despise half the country based on their vastly nuanced ideology, and believe that everyone who does things you disapprove of is a terrorist. But thank God you won’t be disappointed by me again! I wish it didn’t have to be this way. But it’s more truthful than what you thought I was before.
Okay, why don’t you go up to your Che Shirt wearing friends and ask them what they think of Castro. Perhaps you really will be surprised at all the love there is still out there in the liberal community for that monster.
Like I said Stalin is Passe (since 1995 or so) but no Castro is still popular. Not as popular as Chávez but still popular.
That… was so EPIC.
He is NOT still popular, NONE of my friends wear that shirt, and half the people who do don’t even know where the hell it came from.
And by the way, I don’t even hate Marxists, I just think they’re downright wrong and delusion and scary in their ignorance and enthusiasm and I don’t want them in my country. But I don’t even hate them or think they’re evil. How’s that Steve?
Oh good, you’ve taken to video spamming again instead of talking to me. Obviously you’re done.
It wasn’t going anywhere anyway. Good night, Steve.
So when did Castro become Passe?
Must have been a recent development.
But reading enemy propaganda is still cool, right Nahida?
Right. And I try so hard to be cool, with all the drinking and sleeping around and bragging about how I read enemy propaganda. I can’t seem to go five minutes without mentioning it.
I think I’ll adopt some black kids.
And then I’ll go apply to a strip club. You know, to put all those whore pills to good use.
I am just hoping that Nahida doesn’t meet any Economics Majors from Kenya at that University she goes to.
Do you want me to say I immensely overreacted to Grant, Steve?
It would have been a lie then, but it isn’t now. It stopped being a lie when it offended you. My indignation wasn’t worth this. Tell me to say it, and it would be genuine. It genuinely feels like an overreaction now that it’s hurt you. I don’t even feel I have the capacity for anger now. I don’t care!
I want you to read the Federalist Papers.
I’m not a genius, Steve.
Or a snowflake.
I can just fake it well enough, even if I don’t intend to. And do you know what kind of person can fake something like that, Steve?
You are right to be glad we weren’t discussing things on 9/11. You should be right to wish we never met to discuss things at all. Nothing good could come from a counterfeit.
Nahida, you might still be a snowflake but politics sure turns you ugly.
And please please stop reading foreign propaganda. When you do they win!
When you read enemy propaganda that helps the enemy. Unless you are reading it in order to use it against the enemy.
Oh no, still? What do I have to do?
I am not a snowflake, love. But politics doesn’t turn me into this. Gross presumptions and hypocrisy do. And they don’t have to be a part of the process.
Believe it or not, Al Jazeera has interests in reporting things outside of spewing propaganda.
I wasn’t being sarcastic when I said everything is propaganda. I mean, I was in that context, but it is also true. That is what US journalism has become. And that is why I must go to this extent for news.
Everything here is propaganda. Crap over there is propaganda. Might as well have both sides of the propaganda.
When you do they win!
Yes, I can just feel my readership turning into shiny rays of comfort for them to use at their advantage to further their cause. Just like how every time a child throws a tantrum a faerie dies. Because I am incapable of distinguishing real news from foreign propaganda of course. (Which you probably believe is true.) Can they exchange shiny rays of comfort for money to help them eventually take down the US by destroying our economy? That would be genius. It would be so Israel.
Al Jazeera is a modern day Pravda.
Yeah I know that’s before your time.
And Toyko Rose is before my time but that is what Al Jazeera is.
For you to think that Al Jazeera is anything but enemy propaganda shows that unfortunately that propaganda is working on you.
Don’t let the enemy win, Nahida.
No, Steve, it just shows you think the world is so obsessed with taking us down when their own people are starving and screaming and killing each other that this is what they put first.
You’ re not Russian, are you Nahida?
Just kidding but what I mean is you sure sound Russian as they blame everything on Israel too.
The Left has become so anti-Semitic but they still have the nerve to call us NAZIS. You know what the Nazis stood for? National SOCIALISTS!
When you have your guard down stuff like Pearl Harbor happens.
Stuff like 9-11.
Of course the world wants to bring us down. But what they don’t seem to understand is that we are doing a very good job at that ourselves.
Oh relax, I don’t think Israel is doing it on purpose.
And that doesn’t mean a thing–they just kept the name as it was already there.
The world, except for a few freaks like Al Qaeda, has better things to do than bring us down.
Do you honestly believe they are a greater threat to us than we are to them? They have nothing. Nothing. And if there ever comes a point when it is true that they are a greater threat, it will be because we have destroyed ourselves.
And because of Israel of course.
Just kidding.
Actually, probably shouldn’t joke about that…
Don’t worry.
Your Obama will take care of Israel for you.
Stop being douchey. You know I don’t want that.
And no he isn’t.
Don’t do this, don’t do this please.
please please please please please please please
Steve
Did you listen to the Reagan Video?
This is his most famous speech. You should listen to it as well.
This must be it. Who thought it would be a flighted thing! With talons that clench the heart and anxiety like frantic wings.
Did you listen to what Ronald Reagan said about this ruling?
Yes, I know of course he wasn’t speaking directly about this ruling of course since he is no longer with us, but it is just a testament to how great a man he was that his words speak to us even today!.
Gosh, what did Sharon Tate ever do to you people on the Left? She wasn’t even political.
The way some talked about her she may have been a snowflake. Of course it is hard to say, and I would tend not to think so, but by what some of her friends said, it sounds like it is possible.
You want to know how this is unconstitutional? Michael Savage explains it!
Neither are yours (appearing the sidebar.) Scroll up here:
If THIS has malfunctioned, the site is rendered practically unusable.
This is way better than I ever imagined.
Finding her completely undesirable, deserving of hatred, AND snowflake status revoked!
I couldn’t have done it better myself.
I told you you sound like a freak, Nahida. All you’d have to do was keep talking.
Well at least you’ve got the first two.
Good effort, good effort. Have a gold star.
Well he got one of three.
Okay, probably not even that.
I just wish she would stop reading enemy propaganda.
Which of the two? The first?
Because I read “enemy propaganda”? Oh come on, Steve, even you said their camera action is spectacular. And you freaked out because I commended their journalism, which is saying the same thing. Did you take from that that I really read them for different reasons than you?* Without a conversation of course, just like Grant assuming I didn’t know what a right is without asking what I meant.
*I don’t go to mock them, so that’s probably different. But the camera action is spectacular.
The ONLY time I have gone to al Jazeera was during the so called Egyptian Spring. And I had the volume down. I haven’t gone on there since.
What is your purpose for going there? To ridicule them? Do they have a comment section?
The second. Anyone who would go on a enemy propaganda site is deserving at least of hatred.
But I can’t hate you, Nahida. Not you.
Oh, you just said you didn’t go on there to ridicule them.
I never said Al Jazeera ‘s “camera action is spectacular”. It is just was one of the few places with continuous live camera feed during the whole thing last year. I wonder why that was? Perhaps because they were in league with the protestors.
I thought it might have been the first of the three because I didn’t think the second was possible without the first.
No, you didn’t use the word spectacular. “In league” with the protestors? They have reporters who are Egyptians. They do in fact have a comment section; I’ve never commented there, however. Same as part of the reason I wouldn’t go there to protest in the streets even if I really want a democracy in Egypt. Not an American news site (and not the personal blog of a foreign friend)–my opinion in the comment section is irrelevant. Don’t care enough to bother.
I am certain there are others who read that news whom you couldn’t hate. Is it really a statement you can make comfortably for all other instances Steve?
I can’t do it now for things that I otherwise would have, because of you.
And because I’m so pathetic that when you introduced a second sense of hearing, evoking the quality of volume, something you can reach out and turn down and hear be lowered, I felt subtly enthralled at the idea that you exist in a tangible sphere.
A good reason for going there would be to transcribe their lies into English to show us English speakers what they are saying behind our backs.
As for commenting, yeah I would agree with you EXCEPT if it’s an article aboout the US. Then as an American it is your DUTY to defend Ameica.
Hell, I have even defended Obama. I told them no one can call my stupid President stupid but a US citizen like me!
Oh, I really attacked an Israeli over her criticisms regarding Obama. She used to be an American but she became a Israeli. I told her that while I don’t agree with the decision I respect it because so many American Jews don’t make the decision but are still more loyal to Israel than the US. At least she made it clear where she stands so I credited her for that. But she needs to be true to herself and understand that she is a foreigner now and no foreigner can attack our President without hearing from me!
I have to say I find the Israelis to be pathetic. Given the situation they find themselves in they should be MUCH MUCH more ruthless.
But what do you expect from a race that just allowed themselves to be placed in cattle cars. I would have fought. Yeah the outcome may have been the same, I would have died, but DAMN IT I WOULD HAVE FOUGHT and take some of those damn Nazis down with me if I could!
Do you know they actually call the houses of the people they are going to bomb to give them enough time to get out. I mean what kind of people do that?
They didn’t allow anything to happen, Steve! That is hurtful. Can you imagine someone saying that about a tragedy we endured? One can argue we “allowed” 9/11 to happen because the Bush Administration did not heed the warnings of the CIA, but if a foreigner said that I would TEAR them apart! Only an American can criticize the shortcomings in prevention.
You mentioned before that you don’t care where ideas come from, that they should stand on their own. Idealistically this would be true 100% of the time, but it simply isn’t.
There is the concept of “Only I can insult a member of my family and if others do then they will hear from me”. Only I can call my stupid brother stupid (I don’t have a brother but you know what I mean),
I am a strong believer of that. Or at least I used to be.
As for Bush, I am not going to defend him, but he had been only on the job for eight months whereas Clinton had eight years and as we know there where several times where he had bin Laden literally in his cross-hairs but didn’t pull the trigger. Therefore I find him, much, much more culpable.
Do you know they actually call the houses of the people they are going to bomb to give them enough time to get out. I mean what kind of people do that?
People who are actually people, and not totally monsters?
The Palestinians are the last people they should be ruthless against. The Palestinians owe them nothing. And neither do we. Make the Germans send them billions.
You would have hated me during 9-11. I was going on and on about how ruthless we needed to be. I am a strong believer of that. Better to do evil than be evil, and all of that. Sorry, I really believe that preservation is the most important value. If someone messes with me or mine then they need to be totally destroyed. We must match their evil.
That said, Israel isn’t America. Like I said if they must be destroyed so that people are woken up to Obama, then so be it. But still I can look at it from a moment from their perspective and see them as pathetic. Noble perhaps, but pathetic.
“We fight on their level. With trickery, brutality, finality. We match their evil. I know, James. I was reputed to be a gentle man. But I was commander in chief during the four bloodiest years of my country’s history. I gave orders that sent a hundred thousand men to their death at the hands of their brothers. There is no honourable way to kill, no gentle way to destroy. There is nothing good in war except its ending. And you are fighting for the lives of your crew.”
By the criteria of my feminism (and of Islam, were I good enough) I would not have been allowed to hate you. The victim can spew out the most hateful crap at the rawness of the tragedy and it is excused. I could speak against you; I couldn’t hate you.
Better to do evil than be evil, and all of that.
How much evil must you do before you become it? How can you be so sure you’ve identified it?
There is an honorable way to kill, and a gentle way to destroy. There are such things as war ethics. And men have forgotten, because the enemy men have forgotten, and there are no honorable men in war.
Honorable ways to kill, but no honorable men in war.
If only I were as “pathetic” as you believe the Israelis are. I would leave the virtue of nobility against my very will; I will stoop to deception and manipulation when provoked.
This is why I find the Jews pathetic. If you can’t protect your own, what are you?
Some may find it Noble for the Israelis to be like they are.
I find it INHUMAN.
To me the most basic value is LOVE and LOVE IS A PSYCHOPATH!
It is better for a lover of the truth to tell a lie than a liar to tell the truth.
It is better to do evil than be evil!
War is hell! You can not refine it!
It is only inhumane when they do it to their enemies at the risk of losing what they love, and civilians are NOT their enemies! Especially not children.
You’re so sure you can tell the difference between good and evil, Steve.
A lover of the truth who tells a lie becomes a liar.
I suppose I shouldn’t discourage you, though. This philosophy will prevent you from detesting me when all my sins are uncovered. Isn’t that selfish, Steve? (Isn’t that so unsnowflake-like, Steve?)
I wouldn’t even ask you if you would commit some of the war crimes I’ve written about in the name of “love” because I know you wouldn’t.
You can talk so tough. They always say that about me. But it’s true for you. You can bring yourself to say that I am deserving of hatred, but you can’t do it.
What would it take for you to hate me, Steve? Tell me. It would be useful. If I can commit it, it would end this blasphemy of you believing I’m a snowflake.
I’ve already pushed you past your established criteria. Probably further than you believed you could tolerate. What would it take for you to destroy me?
I myself don’t have to choose. Between you and something else. I will nearly always find a way to justify it.
You know, so many Muslim are under the impression that in order to truly be Muslim one must want to bring shari’ah law to the country in which one resides? But they are wrong, for the Prophet said that when you live in a foreign land, you must abide by the laws of the land. It is written in a hadith. And shari’ah law was only drafted after his death (and was far different from what it is today.)
See what I did Steve? I didn’t have to choose between my country and my religion. I love them both so madly I practically scarified my sanity to find that bit of justification. Stayed awake for nights, ripped through textbooks, drove myself crazy. Because love is a psychopath.
I just laughed. Out loud. Really laughed, almost hysterically. RTelier was such a fool.
Real life quote
http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/sherman/sherman-to-burn-atlanta.html
“You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out.”
If only those who brought war into the country were the same who suffered all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out.
But they are always civilians, and the ones who are innocent.
P.S. Your name has nothing to do with whether you turn up in the spam folder, only your IP address. This happens once you leave a number of them in one site in a short period. If you generate a new IP address and your comment does not appear, it’s because someone else using it before has associated it with spam already.
But she needs to be true to herself and understand that she is a foreigner now and no foreigner can attack our President without hearing from me!
You have the right to say whatever you want, not the right to be heard, which I pointing out in the event she wasn’t speaking to you specifically.
Ugh, I knew you were going to pin this on Clinton…
I would commit a war crime for you Nahida.
Actually I don’t believe in the term “war crime”. War is hell. You can not refine it.
Do you know the definition of a war crime? No you wouldn’t Steve. And I wouldn’t want you to.
And besides it is entirely unnecessary to commit one to win.
Rape is war crime, has been employed en masse as very calculated weaponry. To Roma women during the Holocaust, to Chinese women by the Japanese Army in Nanjing, to Croatian and Bosnian-Herzegovinian women by the Serbian army, and of course in Rwanda. And these are just the ones en masse.
I wouldn’t believe you could do that even if you said you could. You’d blow up a village first.
That’s almost romantic in a twisted way.
Not romantic. Patriotic.
Out of love of his country, not of me.
What have I ever done to you for you to believe I’m a snowflake, Steve? Forget the accounts of my friends. They love me. And of course you could argue everything I’ve done was out of the duty of friendship. (What woman wouldn’t save another’s marriage if she could?) But you–from the beginning you saw me as an enemy. Whether at first without, and then only within. What have I done to you for you to believe it?
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 1: The Threat Doctrine of Shariah & the Muslim Brotherhood
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 2: ‘Civilization Jihad’ in America
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 3: Influence Operations Against Conservatives & the GOP
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 4: Suhail Khan, A Case Study in Influence Operations
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 5: The Organizations Islamists Are Using to Subvert the Right
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 6: Electing Islamist Republicans
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 7: Advancing the Islamists’ Agendas
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 8: Team Obama & the Islamists
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 9: Team Obama & the Islamist Agenda
Muslim Brotherhood in America, Part 10: What’s To Be Done?
Glenn Beck: Shariah, the Muslim Brotherhood & the Threat to America
He’s not even listening to you. Hasn’t really addressed anything you said in the past couple of days
Cause he does believe all that. And it’s actually true.
KIRK, you are a complete and total IDIOT. Do you even know Nahida’s line of work. There are SEVERAL reasons she would disagree violently with an imam and none of them have to include your MISCONCEPTION about “jihad.” And why WOULDN’T she attend for the convenience of location if she ALREADY renounced him?? What you are suggesting about her is completely illogical considering her renouncement. God, you’re such an idiot you don’t even know how much of idiot you are. Stop using words you don’t even know. Stop twisting her words, stop USING her for your agenda, and stop involving her in your violence. You do not own her voice, you can not use her at your convenience.
RTelier – really? Nahida’s a very attractive woman with friends who can’t get enough of her even though she doesn’t even pick up her phone. (she says she’s a bad friend but obviously she isn’t). You are NOT going to succeed in depressing her.
I wish she would STOP talking to Steve because he is so cruel to her. And he continues to tell her that HER side is evil while his whole side has called her a terrorist repeatedly and told her to go KILL herself. He REFUSES to see her points and just continues to repeat his no matter what she’s proven.
You people are deplorable.
I bet Grant doesn’t even know she’s BEAT him in an argument!! One that he was so confident about! Never got back to her about that DID you Grant?
And Nahida, you lovesick fool, SNAP OUT OF IT. Just because you agreed to put up with Steve’s crap doesn’t mean you have to take it from his whole entourage.
I find it SO hypocritical that Steve FREAKED out because he misread something Nahida’s roommate wrote and here Nahida has been accused of TERRORISM and some of the WORST crimes and she’s still kept her cool. And people are STILL acting like SHE’S the provocative one!
It seems that in her personal life she is actually an extremely kind individual. I find it odd indeed.
NO DUH. Really? You find it odd? REALLY. It’s BECAUSE of all her supposedly EVIL ideologies. But she said that already.
You are all LIARS. The truth is here before us. And it is that Nahida is everything good in the world and SO IS what she chose.
She chose what she chose BECAUSE she is a GOOD person. And they are GOOD ideologies because she is a good person.
They should have had someone like Nahida on this show, but you all would say it had a liberal bias!! Because you think someone like her is impossible. REALITY has a liberal bias. And you’re too UNREASONABLE and IRRATIONAL to see that she does indeed exist!! (And Steve said she’s the unreasonable one??) You keep saying that everything about her evil instead of realizing that if someone like her can exist with these ideologies it means that YOU have a problem not the Left. But instead you say if she isn’t evil that means she’s not really a liberal? A strawman FALLACY, like Nahida said already. BUT MAYBE I NEED TO SCREAM IT BECAUSE YOU AREN’T LISTENING TO HER.
Now get real.
I bet Grant doesn’t even know she’s BEAT him in an argument!! One that he was so confident about! Never got back to her about that DID you Grant?
Exactly what I was thinking this whole time. Remember the Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman discussion when Nahida left for like FIVE minutes and they went psycho over “winning”?
She’s been OVERLY considerate with these people. She has every reason to push this in their faces because they don’t have an argument for hers, and she isn’t.
Don’t talk about how they “allowed” it to happen. Have you heard of “battered woman syndrome” Steve? You will never understand the mentality that results from being harassed–or oppressed. If you are ready to advocate ruthlessness, it means you have not truly suffered.
Even the civil rights movement because ruthless after they had moved passed the degree of oppression that engendered the original peacefulness of the protests. After they forgot just a little how it felt.
I felt my heart hurt when I read this. She is right. Nahida is saying that they told the Jews they were a force of evil who had to be eliminated to save the country. And the Jews didn’t fight because at this point they BELIEVED it. Steve will never understand that state of psychosis. Nahida, of course, has been physically abused as a child as well as slut-shamed repeatedly like most women (they start to believe they’re sluts themselves)… and called a terrorist. She knows because she lived that in the mental prison. You really believe the things they say about you are true. So when they hurt you, you take it because you think you deserve it. It’s a state of true insanity. I can’t imagine how many times Nahida has had to break out of it… and then heard what she’s been through used against her for why she can’t be “logical.”
This woman knows pain. She really does amaze me. I don’t think people understand her at all. She’s the dangerous type, the kind you can abuse over and over and then suddenly, without even knowing how you got there, you find yourself at her mercy. You’re in the middle of beating her down, and even though she defends herself, she never really loses it. When finally in the midst of it all, she just tilts her head and sighs, and then you’re on your knees begging her to look at you again. It’s her very kindness that makes people so angry. They want to make her something that’s theirs, politically or romantically, but she’s so willful in the strongest way, she doesn’t use any force, and it pisses them off. And they totally lose it on her.
Nahida keeps saying that she doesn’t think most people are loved as much as they deserve, but she was probably NEVER loved like she should be. Never ever. That statement applies to her the most, and she never applies it to herself. I think we have seen here that even people who claim to care about her dismiss her earnestness.
No, these delusion Rightwing FREAKS make me SO MAD. They say we can’t be logical? Nahida TRIED that. He just kept repeating insane garbage and ignoring her evidence. THIS is REALLY what happened through history. I can’t get over how badly she’s been treated here. And Steve said the LEFT makes people commit suicide. All his slut-shaming and violent rhetoric would have DESTROYED a weaker person. Slut-shaming from the Right has actually KILLED women and made them commit suicide.
I am so ANGRY. Everyone who said she was a terrorist here – THEY’RE the ones jumping to conclusions. And they tried to say the LEFT starts it when they played that game with Sarah burning down the church? THEY are responsible for a HISTORY of mistakes involving MASS SLAUGHTER and detaining INNOCENT PEOPLE because they JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS.
I am so glad she is hurt enough to stop. Steve deciding to talk past her and repeat that liberals are evil no matter what she said about comments she received from the Right and PROVED with Mark’s comment about blacks finally opened her eyes to what he really thinks of her. He wouldn’t even admit that psuedo-intellectual racism behind eugenics is as evident on the Right, even when IT’S RIGHT THERE FROM A RIGHTWINGER. And NO ONE got back to her LOGIC arguments against Grant.
Oh, we’ve been logical. It’s just TOO EASY to say we weren’t to have an excuse to be violent and use violent rhetoric. Kind of the characteristic of the Nice Guy that Nahida talks about.
Oh come on, I respect myself way more than that.
Okay, um wow. Hi random people. While I greatly appreciate your reinforcement and empathy, I’m just stopping here to say that I will be leaving for a bit; I would intend to leave forever, or—if I do return—for at least a very, very long time. I have quite a bit of writing to do elsewhere, and additionally I have recognized that I’ve been interacting with the fringe Right, whose assertions are one huge projection of their own schemes onto others. Probably against the intentions of many, I have learned more about the fear tactics on the Right in the past six years engaging with them on this forum than I ever cared to know, and the conduct of their political “discussion” as well as recent developments in the war on women have pushed me further to the Left than I would have ventured on my own. The projections have also made themselves clear; when the word “Obamacare” is elided from a survey evaluating the level of support for the proposals of the policy itself rather than its name, an overwhelming majority of the country—including a solid portion of conservatives—supports every provision of the healthcare policy (except for the hated mandate, which itself has no true power of enforcement), in everything from disallowing insurers to drop sick patients to subsidizing aid to those who cannot afford it, which is only evidence that the slander, violent rhetoric, and defamation from the Right has contributed great damage to the manner in which the Left is perceived in our nation, and with no real warrant—the very proposition and inclusion of the mandate was a conservative one (liberals originally vouched for a public option) which liberals were forced to include as a compromise (to appeal to corporate insurance companies who prefer the mandate over public option as it forces people to purchase their insurance) and of course the pivotal vote on the Supreme Court was a conservative’s. In fact, prior to the ACA, conservatives regularly instated mandates on policies (in 22 states!), even those involving contraceptives, and only took severe issue with them as a means of waging political war whenever the like was introduced by liberals, asserting only then that religious freedoms are being attacked and the very structural frame of our country has been compromised by a mere establishment of policy. It is not the healthcare policy that is their issue but the name under which it was passed—a Democrat’s. This is the type of distorting of reality and twisting of intentions that conservatives are convinced they have endured themselves from the Left, when they are really the ones playing the game. While there is far more hostility in the nation toward the Left than there is toward the Right, when political labels are dropped in surveys an overwhelming majority of the country votes with liberal positions, as it has been the Right that has slandered the Left—only to take up liberal positions once the Right is able to take credit for them as the dominant party. Once they reacquire the presidency, when they do, they will convince the American people that “Obamacare” has been overturned while retaining its features.
It breaks my heart to say such things, I do not make these claims willingly; as I have seen here there will be no acknowledgement of responsibility from the very side that lectures citizens to take some, not even on a personal level (rather than a political one) regardless of the evidence and logical arguments I have provided, I am left to believe nothing else.
Frankly I am weary of hearing my roommates—for the mere sin of complimenting me—overtly accused of being potential rapists and murders (and not even in a political context) by the very people who are shocked and offended when their behaviors are deemed so much as “sexual harassment” or even at the suggestion, evoked not by reality but by their own misreading of a single word, that they are being sexually aggressive, after habitually declaring that these days everything is sexual harassment… while they have just accused my friends of being potential rapists and murderers. For complimenting me.
And as none of my logical arguments have been countered by the number of rightwingers perusing this site—who prefer to employ violent rhetoric and accusatory statements instead—there is nothing left for me to conclude except what I have, and nothing left for me learn; I would much rather engage with those who direct me to information without gratuitous attacks on my religious and political identity and declarations of how evil I am and my entire ideology is.
And so I leave you here. Have a nice life everyone. Whenever I leave for a bit I miss Steve something fierce, but the feeling will sudue itself over days and there will be nothing to suppress.
I have learned more about the fear tactics on the Right in the past six years engaging with them on this forum than I ever cared to know, and the conduct of their political “discussion” as well as recent developments in the war on women have pushed me further to the Left than I would have ventured on my own.
…And they will blame the “university environment”. They will blame the “liberal bias” in the media. They will blame her nonexistent “misguidedness”. They will blame everything but their own cruelty.
To think she would have seen a little more if he had been kinder. To think they found common ground so easily (about Americans protesting in Egypt) when he HAD been kinder and was actually listening. To think that this amazed him! To think that he then said again that there is no hope for common ground once he stopped listening to her and made presumptions and she accordingly resisted his perspective. To think, just a little kindness.
The way conservatives here have pieced together parts of Nahida’s identity to make her fit the profile for the perfect terrorist, using even her introversion and the fact that she thought of suicide before (who hasn’t?), is exactly what they always do when they say that imams are linked to terrorist groups. If she built a mosque, they would want to know where she got the money. And because Muslim feminists are often linked to each other in an international network, the answer might just convince them she’s a threat. Even though we all know it isn’t true.
And this is what they say WE do. They say WE start it.
Yeah right.
They wonder why we’re so careful and PC with Muslims? People ALWAYS jump to conclusions with them. The ones who preach that the Left never gives the benefit of the doubt. NO conservative would defend Nahida if she was accused of this, even if she’s innocent. NONE.
And Nahida doesn’t even LOOK a terrorist… which is of course the primary racist way that conservatives accuse. And they STILL called her one. What does she have to do?
https://twitter.com/NahidaSN/status/220019232258277376
Oh gosh, she’s so pretty!
We will defend you, Nahida. We recognize you are an American and one of us. We will defend your right to practice your peacefully practice your religion. We will defend you from attacks, whether from the Right or from our own Left!! And we will continue to defend you against false accusations of terrorism even if you chose to move to the Right because we KNOW those accusations are false. We are really the ones who would die for your rights as an American. You can be assured of that, because we will fight for them now. And we will never throw you away as a casualty for politics even if you became conservative, because that is real love. And love is a psychopath.
Probably no use saying it since she’s gone, she’ll never see it. No point being here myself if she isn’t. But there it is. Everything she wanted Steve to understand and what he never did. The love he never showed her, because he never had it.
Moving on now. See you all around.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/feds-label-liberty-lovers-terrorists-again/
And you can tell us your imam is batshit insane, and we will NEVER jump to conclusions or think he’s preaching violence just because you disagree with him. We will listen to what you say first. We will definitely not hold this against all Muslims or become racist as to discourage you from reporting real violence. And you can tell us you have to attend for convenience of location, and we will UNDERSTAND and appreciate that you’re so in love with your religion you’d endure anything.
That’s all I have to leave for you here. In case you ever come back. Goodbye.
All I can think of right now is her saying, “I know am a veritably impossible person to love, and ironically I can accept that about myself.” And how strong and sorrowful she sounded. And so beautiful. She never asked for anything, ever. Whenever she made a request it was the simplest.
Now she’s gone. Let’s leave this place to the Rightwing.
Goodbye Elana and Daria. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out!
Isn’t it interesting that they spent so much time talking about her physical beauty. What were they? A couple of Lesbians?
They mentioned it ONCE. And when are you nutjobs going to realize “lesbian” isn’t an insult to a liberal.
This is exactly why she left. The men here went on and on about her physical appearance and a woman mentions it ONCE and she’s a lesbian. The last one was a rapist!
A couple of Lesbians?
What an awesome argument.
It’s not surprising at all to see why she was finally fed up. Every logical argument ignored and all evidence dismissed for personal attacks. The intellectual dishonesty here from the Right is amazing.
…I came to check for responses to the message and THIS is what I find.
FUCK YOU, Gene. FUCK YOU, and FUCK the Right. FUCK your slut-shaming and your dyke-baiting and FUCK the way you DESTROY PEOPLE’S LIVES and discredit them on personal attacks. THEY WERE ONLY TALKING AMONGST THEMSELVES. FUCK your total ignorance and FUCK your disregard for evidence. FUCK your political double standards.
Steve, do you see this? DO YOU SEE THIS. DON’T EVER TELL ME I’M JUST “MISGUIDED.” DON’T. EVER. You have NO. IDEA.
I am not misguided. I’m just as EVIL as the rest of them, and you’d better believe it.
This is beyond the intellectual dishonesty of refusing to acknowledge Hitler’s “certain races are inferior because they have lower IQ” is as RAMPANT a racist and historically destructive sentiment on the Right as the Left. Beyond the intellectual dishonesty of admitting that program was demonstrably wrong about civil and inalienable rights. What the FUCK kind of PERSONAL ATTACK did either of them launch on you to warrant that? STAY THE HELL OUT OF PEOPLE’S SEXUALITIES.
That is all.
Gene, feel free to call me a lesbian as I walk out. It’s true; I love women. But you wouldn’t know anything about that. Not about appreciating beauty, not about love, not about women, and certainly not about loving women.
Okay. I’m not even really political at all, but I actually lean to the Right myself. Definitely economically, and socially in a lot of areas. I have to say, these past few days, with Nahida continuously making attempts for honest and open discussion and her opponents resorting to attacking her ideology and everyone’s character? I’m just really disgusted. Why are you even here if that’s all you’re going to do? And I really, really hope Nahida doesn’t take these people as representative. At this point, though, I kind of wouldn’t even blame her.
Way to go Gene.
You are just employing techniques the Left has used for years.
About time!
“STAY THE HELL OUT OF PEOPLE’S SEXUALITIES.”
Perhaps people should stop shoving their sexualities in our face!
On Nahida, Steve? Really? On her?
She left in tears. I can tell.
When did any of the women do that? Daria mentioned once that Nahida is pretty. By that logic the men here, who have said it THOUSANDS of times, are the ones who shoving their sexualities in people’s faces way more often.
only to take up liberal positions once the Right is able to take credit for them.. Now that sentence doesn’t even make sense. If the Right takes up a Leftist position that doesn’t make them the Right anymore.
She mistook “Right” for “Republican”.
Same old excuse, “leftist” tactic… Except the Left HERE never did it. Go do it to the Left that actually does.
Thank God Nahida stormed out of here before seeing Steve’s response, even if it was in tears. I think that would have destroyed her.
Steve, Nahida has thought to hurt herself before. Did you know that?
You are not playing a game. You have no idea who comes through here, and how many of them lean enough on suicidal for something to be just enough.
But I’m beginning to think you never really wanted her on your side. You saw yourself that kindness worked much better for that, and this is still what you resort to. I’m beginning to think this was always just a game to you, and you wouldn’t care at all if it destroyed her.
In fact, I’m going to tell her you said exactly that, that you wouldn’t care if it destroyed her. Because that’s basically what you’ve demonstrated. You’ve just had had too much fun playing with her to come out and say it, because if you did it would finally stop – and no more fun for you.
Layla, don’t do that, it’s a BAD idea. (I know her in real life.) Trust me, it will not go down clean. She would have far too much pride to show it, but I’ve watched her in pain before and it’s like you can see everything destroyed behind her eyes while she just sits there with her chin up.
Steve has no idea the extent to which she adores him. You know sometimes she just randomly pops open her laptop and reads his messages? Of course she wouldn’t tell him the effect he really has when he is this cruel. She wouldn’t bother him with anything. And she’ll think she’s the one being pathetic. She knows how to suffer in silence better than anyone I know.
By that logic the men here, who have said it THOUSANDS of times, are the ones who shoving their sexualities in people’s faces way more often.
You and your talk of “logic”…
It’s too late. I told her. I messaged her that he said he didn’t care. She didn’t type anything for a long time and then finally just wrote, “Alright. Thank you, Layla.”
And then I asked her if she was surprised, and she said, “Well… for a while I had thought that he told me to get off the net because he was concerned. Maybe even about the things his own side was saying. I was wrong, but that’s fine.”
So I typed, “Are you okay, Nahida?”
And she said, “I will be.”
I never said I didn’t care.
I still believe she is a snowflake.
I wanted her to get off the net because gosh, it’s summer and she seemed like she was here too much. There’s other things to do besides being glued to a laptop all day.
And then she said, “I just wish there was something I could have told him.”
I asked, “What?”
She said, “Nothing, really. It’s not important, and I wouldn’t want to bother him anyway. Besides, I know what he’s capable of but I didn’t even think he would attack people who were defending me, after what was said…”
I said, “Wait, that was … Gene.”
“Oh, Layla. No it wasn’t.”
end of conversation
No, but it’s obvious you don’t care. And Nahida isn’t glued here all day, and when she is it’s not for fun. She’s working on a project.
Wasn’t Layla a character in the show?
Steve, you are being played here.
What do you think? Do you think Rayyan and Amaar will post next? Perhaps Sarah (or is she in jail)?
Oh hey, you PERVERT.
Layla is a super common name among Muslim women, and this is a Muslim show. Besides, it’s not even my real name. Like I would use it with YOU freaks.
I don’t think Nahida thought Gene was Steve when she exploded at him, because I doubt she’d say that to Steve. It must have been something she thought of after.
I don’t think he is either, though. Steve’s a jackass but he wouldn’t say something about someone else’s sexuality.
Gene is total PERV.
Layla, that was Baber’s daughter, right?
Gosh, it is hard to tell whose who here but it did seem strange that a whole bunch of “new people” came on here to defend Nahida.
Yeah, I am really tired of Nahida playing the victim. She wants to engage in political warfare and then goes all “poor Nahida” when I fire back.
I do think Nahida is personally a great person. The way she has stood up for herself in her life, the way she treats the people around her, and the things she says about her religion and love and all of that. I think she is beyond a great person there as you know.
But when she engages in politics she knows how to hit below the belt like the rest of them.
I know, oh, I know what a bunch of traitors the Republicans are, perhaps better than Nahida will ever know. I know that the guy who handed Obama his victory was a Bush Appointee, and the idea of Obamacare actually came from Romney. I know how even now Republican leaders are trying to back away from repealing Obamacare.
But for her to think that our opposition to Obamacare/Romneycare is mere politics from grassroots conservatives she is totally wrong. This is the last piece in turning America socialist. When the government can control the level of healthcare you may receive it controls your very life. I hoped that she got that from Reagan’s speech on Health Care but I guess not.
As to the racist thing. I looked at that video. The woman (yes it was a woman) who said that Blacks had lower IQs didn’t seem like a conservative to me. And like I said the show was hosted by Morgan Freeman who is known for his leftist views. I don’t even know if Nahida saw the show. As for Mark he never really indicated if he was conservative or liberal. Nahida just assumed he was conservative.
Um. And a bunch of “NEW” people were here to ATTACK her too.
I been here the whole time.
Layla, you’re right, left or right that’s a really perverted thing to say.
Layla, how’s your dad fitting into the new Mosque and the ways that Amaar has decided to do things? I bet the whole no barrier thing is really bugging him.
Did the Anglicans come through with the money to rebuild the church or did they figure that attendance at the church was too small to bother? Are the Anglicans now permanent residents at the Mosque?
Hey! I come here to see whether Steve really said what Layla said he did, and then I find this whole scheme. Seriously, people, you realize I’m capable of coming and checking up right? Layla, don’t lie to me again (even if you think it’s for my own good) I swear I will chuck a dictionary at you.
Steve, are you out of your mind? Do you want to compare how many times either of us have “hit below the belt”? Playing the victim–REALLY? If you don’t want me to storm out, don’t bring up rape every two seconds for everything, stop talking about suicide, refrain from insulting people just because they brought forward information against your argument, and for the love of God SHUT UP about how you’ve been VICTIMIZED by the Left. I’m playing the victim. Really. Playing the victim is all you’ve been doing this WHOLE time. And if you were under the impression that I wanted to engage in political WARFARE you were deeply misled. You haven’t the slightest interest in a discussion without violent rhetorical and needless attacks. Oh, you know how to it; you just don’t care enough. You said you would never hurt me in real life (acknowledging that you’ve been beyond douchey–so don’t start with how I’m playing the victim now), but obviously you can’t seem to register that this is closer to real life to me than it is to you. You don’t actually want to get anywhere–you want to play a game, Steve, and I’m not playing. Fire back? I engage and then YOU are the one who fires BACK? Steve, you fire FIRST. You have ALWAYS. Fired first. And we both know that’s true.
You say I get ugly when I talk about politics–have you SEEN yourself? Where exactly do you think I picked this up? I noticed recently, when you had a moment of softness after RTelier’s pathetic episode, that I had gotten bitter and crueler just as you were being kind, and it saddened me so much. I don’t want to become something like this, and definitely not with you.
By your definition, there are hardly any true conservatives in this country! Saying that someone isn’t what they claim–well geez, if I did that every time for a liberal I wouldn’t be taking political responsibility for ANYTHING. Which is what you’ve done, exceptionally well.
And Mark? I didn’t assume he was a conservative. I didn’t say he was one until MUCH later, when he started posting videos on the Holocaust. I should have decided earlier though, because he made it clear he was anti-choice. And I already told you I’ve known SEVERAL others. I don’t care if the Left made that video. I never denied it. You NEVER get the actual point.
P.S. Yeah, Gene’s a total pervert. (Steve, I apologize for thinking he was you after. I had entertained it and then decided not.)
Steve, Layla and Martin are actually two different people. I know this for a fact. *rolls eyes* And why would they fake quantity? They’d still be saying the same thing.
Nahida, I used to be involved in the Republican party and I spent all my time there fighting the Lefitst establishment who controlled things there.
I didn’t vote for Bush the first time, I didn’t vote for McCain, and I don’t think I voted for Dole (don’t remember). And I am not voting for Romney. Why? Because they are Leftists.
So, yeah, I know the Republican Party is lying to me. I have lived it!
There’s an internal battle going on in the Republican party between the party establishment which is Leftist and the upstart “Tea Party” people. In the Primaries the establishment won (through a lot of corruption is the feedback I get from activists I know who are still working within the party). But perhaps after Romney loses this election and the establishment is totally discredited the conservative grassroot forces can begin to take over.
I am fully aware that conservatives are fragmented–I’m just sick of you crying about how the Left took you down when you destroyed yourselves. Romney and McCain aren’t Leftists, give me a BREAK. Where’s my violin? Let me play it for you.
GET YOURSELF together. Stop playing with labels and revoking the conservative card of anyone who doesn’t agree with you just so you can paint a little picture about how great your ideology is because you’ve weeded out everyone in it who SUCKS at your convenience–you would NEVER let me do that with my side. Come at the Left with organization and a real intention to do something for this country, and THEN if we take you down you can actually place blame where blame truly lies. Until then it’s no one’s fault but your own. Stop whining and PULL YOUR PARTY BACK UP. It sucks.
God, I can’t believe I’ve been criticizing myself so severely these past few days in total self-deprecation. Forget it. I’m awesome and you all suck. (I’m definitely not a snowflake though, Steve, you MUST stop with the whole thinking I’m a snowflake business.) Daria… has left, but if in case she comes back, DAMN RIGHT I’m gorgeous. (Not really, just in that picture.) Thank you very much, Daria. Gene, stop getting your panties all in a knot over women complimenting me (instead of you.) And Elena, EVERYTHING you said was true. Those attacks were exactly that.
*snort* Playing the victim. Steve, like you didn’t explode at Kelly for something she didn’t even say. And then you had the audacity put up an embarrassing little show about it. A complete tantrum. You have played the victim COUNTLESS times and I have actually entertained it. Gimme a break. I’m done simultaneously tearing myself apart and defending myself just to attempt to get you to see me as an equal. I’m not better than you, and I’m definitely not worse (in politics.) I can tell you that when it comes to political discussion that you are MUCH worse. You’re a total jackass. And you’re really fooling yourself if you think you can turn this around and undo years of jackassery to make it sound like it’s my fault. Do you think I’m THAT pathetic? Do you think I’ll let you walk over me like that?
When you’ve finally accepted the idea that I don’t intend to engage in “political warfare” but mature conversation feel free to let me know. You have shown that you’re more than capable of it several times (recently with Egypt, then with the ACA, until Grant decided to be presumptuous asshole, and with other things as well) so DON’T act like you don’t know the difference, and DON’T act like I’m merely playing the victim. Because YOU, you KNOW the difference.
I should say in the PRESIDENTIAL primaries. In other races it has been mixed. In Texas the tea partiers defeated many incumbent Establish Republicans. In Utah the Tea Party lost big time so their strength isn’t uniform throughout our country. Tea Party favorite Bridenstine defeats incumbent Sullivan in Oklahoma primary. So there’s another victory for the tea party. The next big test for them will be if they can hold these people they helped get elected accountable when they betray us!
I swear I’m gonna give the world a PIECE OF MY MIND!
Gene you’re BEYOND PERVERTED. Get your perverted self out of here.
Gene is just another RTelier.
In fact, I wonder if they’re the same person–I can totally imagine RTelier pulling the “she’s a lesbian” card. How disgusting to attack someone’s sexuality. What kind of mindset would a person have to have?
And Steve, no one was shoving their sexuality in your face. See Selina’s comment on the illogicalness and hypocrisy of that. The Left HERE, on this blog, has been TOO POLITE. I don’t what you say is going on OUT THERE. YOU’VE been taking advantage of how polite people have been here, and it is INEXCUSABLE. If a Liberal attacked someone’s sexuality like that he would be EQUALLY PERVERTED. Disgusting.
Heh. I kind of feel bad that we took over a Canadian blog with American politics though.
Good to see you kick back Nahida. I was wondering when you’d shake off the DISGUSTING things conservatives here have said. It really changes your mentality and makes you tear yourself down doesn’t it? I also second (third) everything Elena said.
Layla–I agree I also felt self-conscious because the moderator has left and this space as basically been taken over. Especially with total perverts like Gene.
No, these delusion Rightwing FREAKS make me SO MAD.
Yeah, polite.
Well I guess it probably is the closest that a Leftist can get to “Polite”.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/303972/middle-fingers-white-house-dennis-prager
Um, that was AFTER I was SEVERELY attacked–called a terrorist, a psychopath, and told to go kill myself, so yeah Steve, Elena saying it was delusional and made her mad, that was PRETTY damn POLITE.
Don’t play this game. Your side has been SO DISGUSTING here you cannot win. And you were the first to bring it HERE. I won’t argue with you about who started it, but you brought it here.
Well I guess it probably is the closest that a Leftist can get to “Polite”.
You have SEEN me be polite, and it seems to be a level beyond your capabilities.
Do NOT mistake my kindness for weakness. I warned you I’m not Jewish. I am more than aware that I have been EXCEPTIONALLY gracious.
Herbert London wrote that there are “250 million Arabs in 22 Arab and Muslim countries who want to destroy [Israel]. But Israeli leaders do not modify their moral code one iota. As the commander of a training session for IDF entrants at Ammunition Hill in Jerusalem noted, ‘[i]f we altered our approach, what effect would it have on soldiers when they leave military service?’ One fights not only to save a nation, but to save values.”
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/jewish_tradition_and_war.html#ixzz1zb4CjVs6
If your nation doesn’t survive then that nation’s values doesn’t survive.
That is kind of what “it is better to do evil than be evil” means.
Sometimes you really need to burn the village to save it.
The highest value is preservation.
Well actually the highest value is love, and love is a psychopath.
Like I said – the Jews are pathetic!
If your nation doesn’t survive then your nations values doesn’t survive. So if you need to temporary abandon your values to save your nation then that is what you need to do.
Jewish values will be their destruction.
To hell with ANYONE who thinks they can play mind games with me about who’s been how polite. I’ve been abused my whole childhood and learned how to deal with abusive dunderheads in feminist theory, and you expect me to not recognize these abuse tactics? I will call it out when I see it.
You all ought to be ashamed of yourselves. Wave your political “WARFARE” out in the real world with other jackasses who will put up with it, don’t serve it up to me here and expect me to eat it. And then try to say it was me? Yeah, go tell yourself.
For Elena to say that delusional rightwing freaks make her angry, after they told me to kill myself as an act of patriotism? That was practically OOZING with kindness.
From this point if any of us says anything offensive just holler–I’ll apologize (if you’re not being a douchebag and playing mind games). If I come back that is. I kind of want to go for a swim now.
Oh, Steve, I have just yelled at you terribly as an individual for the behaviors of your… “entourage” as Elena (who is fantastic and far too polite after what the Right has said here) has called them. You’ve done the same with me before, and it’s awfully unfair isn’t it? Don’t try anything though. I know the scoreboard. *hugs* No hard feelings. Going to swim. See you later okay. (Hopefully not in less than a week I don’t feel like being called back to write [that’s why I’ve been here so often].) Bye!
LOL That one…
Yeah, she sure is something… Actually I’ve been mildly jealous of Steve.
Jealous?
She is hundreds of miles away from me.
If she met me I doubt her infatuation would last long. Even if it did politics in the end would break us apart. I can’t change that about me even if I wanted to. It is too much a part of my life. It is too much a part of who I am.
As much as I am attracted to her, as much as I am compelled to care for her, in the end this is just a mirage and for a thirsty man a mirage is cruel torture.
Don’t be jealous. Pity me.
Well that was something to read while I dried my hair.
Infatuation? Ahah You think this is foolish and unreasonable? Okay, maybe. A little teensy bit. And why wouldn’t it last, Steve-which-is-not-really-your-name? I never understand why men seem more insecure about their appearances than women; how truly unattractive does a man have the capacity to be? Doesn’t he just need clean clothes, some cologne, and a nice watch–and he’s achieved the standard? I just acquired $50 worth of eyeshadow (that’s four), a tight black skirt, and I had a waxing appointment yesterday. Are you under the impression that I just roll out of bed, not-named-Steve?
You? Change your politics? I would never ask such a thing. It’s not your politics I have an issue with. (Well ideologically I have an issue obviously.) But it’s the way you get about them. I don’t mind at all when you’re a little snide or sarcastic or even rude–that’s the nature of it; I’m sure I’d do the same–but there’s simply a line and “I’m being myself” isn’t an excuse for douchebaggery. But look at you; do you think you’re so cruel? I’m just amazed, and so moved, that the thought of changing them would even occur to you, especially since you know it’s such an integral part of you that it would be quite impossible and you don’t want to anyway. If you needed another reason, not-named-Steve, here you would have it. (From previous comment.) You’ve considered whether it’s possible to compromise yourself for love. I’d never think to require such a thing. How gentle of you to even mention.
You don’t have to fear taking it too seriously, Steve-which-isn’t-really-your-name. You don’t really have an interest; you’re just experiencing that thing when you’ve suddenly regarded someone as a possibility because you’ve found out they were interested and now you’re interested by virtue of them being interested just because you’d never thought of it before and now it’s open. I mean, really, what else could it be? You’re wondering how and why it happened to me–but why else could happen to you, not-named-Steve?
you’re just experiencing that thing when you’ve suddenly regarded someone as a possibility because you’ve found out they were interested and now you’re interested by virtue of them being interested just because you’d never thought of it before and now it’s open.
Don’t underestimate the attraction in that. Perhaps not for others but yeah, there’s nothing more sexy nothing more compelling to me than someone who is attracted to me. It is something I never have experienced in real life.
And then for it to be someone who is super attractive, I mean model like, TV star movie star like attractive, someone who is super intelligent, and extremely kind and wonderful, it is almost too much to endure. What wouldn’t I compromise for that?
No, I can not afford to take that seriously. It would hurt too much.
And it is not even the fear of compromise that bothers me so much. I have been compromised before for much. much less.
Just the plan fact that this isn’t real. This isn’t something I can touch. It is a mirage.
If it wasn’t a mirage? I don’t know what I would be able to do with it. It is just so outside my world experience.
I just acquired $50 worth of eyeshadow
Holy–
Steve could you afford her?!
=P
Never in real life? Surely you must have experienced it at least once or twice? She probably just never told you. You can be very arousing at moments you don’t even know.
Model? Movie star! Where are you getting this from? Certainly not. I promise you you’re not missing as much as you think you are. But I will of course respect your reservations if you truly feel you need fear taking it too seriously. I’m just moved that that would be a concern for you at all. There’s something heartrending about men preferring sustenance and long-term.
Chris—LOL well I wouldn’t make him pay for everything!
Heh, I was joking. He probably wouldn’t even care.
I have been compromised before for much. much less.
Well what would you really be getting from her that you didn’t already get from your friends anyway? AND she’ll control your finances!
Yeah RTelier? Too bad I wouldn’t control yours regardless of how hard you cried and begged.
Shut up, Nahida, why don’t you go spend money than you can afford on shoes and eyeshadow.
I don’t have to. I can get men like you to do it for me.
Hey, how do you know how much she can afford?
Nahida’s VERY intelligent, how do you know she hasn’t made money off her brilliance? She’s not “trophy wife” material, RTelier, if anything she’s an INVESTMENT.
Leave the pretty woman alone and get a life. And again, I was joking, stop using my joke for yourself.
I’m going to go buy a trophy husband to go with my eyeshadow and shoes.
Look, not that it’s any of your business RTelier, but I grew up very poor despite my mother working 24/7 because her paychecks would always be confiscated by her abusive violent control-freak of a husband (if he were even worthy of being graced with the title.) He indulgently used it all on himself. I went to school without coats in the winter and years without new shoes until they were too tight to fit anymore, even uncomfortably. The school, when reviewing for things like textbooks and field-trips and fees, saw our household income placing us squarely in the middle class and would decide I didn’t need any aid, but of course they didn’t know I didn’t have access to any of that. And because my mother was so prideful, she wouldn’t allow me to accept anything from adults who showed concern about why it was 50 degrees out and I wasn’t in a proper jacket.
I was never high class, but I was pretty good at faking it.
Now with renewed liberty, occasionally I purchase eyeshadow and admire $200 shoes. I might even actually buy expensive shoes, because dammit I feel like I deserve them. I don’t expect I’ll be 21 forever. In fact I might even be hit by a bus tomorrow, and thanks to your patriarchy, the most devastating thing would be how the accident rearranged my face. “Oooh she used to be so pretty!” (Never mind I probably can’t walk! What if there was brain damage? No mournful mention of that of course.) “Hey, at least you’re even thinner! You look like you’re straight out of chemotherapy!”
So yeah, to survive this atrocious world you’ve created, I’m going to walk around in gorgeous things, and you’re going to shut up about it because it’s not affecting you. In fact, I’m doing you a favor. Thank me for stimulating the economy you’ve devastated. And for the view as I walk away after I’ve rejected you.
Nahida can handle herself like a boss!
Well, at least she wouldn’t make him compromise, I guess.
As one of my friends said today, “I will never not laugh at men thinking women are more high maintenance. Our entire existence has been manipulated to pad your fragile ego.”
And she is right. A woman will never be as high maintenance as a man’s ego.
There is no compromise in love! Anyone who says otherwise is lying. You love yourself, and he shares with you the love of yourself. He loves himself, and you share with him the love of himself. To believe someone should love you despite something even you would renounce in yourself is not a compromise; it is to make demands of love. Love is earned, not demanded. How selfish to desire someone to love you when you would not tolerate yourself if you happened to meet yourself! “Love me even if I don’t love myself” is only arrogance masked as humility. And it is immature, unrealistic, and destructive in its self-deprecation, because now it has crossed to distressing someone else. There is a point when modesty gets in the way, when it then fails to be modest and champions the virtue only in name.
Well, haven’t you been talking to her for six years? I think that’s what she said right. I can’t remember… it’s been a while since I’ve been here. And I remember her but not you. I watched the whole show but I haven’t visited this blog since the third season. Had it’s moments, but wasn’t that great of a show. There were a couple of episodes that really disappointed me. But yeah, that’s six years of politics. For you and me, that’s not long, but for her, gosh that must be just a little less than half her lifetime, and she hasn’t been upset enough with you yet to completely not speak to you or anything. And she doesn’t seem to want to change your politics. She just lectured as all for the past hour or so about being nicer, not changing. (She puts up with a lot patiently, but man when she’s finally fed up can she lecture! Puts everyone back in their place. It’s admirable how tough she is.)
Even if she’s miles away, the thing is you still did it. So yeah, you got something to be a little jealous of.
But again, if it is all but an illusion to what ends? What substance does it really have?
In the end it really is a mirage. I fear taking it too seriously.
“you still did it.”
She did it, not me.
And I have been thinking about how and why it happened and I think I have figured it out and it is so sad that it brought tears to my eyes.
Are you afraid you might take it seriously? Wouldn’t want to make it hard for you, then… but I was thinking it terms of knowing you have that ability. She listed a bunch of things that were attractive about you. That must have felt nice, like a confidence booster. But yeah, I guess if you really want something out of it and know it’s impossible, these things aren’t as fun.
What do you mean? Why did it happen?
I really don’t want to go into it but it has nothing to do with me.
Not really.
I think I get it now, and yeah, it is sad.
Well then it can’t be right. What could possibly be sad? Nahida’s gorgeous, strong, really intelligent and compassionate. She’ll be fine.
All I have done has been cruel and mean to her. What could she possibly find attractive in that?
Oh.
Yeah, I got a lump in my throat when I realized what is going on.
By the way I have an event that I am attending at 5pm tonight and probably won’t be home until like 1 AM.
What you talking about? She told you exactly what was attractive. And I thought it was BEFORE you started acting like that. And then she stopped.
I don’t know, I go in and out so maybe I missed something, but I’m pretty sure that’s what happened. It was before.
Are we playing armchair psychologist, Steve?
Are you going to be so impertinent as to suggest your meanness and cruelty drew me in, when I blatantly emphasized otherwise citing about nine or ten alluring qualities about you, none of which included cruelty? And so what indications have you congregated to direct you to such a brazen conclusion? Because it certainly was not a result of my own contentions and insistence, which you have been recently overtly disregarding anyway. (Why is it that no matter how often I repeat something I am never heard?) While I don’t contend that yours is a theory widely applicable to many women, as we have been conditioned to mistake abuse for passion and cruelty for concern, I can assure you it is not applicable to me. You needn’t pity me (and you needn’t pity them either.) The key to recognizing when it is relevant is whether the woman justifies this behavior. And I never have, and never would, justify the reprehensible things you said. And I don’t appreciate you diminishing the genuinity of my affections by alleging that they are a consequence of this, or that I am somehow damaged. Make no mistake of it; I am no one’s victim. I don’t even consider myself a survivor of anything. I was blessed enough to have two parents in one. When I was very young I would often confuse my mother with the Virgin Mary, and as I grew older I saw no reason to change my opinion.
Have you forgotten the qualities I listed and instead substituted them for cruelty? (Perhaps to assure yourself it isn’t you to protect yourself and inadvertently insult me as well?) Here they are again for the third time, in the same order: you’re stubborn, decisive, interpretative, circumspect, self-directed, strong-valued, fervid, discerning, and recondite. Shall I list your faults as well to demonstrate I am not unsighted to them? Half are the same as your virtues! And moral laziness. Do you truly expect me to live to the standards you’ve failed to achieve yourself? You are more than capable of engaging civilly; conveniently, you chose otherwise. You’re not a bad person, Steve; you’re a morally impatient one, to the point at which you employ tactics you would on evil with even those you believe are good or of whose quality you are unaware. Quick fix. And of course, you believe you know who is evil. You don’t know, Steve. That is another fault, believing you know. Those who know such things never believe they do, and thus never lose in recklessness and carelessness their ability to recognize them.
You refuse to amend your judgment regardless of substantial evidence, and not even when the entity of your scrutiny informs you otherwise as I am now: it was not, and never has been, your cruelty that was attractive. Trust me, I am not of the opinion that’s a good color on you. “All [you] have done” has not been cruel. There was a time you were kind. And you will be respectful enough of me to recognize that I’m not that pathetic as to freely cohere to cruelty. (And it would do much good to alleviate your pity.)
I have never been taken advantage of (and I’m not about to start), but I am exceedingly sensitive to those who are suffering, which compels me to question the sincerity of my empathy. So if it’s selfless love you detect, Steve, you’ve got the wrong woman. I may appear to have an excess of love, but it’s a common device in writers and artists and musicians, who have such an accumulation of it that they fall in love about twice a day, or otherwise have to force it into their inner worlds. I consider myself none of those three things, but other people seem to be convinced I am. Let me tell you my issues—because, like you, I have quite a few—I’m adhesively loyal. Adhesively. You were kind to me in the beginning, and I never forgot. And that is what I’ve clung to, Steve, not your cruelty. Why have I? Not because I am a saint. Often I believe that if I don’t forgive people, I will thwart some wonderful part of them that has the potential to emerge, pristine and noble and strong, of which perhaps they weren’t even aware, and the universe will be cheated of such a beautiful revelation gracing existence and Eternity. I am an egotistical woman, arrogant enough to fool myself into trying to use such a beautiful power I don’t even possess, and self-destructive enough to dedicate myself to its emergence so fully that it’s frightening. But in reality I don’t have that power. People like me, deficient, imperfect, incapable of selfless love, don’t have that power. Eventually, if you push hard enough, Steve, you will find me cold. And you’d best remember that. Others have done it before. I am no snowflake.
Politics is too much a part of who I am as well; you just don’t think so because I don’t go ripping throats like you do. Like I said, my approach to a lot of things is like my approach to religion, and being tasteful about Islam doesn’t make me any less Muslim than being tasteful about politics makes them less a part of my life. It would not have torn us apart, I assure you—you simply cannot imagine a relationship extending beyond the prism of your ideology, because that is what you have known, Steve. You said yourself you were involved in politics; you never really knew the Left, you only knew the political Left. And you knew both the normal and political Right because you were both and both were in your circles. But the Left? You encountered them in politics and so you believe only liberals tend to allow politics to consume them, and conservatives are normal. Why do you think people “suddenly” appeared to defend me (as suddenly, as someone mentioned, that they showed up to attack me)? It was not sudden; they just didn’t care to discuss it before until it got to that point. You never knew liberals like that. You said so yourself you couldn’t write to me because of my politics. You only knew the political Left, never the normal Left—never the men whose friendships may have sustained you, never the quiet pensive teenager, never the woman you could have loved.
That’s what politics does to you. It empties your life, it haunts your soul, it constrains your love so that when you encounter those who are deserving they are driven away by your aggression incited by the superficiality of the label.
Somehow, for reasons I cannot grasp, it seems everyone has a theory about me. But none of them are true. I am neither the vehicle of evil nor the embodied apex of goodness. I am no seductress, no alluring enchantress, no elusive creature of mystery. I merely desire to crown those I love and bequeath them the modest realms of my heart!
Do you know how laughably simple I am, Steve? I was growing progressively apprehensive and annoyed that people were commenting on my appearance (except the women, whom I don’t mind, regardless of their sexualities—I’m adulated!) and utterly unsatisfied that none of them were you. I don’t care about the opinions of random men, and frankly I don’t see why they would flatter themselves into believing I do. The only ones I care about here are yours. It doesn’t matter how supreme the compliment is, but from whom it is delivered. And of course you won’t. (I’m sure you have your reasons, none of which you owe me.)
But, long comment short(ened), it is far from your cruelty.
De-lurking to say I can feel my vocabulary improve just from years of reading Nahida’s comments.
Oh, and RTelier is knob.
Can she go swimming? I mean with a regular bathing suit? Layla are you actually Muslim (to answer) since you said that’s not your real name.
Actually, that is my real name, just with a different spelling. (Didn’t bother think of an entirely new name.) And yeah, I think she said before that she just goes in mainstream bathing suits. She’s not really the kind of person to give a damn. Says they’re easier.
I hope she doesn’t take it the wrong way but she should really try skinny-dipping someday. It’s not really sexual but it really feels good. Of course nudist camps can differ (some don’t uphold the standard but most do) but nudist camps can be less sexualized than regular swimming places. They really stress respect for others as well as self. Unwelcome attention usually doesn’t happen but in the few cases it does it is dealt with immediately. That is at most places. There are some exceptions but I mean at most.
She wouldn’t take it the wrong way. Nahida’s really chill.
Independence day!
No, just the Fourth of July.
We lost our Independence Last Week if not before then.
[audio src="http://stevedeace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/deace_podcast_070312_hour1.mp3" /]
When the government controls your health care it controls your life. It intrudes into every aspect of your life, even to how much pop you are allowed to drink,
Yeah, Happy Dependance Day!
http://reason.com/archives/2011/07/26/mcdonalds-to-kids-apple-slices
Every Happy Meal shall henceforth contain apple slices, according to a decree from McDonald’s HQ today, which boasts that the change is part of “a comprehensive plan [that] aims to help customers—especially families and children—make nutrition-minded choices whether visiting McDonald’s or eating elsewhere.”
And while USA Today reports that the company is claiming the apple incursion is “absolutely not” a response to growing regulatory threats from local, state, and federal governments, the Associated Press is reporting that First Lady Michelle Obama is pleased. The redesigned meals also happen to come within striking distance of the standards crafted by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, initially designed to make existing Happy Meals illegal within the borders of the City by the Bay.
Apples have been on offer since 2004, of course. But no longer will American parents be forced to choose between a Happy Meal that includes McDonald’s signature salty, delicious fries or one that replaces those fries with fruit. In a move that can only be described as Solomonic, McDonald’s has decided that Happy Meals will include both—a wee serving of deep fried spuds (1.1 ounces, down from the current 2.4) and a baggie of pre-sliced apples (sans the creepy caramel dipping sauce now on offer). Happy Meals will also default to include low-fat milk rather than soda.
When customers were offered the choice, only 11 percent opted for apples over fries for their kids, despite the fact that 88 percent were aware of the healthier alternative. All things being equal, McDonald’s might have interpreted the slow uptake on the apple option as evidence that people don’t come to the Golden Arches when they want to eat healthy (or even faux-healthy) and sent the fruit the way of the McRib.
But all things are not equal. Hysteria about childhood obesity continues to mount, along with an ever growing impulse by regulators to blame commerical food providers for the problem. So governments (and activists who have legislators’ ears) nudge McDonald’s to include healthier options. That accomplished, the nudgers set out to convert those options into defaults. It’s not hard to see demands to remove the fry option altogether are close on the heels of this concession. And always the threat of binding legal requirements lurk in the background.
But when the company itself protests that it is making changes in kids’ meals purely in response to customer demand to enjoy “more food groups” and have their fast food chain of choice “create nutritional awareness,” it’s hard to tell where coercion begins and voluntary change ends. McDonald’s is one of those brands, like Wal-Mart, that gets consistently hammered for being the biggest, baddest guy out there, even as the chain scrambles to stay ahead of the game, become the good guy, or at least be left alone.
And whenever a health or safety measure is instituted “for the children,” you can bet that an adult-sized version is lurking nearby. And lo and behold, amidst the crowing about apples for kiddies this tidbit has mostly been ignored: McDonald’s will be reducing sodium in its meals across the board by 15 percent in the next four years. The chain has also hired a third-party firm to report on promised additional progress to reduce sugars, fat, and calories by 2020.
The food scientists/powerful wizards working around the clock at McDonald’s HQ will certainly do their best to minimize the impact of these promises on the taste of McDonald’s food. But today’s announcements are a perfect example of how moves to protect kids wind up taking choices away from adults (in this case, based on science that is shaky at best).
McDonald’s changes are voluntary, but they happened because McDonald’s exists in a world where trans fat bans are a reality, and junk food taxes are fodder for The New York Times op-ed page. Regulating food intended for kids is an easier sell, but the state is really just taking away parents’ choices. And once adults are no longer free to choose for their kids, why let them go on choosing for themselves?
====
(By the way this article was a year ago. A year later Bloomberg is talking about banning “oversize” sodas).
(I’ve decided I’m ignoring Kirk’s existence.)
Steve, where are you calling the limit? Are you against all state regulations of food and substances? I don’t think anyone can purchase alcohol before noon on Sundays in a lot of places or drink in bars after 4am from what I hear. And you can’t buy cigarettes if you’re under 18. Why is banning oversized drinks in venues where it would be consumed all by one person (since you can still purchase them in grocery stores and such) a pivotal point, when sugary drinks are not only unhealthy but incredibly addictive and have been proven to cause practically an epidemic of health risks from heart disease to diabetes?
If I had it my way of course, they wouldn’t be banned–but if I had it my way people would be able to drink at 18, not 21. (If you’re old enough to kill you’re old enough to have a beer.) Certain drugs that are much less dangerous than alcohol would also be legalized. If people want to do them they can ruin their own lives; it’s their choice. I’d simply raise fines for driving drunk and have everyone take some damn responsibility for themselves. The video mentioned smoking, and while I’m quite relieved that people can’t smoke at work or enclosed spaces (get off my air) but when it gets to the point where smoking is banned in public parks or pedestrian malls you’re just banning it to be a moralizing asshole. It reminds me of people being douchey to pregnant women who just want a glass of goddamn wine. Let her have the wine and stop policing her body. (What’s the point of it being illegal to serve it to her when she could just buy it at store anyway? It makes so angry how people treat women like children, or territory.)
I’m very, VERY concerned about telling people exactly what they’re buying and labeling food properly, especially when it comes to organic food–or, as our ancestors once called it, just food–and free range and products from local farmers that would help support them separated from corporate junk (you know, the usual liberal stuff). People need to know what they’re getting. After that? It’s their business. The only thing is I don’t understand where you’re drawing the line. Do you have a problem with smoking bans and the drinking age? Why are you against legalizing marijuana when it’s proven to be much less dangerous?
Look, at this point I fear they’re going to come after my caffeine next (which is something that will actually affect me [technically coming after soda is already coming after caffeine but I never saw the point in oversized soda so this doesn’t reach me personally I could never finish that stuff]) but I find the inconsistencies from conservatives absurd. You’re okay with someone not selling someone else contraceptives but not this? What if oversized soda is against my beliefs?
Did you know somewhere (forgot where) there’s a fine for texting while walking because people keep falling into fountains and stuff? A fine. For texting while WALKING. That will never cause any harm on someone else. If you fall into a fountain its your own damn fault. You should have watched where you were going. But as alarming as it is that state governments are babying us, I can’t take conservatives seriously when they get outraged about this because of the other things they’re okay with. It seems awfully selective, and very hypocritical.
“Would you tell me please, Mr. Howard… why should I trade one tyrant 3,000 miles away for 3,000 tyrants one mile away?”
http://www.hark.com/clips/tqqkkllkfk-3000-tyrants-one-mile-away
(By the way this article was a year ago. A year later Bloomberg is talking about banning “oversize” sodas).
Shows that no matter how much you give them they just want more. I remember he used to say stuff like this “next thing they will do is ban 32 oz sodas” as kind of a joke, well at least hyperbole, and he stopped doing that as they actually continue to make such stuff a reality.
Bloomberg should be executed for this. Damn, what did we fight all these wars for.
Kirk.
I am really at a lost to whether I should celebrate this holiday this year.
As you know I am a very patriotic person.
But after what just happened, when will I admit that this isn’t the country I thought it was anymore.
How can I just stand there as people talk about freedom and liberty when we have neither.
Sure Pop, Happy Meals, they seem like such small things, but isn’t that just the point. When you can take away the small things then you can take away the big things.
And that is exactly what Romneycare has done. It gets to determine how long you live. If you don’t live a lifestyle that the Government agrees with then you will not get the health care whether you can afford it or not.
…Oh you WERE Kirk.
Well that’s depressing.
You know, Steve, you could have just asked me if my imam was a threat to the country. I’d remind you irritably I already said I’d report that stuff (you really don’t trust me; that’s fine, I guess, you don’t really know me), but I wouldn’t have exploded at you or anything for the implication (like I would at someone random here, because like what was said already the fact that I already renounced him makes it the stupidest question.) When I said he’s batshit insane I meant orthodox but innocent if-you-don’t-wear-socks-you-can’t-go-to-heaven kind of batshit insane.
And so yeah. I do go because it’s “conveniently located.” And I will continue to do so. Maybe religion isn’t that important to you, but it is to me. I don’t expect you to understand, and that’s fine. But if that’s the case, don’t pretend you know.
I’m just a little astounded. I thought I could trust you enough to confide in you about these things without you jumping to conclusions or using it against me and my entire already-over-scrutinized-to-the-point-of-our-rights-being-infringed community, but apparently not.
Well it’s good to know. I wouldn’t make the same mistake twice. You only care about the freedoms of specific religions. I’ll just start being exceptionally protectively PC again.
I am sorry. That was over the top about the imam
But regarding Sharia, you understand why we are so concerned about that, right?
We are in conflict with so many Islamic societies at this time, I am afraid we need to scrutinize your religion more than others. That is just an unfortunate reality. But it is good to know that there are people like you out there who would report things if bad things are going on at the Mosque you are attending.
No, Steve, quite frankly I don’t understand.
You don’t know what shari’ah law is. If you heard a Muslim saying that they are participating in it in this country, it would completely alarm you. But we are. And I am. I am participating in it when I don’t drink, when I don’t gamble, when I don’t engage in other Islamically illegal activities, when I fast, when I give the designated charity, and when I behave appropriately. It was never meant to be a political system, only a very personal and religious one. It is meant to govern marriages through contracts, and these contracts have in fact saved women’s lives when Western law would have failed them.
There was a case for example, when a woman was brought from Jordan to the United States by her husband. She knew very little English; this is a country in which she was entirely powerless. As soon as they arrived her husband changed. He became extremely abusive, beat her, raped her repeatedly, and she discovered he had a mistress. He soon abandoned her after just over a year of marriage.
Luckily, her marriage contract under shari’ah law, drafted by an attorney with translations in English, entitled her to ten thousand dollars if her husband divorced her; the contract also dictated a closed marriage: he could not marry multiple women, nor could he have a mistress without paying penalties for violating his marriage contract. Unluckily for her, she was in America now, where a contract under shari’a law could not be enforced. American women–who divorce and marry freely with sexual and financial independence and without social stigma–do not need these protections, and the court system reflects this society: reasons for a divorce like adultery or abandonment are understood as irrelevant. And for just over a year of marriage? No spousal support.
She was in Indiana, and again and again, not understanding, she asked her lawyer for the entitlements promised to her in her contract. And the lawyer explained over and over that in Indiana a contract drafted by shari’ah law could not be enforced.
From the lawyer: Then she would exclaim, aghast, that if she could not get any rights or restitution under Islamic law, what indeed were her options under American law? My response, that all she would receive from an American court was a legally recognized divorce, no property, no spousal support, and no amount awarded for repudiating the marriage contract, was impossible for Zainab to digest. “How can this be?” she would ask. “This is America. Women are supposed to have rights here. How can a judge tell me that I deserve nothing after having been abused and abandoned?”
And so there I was, with my first Muslim client, confronting a predicament where the American legal tools at my disposal did not promise the best result for my client, a Jordanian Muslim woman.
The story has a happy ending; the contract held in court. Easily.
Of course you could say that we have this thing called a prenup which is basically the same thing (I honestly don’t know why the lawyer was worried either; I haven’t even been to law school and I could have told her it was completely enforceable) and so it’s not really shari’ah law–it’s US law holding up a contract, but that doesn’t take away the conditions under which it was drafted.
Listen Steve, shari’ah law as practiced by “Islamic” governments is terrible. Terrible. I don’t even need to tell you how terrible it is. It wouldn’t even matter if it weren’t terrible, because we have our own UNITED STATES law, and it really doesn’t matter what shari’ah law is because nothing but American law belongs in America.
But you just don’t know all of it.
The American court system was not going to bring Zainab justice. The American court system is made for liberated American women. But Islamic law, *designed* for women to conquer intense patriarchies because of the intense patriarchy during which Islam was revealed for the exact purpose of overthrowing it, would afford her incredible victory.
When women move to the United States (naively trusting men to be their protectors), they bring with them the unjust power structure that existed in those countries—into a country in which they have even less influence because nothing is familiar to them. They also bring with them the instruments to defeat these injustices. And the appropriate way to level that unjust power structure is use against it the very interpretations that have developed from within those societies to rightfully restore power to women.
And when people rage blindly against shari’ah law? It frightens me. Because they have no idea what they’re talking about, they have no idea they could be taking something away that may help save lives because they have never seen it that way, and how would they react if they knew a contract drafted under it had been enforced at some point in the US? (Their greatest fears confirmed!!) Would they even care to know how it happened, or why, or what exactly took place, or the whole story at all?
I have things to protect, Steve. I have America to save from Muslims and Muslims to save from America. And maybe you have no reason to trust me. Maybe you are totally freaking out right now. But you don’t see the sphere I see. You just know foreign words, and you think you know what they mean, but you don’t.
The American court system was not going to bring Zainab justice.
Well, you know, except for the fact that it did. But the justice was executed through a contract drafted under shari’ah law.
My point in this story is that shari’ah doesn’t mean (only) what you think it does.
Do you really think there isn’t a reason people tiptoe around Islam in a way they don’t around Christianity? Do you really think it’s just PC and it’s nothing but a total injustice? It’s frustrating, I know. It seems unfair, and it feels like “your” culture is being attacked, and you feel terribly victimized and angry that these “foreign” religions seem to be getting far more respect than yours ever does. But it’s like that because everyone knows Christianity. Christianity is home. When a Christian does something it will not be attributed to their religion like when a Muslim does something, and it will not be misconstrued and language will not be appropriate. You can use the word crusade in a way I can never use the word ji’had–even if comparatively by definition alone ji’had is much milder. (It refers to inner struggle primarily.) And that’s even more unfair than being constantly made fun of, Steve. I can’t… use my own words! Do you know what that’s like?
It sucks that people are obscene with Jesus and Mary and what else. But when we get to the point at which Islam can made fun of the same way and it’s ONLY disrespectful (and not dangerous to both Muslims and non-Muslims) because people are way too comfortable? I would cry because it would mean we were finally accepted as American. I would be simultaneously happy and extremely offended.
language will not be appropriated*
I know what you mean Kirk.
It’s not even the money, or the inefficiencies or all of that which bothers me.
It’s the CONTROL.
Bloomberg could say well all these people drinking all this pop, well they are a burden upon the taxpayer. That is why WE HAVE TO DO THIS. In order to save our national health care system.
What can’t a government justify under this.
No, it’s not that I don’t want to pay for poor people’s health care (though what gives them the right to demand that). No, it’s not that. It’s the control that the State will inflict upon lives of each any every one of us. Heck they are already trying to that and we don’t even have a national health care system in place. Where they go next I don’t want to speculate. I don’t want to give the bastards any ideas.
Yeah, Bloomberg should be shot in the head. He is a tyrant!
Kirk, I am a very patriotic person too.
But it is getting to the point that I must ask, does what I am being patriotic too even exist last night.
I cried last night when I thought about today. And they were not tears of joy.
Last night, I really cried. What am I celebrating anymore? What am I celebrating?
Nahida, I am almost to the point of supporting Marijuana legalization.
But, Marijuana might not be as safe as pro-Marijuana people like to claim it is. They like to say it is safer than alcohol, but remember that cannibal a few weeks back in Florida. They thought he was on “bath salts” but they were wrong. He was on Marijuana.
http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/national/rudy-eugene-zombie-cannibal-miami-face-chewing-attack-on-ronald-poppo-detailed-by-me-report
Tests on the 31-year-old’s body show only marijuana in his system at the time of the May 26 attack, according to the Miami-Dade County Medical Examiner.
Ruled out were synthetic marijuana, LSD, amphetamines, PCP, heroin, oxycodone, several other street drugs and alcohol, the ME reported in a news release.
To complete its examination, the ME’s office said it sought help from an outside forensic toxicology lab. “Within the limits of current technology by both laboratories, marijuana is the only drug identified in the body of Mr. Rudy Eugene,” the ME’s office said.
“What if oversized soda is against my beliefs?”
If you are an owner who doesn’t want to sell oversized sodas then it should be your right not to sell them. That is totally different from being barred from selling them.
You can get soda anywhere. Pharmacists are in line with doctors. There’s no way in hell I’m going to allow them to deny medication to those who need them and can pay for them. Doctors can’t deny someone their service on the basis of religious beliefs any more than landlord/lady can deny a client housing on the basis of race or sex. Their civil right to practice their religion is now infringing of someone’s inalienable right to their life–which they are taking care to pay for themselves. If they don’t want this, they can find another job. And if not, I’m going to go get myself hired to serve drinks and then just not serve them. And then I suppose I’ll just file a lawsuit.
A store owner can sell whatever he/she wants. You’re your own boss. A pharmacist or doctor has expectations and regulations and is serving society like a teacher, nurse, or firefighter.
This isn’t about religious rights like people say it is. (Unless of course it’s only about the religious rights of Christians.) It’s about denying women the healthcare we pay for to hold us to the patriarchal male standard of health care, which it has been for all of history. If someone showed up needing something for any other serious ailment and was denied because the pharmacist was witch or something and only believed in herbal medicine there would be outrage. Nothing will change my mind about this.
The standard for health should be female. I am not even joking about this. (I am not an egalitarian feminist–treating people the same is NOT treating them equally.) There is a percent more women in this country than men, and women are more expensive. We have children. We should be the standard. Who says it gets to be men? A lot more men would get what they need with the female standard anyway, because there is much more taken into account in terms of complications and expenses–and they’d be denied what they don’t need. (*coughViagracough*) It would simply be more efficient, but people can’t even get past the current paradigm to see how wrong and deficient it is.
On marijuana–I’m aware of both sides saying it’s dangerous or isn’t, but I’d still legalize it. The degree of danger still doesn’t compare to the number of people who die from drunk driver accidents; even if it turns out to be true that it’s individually more dangerous than alcohol, the frequency of disaster is something to be taken into account. And I just don’t really care to tell people what drugs they should or shouldn’t take. As long as we’re not legalizing coke or meth or heroine, which makes people kill other people or lose their minds for it.
What if I’m the mayor and oversized soda is against my beliefs? I suppose I should be able to shove that in everyone else’s face and barr them from purchasing it?
That’s the kind of power pharmacists have. The mayor is there to serve, and so are they.
No, only at your store if you are an owner. Government should have limits.
Bath salts? Wtf? The stuff I put in my bath? (Jesus Christ. People can get high off anything.) Or is it an actual drug?
If the effects are comparable to PCP I don’t see why it should be legal!
I am not sure. I have been wondering that myself. I guess if I really cared to look I could find out. But yeah, whatever it is, this seems to be the latest thing, but not in the case of this cannibal. All he had in his system was marijuana.
That doesn’t mean the marijuana was responsible. He could have just been a cannibal… who happened to be on marijuana.
Nahida, reeeelax. He just had something to say and was afraid to say it to you because you might get mad. You’re too gorgeous to lose. So he used a different name. It’s practically a form of flattery.
RTelier STOP SHOVING YOUR SEXUALITY IN MY FACE, GOD. What is it with you straight men and making your sexuality everyone’s business?
(Yeah, still not over that. Just a heads up to anyone, I am FEROCIOUSLY passionate about these double standards around sexuality. Don’t even try it with me.)
Yeah, I get it. I’m not mad at him or anything. (And I’m not passively aggressively saying that! I’m really not mad.) He needs to be anonymous, and “Steve” isn’t anymore. I understand; let him have some room. But I’m a lot likely to ignore other names if I believe they aren’t him, and I WILL explode at violent ones that attempt to engage me.
Hey, Steve said that, not me. You’d never say that to Steve, even though he’s the one who said it.
I enjoy his compliments. Yours are disposable.
Don’t get all socialist on me again.
Of course, this is why Marxist feminists are WRONG. They think class divisions are the main intersection oppressing women? Equality is perfectly possible in a dog-eat-dog world. Even better in fact. As long as women are viewed as property along with other objects and items, we will NEVER be free in a Marxist structure.
Nahida, I agree with you 100%. But for the sake of argument, if women are viewed as objects and entitled to men in both Marxism and capitalism, then aren’t they still property in capitalism? Just… one man’s property, I guess.
Have you heard the saying, “Men on the Right think women are private property; men on the Left think women are public property”?
Of course we are. But in Marxism we are objects perpetually; capitalism presents the opportunity to own property rather than be it. It is much easier to weed out oppression in capitalism than Marxism. It’s truly a kind of slavery!
I guess in the “ideal” manifestation of Marxism there would be no slaves because everyone would be recognized as a person*, but it is much more likely that there would be slaves–and can you imagine if there were? You’d never be able to get out of it! I think it’s so insane. Absolutely delusional.
Of course classism and sexism aren’t completely independent of each other, but the solution to classism in order to solve sexism is not Marxism. It’s protecting the hard-working lower class in a capitalist system.
You know, my mother always said that the death of America will be moral deprivation. And I think that’s what has happened. Maybe the “trickle down” effect really did work once. Maybe those who believe it works still are stuck nostalgically in the past, during a time when people actually cared about contributing to society, whether they were wealthy or otherwise. Our class structure is intrinsically linked to the moral state of the nation. When something stops working, something else has changed.
*Of course, everyone would also be slaves.
And you were the one who asked about bathing suits, Windy? Yeah, I don’t bother with “Islamic” bathing suits. (What does that mean? Why can’t a mainstream bathing suit be considered Islamic?) Of course my mother absolutely disapproves. I keep telling her that modesty is an attitude, not an article of clothing, and she’s not being very modest when she gets judgmental, but she tells me to stop lecturing her (as she continues to lecture me.)
She’s brilliant, but sometimes…
It is time for an American Islam.
(Not that people who wear “traditionally Islamic” bathing suits aren’t American. I meant of course that I find it so hypocritical when Muslims attempt to preserve the supposed “purity” of Islam when in reality the religion has been compromised to fit the criteria of so many different cultures. That is its purpose. It is not meant for one people.)
Oh i actually hear that Islamic bathing suits are becoming mainstream American because of the obesity problem… ppl want to cover their bodies!
modesty is an attitude, not an article of clothing
Is this rooted in Islam, Nahida? Or is it American? Where are you getting it from?
Chris, it is absolutely rooted in Islam. Regard the following hadith:
The Prophet, peace be upon him, said to his companions, “No one with an ounce of arrogance in his heart will enter Paradise.”
In seeking to understand what arrogance means, the companions asked, “O Prophet of God, what if a person likes to dress well?”
The Prophet, peace be upon him, responded, “God is beautiful and loves beauty. Arrogance is rejecting truth and looking down on people.”
Windy, they’re referred to in the trend as “modest bathing suits” and yes I’m aware of this trend as well. And isn’t it a shame? I would love for my sisters in Islam to feel much less self-conscious in the bathing suits they wear and much more like they’re American enough to have defined American culture, but I don’t want the reason to be because people are ashamed of their bodies! I’ve also seen a some of those bathing suits and feel that they are hideous. Except a couple that look retro and are kinda cute.
The Prophet, peace be upon him, said to his companions, “No one with an ounce of arrogance in his heart will enter Paradise.”
In seeking to understand what arrogance means, the companions asked, “O Prophet of God, what if a person likes to dress well?”
The Prophet, peace be upon him, responded, “God is beautiful and loves beauty. Arrogance is rejecting truth and looking down on people.”
WOW. Nahida you need to get the word out! Become a religious leader already!
PREACH it!
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/is-jesus-christ-reaching-out-to-muslims-through-their-dreams/
Nahida, you won;t be 21 forever.
And you will look back and wonder where all the time went.
It really goes much faster when you are older.
Well what would you really be getting from her that you didn’t already get from your friends anyway?
RTelier, are you serious?
Well it’s not like she can DO anything.
Because that’s all there is?
With him? Who says I wouldn’t?
Anyway, this is officially beyond your business. If I could count the number of times I needed to put a man back in his place!
“She was twenty-one, for God’s sake. She must be allowed to grow up. By the time they were her age, most of the heroines of literature had lived, loved and even died… If she wanted to be a heroine, it was time to start behaving like one.” — Robyn Sisman
Get the hell out of my way.
I love your attitude Nahida!
A few months back I thought you were approaching the future with lots of fear and in your case you really don’t need to.
I am not going to tell you crap like Seize the day and all of that because that is too much pressure. but just take each day as it comes.
I believe there are great things ahead for you Nahida. I am looking for you to become the spiritual leader I am becoming convinced you are destined to become. Either that or like a Fox News commentator. They always have people on from the Left and yeah, typically they are attractive women. Of course you are attractive and smart which means they would like you to become a commentator.
I was wondering, I know that newspapers are dying off but it you could like host a talk show in your area or become like a columnist. Then you could write a book that becomes a top seller and then go on the lecture circuit.
“By the time they were her age, most of the heroines of literature had lived, loved and even died…” Yeah but those were different times back then . I remember a quote from Interview with a Vampire” where the vampire stated that back in the 18th century (when he became a vampire) he was a landowner even though he was pretty young and that was just the way things were back then. It probably had to do with the life expectancy being so low back then. I mean even then sure you had your people who lived over ninety or so but that was much rarer with disease and all.
I know exactly how you are feeling right now. Just be a little patient. NOT TOO PATIENT but if you think you must have more education like a Masters as awful as that may sound (just when does ‘preparing for life’ stop and living life begin, right that’s what you are thinking) please consider doing it.
Oh, and life happens while you are making other plans. That really is a truism. Preparing for life is living life, but with a Masters you can also work that in with a real career.
Not saying you need a Masters. That is something you will have to work out after researching it for yourself. One of the reasons I never got one is indeed I thought I was tired of ‘preparing’ and wanted to start ‘living’. I can’t say that was a good decision or not but of course there was also the money, but with good financial loans it really is less of a problem then it may appear to be when you looking at it right now. I never had much of a problem paying off my financial loans and I never got that high paying of a job. But then again I know of friends who probably did “overeducate” themselves and became burdened with financial debt that they found hard to pay off and the job they finally settled on probably didn’t need that degree of education.
Hard call,
Doesn’t Nahida write fiction?
We know her as religious and political commentary, but I thought her “real life” was literature?
Layla, she does write fiction. And it’s gorgeous. I mean GORGEOUS. I just looked for a sample right now, but I think she made them all private. I guess writers have reasons to not put pieces online that haven’t been real-life published yet.
Her writing is very luscious, and very imaginative. I don’t know what genre to call it. It’s not really fantasy, because it has science fiction and mystery elements in it. And there’s a lot of moral dilemma and not being able to tell who’s good or evil. But she doesn’t even think she’s a good writer. Can you believe that?
Selina, I’m not just a bad writer; I’m simply not a writer. Largely I am in the abstract sense, but in order to be a writer one must write, and referring to myself as a writer during a period I am veraciously not writing is no less than pretentious. Honestly I don’t assess there is anything exceptionally distinctive about my writing, and I use too many adverbs. (Adverbs are “fillers”—they make you sound like you’re accentuating significance but are really just decorative alternates for substance. Often they present phantom comparisons rather than the execution of acute profundity.) I’m a little amazed Steve thinks I’m capable of writing a bestseller; I don’t suspect my writing ever made much of an impression on him.
Of course, seeing as authors have made it on that list with less than impressionable novels (50 Shades of Gray? How I shudder!) I suppose it’s also a matter of luck. Readers happen to be into that Twilight sort of genre now.
In fact, whenever I’m asked to guest post, I’m always disheartened at the possibility that it’s because my identity as a Muslim feminist is relevant to the current socio-political atmosphere, not because I’m even half a decent writer. They just need my voice. I’m often startled to find myself listed in circles with very highly educated women—many of whom are pursuing phDs—and I can’t possibly be as good as them! Of course I’m just there because…
Well. What else could it be? Would it be foolish to believe I’m truly offering anything valuable or insightful? What have I changed? About anyone?
Steve, I’m tired of “preparing” too. I’ll get a Master’s (because with my field a graduate degree is often required) but it’s just going to land me in the same place I would have been anyway without it. I wish I could stop like you did. I can’t take loans (paying / receiving interest is against Islam) and will be simultaneously working and contingent on scholarships. (In what did you get your Bachelor’s? May I ask? Probably not if you deliberately left it out.) I don’t really care if I get that high-paying of a job. (But I guess if I did I wouldn’t have chosen this.) I don’t even really care if I’m not working in my field; I just want to love it and have enough to live.
Steve, I’m assertive forward and overly smug, and assure you I will be less alluring the more I keep talking.
Major was economics.
In fact, whenever I’m asked to guest post, I’m always disheartened at the possibility that it’s because my identity as a Muslim feminist is relevant to the current socio-political atmosphere, not because I’m even half a decent writer. They just need my voice…
You don’t get it. It’s because of BOTH. Even decent writers don’t get anywhere without something additional, and you are both a very good writer with the addition of being relevant to the current socio-political atmosphere.
Got to strike when it’s hot. Now is your time. I don’t know if the Muslim thing is going to be the thing for the full next decade that it was in the last. The focus might be on economic stuff, you know the occupiers vs those who believe in the free market.
By the way, it’s not luck it’s connections. Your social-political advantages can get you the connections.
I see you as mostly a non-fiction writer, but I would love to read some of your fiction work as well. Given my political leanings I would probably enjoy your fiction work.
Use what you have to your advantage.
Right now you are socio-political relevant. Don’t know how much longer that is going to last. Then after you are established there you can use that as a base to branch out.
You are an extremely good writer. Don’t think just because you are sociopolitical relevant they don’t also recognize that innate talent within you.
What I mean is that although I might not enjoy reading your political work regardless of how well written it is, I would enjoy fiction from you.
Maybe a story about a man who commits a War Crime to save the woman he loves.
Major was economics.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!Omg I almost died.
Steve, when Nahida gets here you’ll understand why that’s so funny.
Oh gosh. When I said “economics is the root of all evil” I was talking to an economics major. …Well that’s terrific.
If this were a sitcom and two people were having dinner it would be one of those moments the woman asks for wine after saying something impertinent to the man she’s trying to impress.
“Economics is the root of all evil.”
“I majored in economics.”
“…Can I get some more wine?”
They have that scene too frequently; it gets old. Also, I wouldn’t even be able to ask for wine.
As surprising as it is, I am glad you think the political rambling is well-written… since I don’t put any effort into that or consider it real writing. I never read what I write when it’s political, much less edit. I do when I’m asked to guest post, but not when it’s hosted on my own site! They’re more like journal entries; of course I’m always shocked when people refer to them as “articles.” It makes me want to laugh hysterically.
LMFAO!!!
Nice. Especially since the woman in those sitcoms never drinks because she messes up herself. It’s usually the man who says something embarrassing and she drinks because she still has the whole date to go
Speaking of people making me laugh hysterically, I’ve received a few notifications from instructors at religious schools informing me that they’ve used my exegesis straight from the site in their classrooms and thanking me for it… which is mildly alarming; for the first time, I’m seriously considering changing the header of the site. I don’t think it’s inappropriate or provocative or anything (and none of the instructors have complained) but it’s just not very… reference-y. And if they’re sending their students there… well gosh not everything I write about is exactly age-appropriate is it! I suppose I could hope the students are adults.
To be honest I rarely even think about who’s reading. It was always supposed to be just for me. Now I’m wondering if I do have to make a few alterations (what if they’re just too polite to complain?) and if I’ll even be able to identify what they are because I’ve just been writing so freely…
I say leave the header. It’s amaaaaazing.
Well, I don’t know… it IS kind of suggestive. I know it’s not supposed to be, but it just is. If the instructors were women, then I guess I can see why they didn’t see a problem. But then I guess you don’t care what I think (maybe Steve though) and only what women say about it.
Yeah it’s definitely not “reference-y” though if that’s what you want.
I say keep it!
You definitely don’t have to fear taking it too seriously, Steve. The more she talks you’ll feel less and less attracted to her. Can probably see it working right now.
Unfortunately no.
She has to be one of the most amazing women I have ever been associated with.
I do comfort myself with the understanding that as much as I would want to compromise my politics for her in the end it is just too much a part of me for that to ever happen. We would no doubt break up over politics.
That is if me becoming “real” didn’t break her attraction towards me in the beginning.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/muslim-group-wipe-christianity-from-face-of-earth/
The “Right to be Sexy” in China.
http://www.bon.tv/1/85/8364-the-right-to-be-sexy-media-watch-june-26.shtml#.T_nkQcXy8pQ
Men are globally the scum of the earth!
the same bullshit we see here in the us happening in china! big surprise.
This was the reason for the slutwalks, remember that Nahida?
I hate being sexy, but someone has to do it.
Denies she pursued modeling for provocation? She should be shoving it in his face.
http://rt.com/community/blogs/tim-kirby/russia-dress-code-people/
Aaaand of course the male news anchor can’t let the story pass without making some sleazy comment.
What do you expect from Russians, Nahida. They are sleazy.
RT is the Russian Government Propaganda channel against the United States. It is designed to spread lies about America and get Americans to hate their own country. Little do they know, MSNBC does a much better job at doing that.
Israelis are SO FUNNY!
Hello, I think your site might be having browser compatibility issues.
When I look at your blog site in Ie, it looks fine but when
opening in Internet Explorer, it has some overlapping.
I just wanted to give you a quick heads up!
Other then that, fantastic blog!
belstaff chicago radio indy