What Were They Expecting????

Muslims at Catholic University complain that the school is too Catholic

Posted on October 26, 2011 at 2:37pm by Meredith Jessup

As JihadWatch notes, crucifixes hung in a classroom at the Catholic University — a private university in Washington, D.C. — are apparently now considered a violation of Muslim students’ human rights.

The school’s newspaper details the new legal complaint:

The official allegations claim that CUA, “does not provide space – as other universities do – for the many daily prayers Muslim students must make, forcing them instead to find temporarily empty classrooms where they are often surrounded by Catholic symbols which are incongruous to their religion,” according to a press release on PRLOG.com.

This formal complaint also maintains that the new same-sex residence halls are particularly discriminating against female students, which is a new position on the same-sex lawsuit that began last month.

more here: http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2011/10/26/muslims-at-catholic-university-complain-that-the-school-is-too-catholic/

43 Comments

  1. It’s done for one reason only. This gives the power of the lawsuit to destroy an institution. I guess next they’ll sue for a mosque and a mineret to call to prayers.

  2. In a country with some common sense in its jurisprudence, such a lawsuit would be laughed out of court, but there are times that I wonder just how much common sense is in our legal system.

  3. Dana Pico says:
    26 October 2011 at 20:27
    In a country with some common sense in its jurisprudence, such a lawsuit would be laughed out of court, but there are times that I wonder just how much common sense is in our legal system.

    Remember we have such things as the 9th Circus Court of Appeals and the Emminent Domain Travesty in CT. So, the courts are a toss us. I remember the elementary Catholic School “training” that if you walked into a Protestant Church you would evaporate. But Common Sense has all but disappeared in this country and replaced with a wrecking crew for any and all things. In the early 60′s, a muslim knew two things about this: 1)if you apply, expect rejection, and 2)a muslim would not feel at home or welcome there. Of course the high ups would be invited for meetings, but the proles were non-grata. Now with lawsuits for any and all things, there is an underlying fear in making any decision, right or wrong, sensible or stupid.

  4. “interesting that CSPT finds this story to report on in Catholic news this week and not the Pope explicitly condemning Republican economic philosophy.”

    Exactly, cbmc, Dana and the other Righties are very selective wrt what they select for their pontifications. Its called propagandizing!

    Their “Republican economic philosophy” is for one outcome, to regain total power, and in the process, to protect the upper 1%. They will go to any extreme necessary to achieve this goal, regardless of the negative impacts their actions have on the rest of us 99%, as per Paul Ryans speech just yesterday: “Misleading, out of touch, and filled with tired talking points”!

  5. Unfortunately, His Holiness the Pope doesn’t understand economics. If liberal economics really worked, where giving people things that they did not earn themselves actually worked, it would be great, but it doesn’t work!

    We’ve been trying it for decades, out of our compassion for the poor, and all we have done is to create more poor people. We have removed the penalty for not working, which means that people without work who might want to work are under less pressure to find work, while those who’d really rather not work can do so without starving to death.

  6. Their “Republican economic philosophy” is for one outcome, to regain total power, and in the process, to protect the upper 1%. They will go to any extreme necessary to achieve this goal, regardless of the negative impacts their actions have on the rest of us 99%

    Is that so? Amazing, then, that so many would vote for the GOP considering what you say above.

    Of course, your ridiculous counter is that “Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, yada yada yada have brainwashed so many people …” But of course, when a black man like Herman Cain says that very thing about many of his fellow blacks, that somehow makes him a disgusting racist. So, what does that then make YOU, Perry?

  7. Their “Republican economic philosophy” is for one outcome, to regain total power, and in the process, to protect the upper 1%. They will go to any extreme necessary to achieve this goal, regardless of the negative impacts their actions have on the rest of us 99%

    Is that so? Amazing, then, that so many would vote for the GOP considering what you say above.

    Of course, your ridiculous counter is that “Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, yada yada yada have brainwashed so many people …” But of course, when a black man like Herman Cain says that very thing about many of his fellow blacks, that somehow makes him a disgusting racist. So, what does that then make YOU, Perry?

    First of all, not too many people voted for the GOP in 2006 and 2008. In 2010, the Dems were victimized by mistakes made by Cheney/Bush et al who were responsible for the Great Recession they created, yet the frustrated and suffering American middle and poor took it out on the party in power. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand this dynamic. We will see what the 2012 election results tell us. I hardly think that Americans, still suffering as much as they are, will put the do-nothing Repubs back in office.

    Since 1979, according to the CBO, the income of the upper 1% went up 275%, the average household, 40%, and the poor, 18%. When one takes into account the impact of inflation over this time period, two thirds of the increase evaporates. The middle and poor are being cheated out of the rewards for their productivity, that’s obvious! Nevertheless, Repub policy continues to protect this upper 1%. This is obviously unsustainable, as we may very soon find out. This is what the occupy movement is all about!

    Secondly, on Herman Cain, he has proven himself to be a person without much analysis and planning going into his campaign, therefore, Repub voters would not be wise to take his proposals seriously. Race doesn’t even enter into his self-made political difficulties. That said, I do find him to be an engaging person. Now that he is out of the pizza business, I suggest he seriously consider a career in music as a soloist, as he has a beautiful voice and a demeanor to project an entertaining vista.

  8. Perry says:
    28 October 2011 at 03:32 (Edit)

    “interesting that CSPT finds this story to report on in Catholic news this week and not the Pope explicitly condemning Republican economic philosophy.”

    Exactly, cbmc, Dana and the other Righties are very selective wrt what they select for their pontifications. Its called propagandizing!

    Their “Republican economic philosophy” is for one outcome, to regain total power, and in the process, to protect the upper 1%. They will go to any extreme necessary to achieve this goal, regardless of the negative impacts their actions have on the rest of us 99%, as per Paul Ryans speech just yesterday: “Misleading, out of touch, and filled with tired talking points”!

    This one has greater impact to me (and I didn’t see or hear of the other one) because what we see in this country is an all out assault to destroy institutions that do not conform to the new more or less group think. I can see a lawsuit coming from this “trivial” complaint. We’re seeing everyday all out assaults on religion and this story fits that story line.

    This institution is a Catholic Institution. It is Private. It makes the rules. It outfits the rooms. If someone doesn’t like it, either deal with it, or go somewhere else. But I fear this will not end this way.

  9. First of all, not too many people voted for the GOP in 2006 and 2008. In 2010, the Dems were victimized by mistakes made by Cheney/Bush et al who were responsible for the Great Recession they created, yet the frustrated and suffering American middle and poor took it out on the party in power. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand this dynamic.

    If Democrats are so easily “victimized” — not to mention too stupid to realize that THEY still run the Senate in their idiotic “Republican Congress” campaign — then why should voters entrust THEM to office? Why would the public want people who make excuse after excuse for their own dismal performance?

    Secondly, on Herman Cain, he has proven himself to be a person without much analysis and planning going into his campaign, therefore, Repub voters would not be wise to take his proposals seriously. Race doesn’t even enter into his self-made political difficulties. That said, I do find him to be an engaging person. Now that he is out of the pizza business, I suggest he seriously consider a career in music as a soloist, as he has a beautiful voice and a demeanor to project an entertaining vista.

    Why are you being such a racist? Nice stereotype — a black man who should go into music. Just imagine if one of us “righties” said something like that about Obama.

  10. Hube:
    Why are you being such a racist? Nice stereotype — a black man who should go into music. Just imagine if one of us “righties” said something like that about Obama.

    We already know BO can sing well. It’s always the same ol’ tune. Sorry, didn’t mean to digress from the subject.

  11. “If Democrats are so easily “victimized” — not to mention too stupid to realize that THEY still run the Senate in their idiotic “Republican Congress” campaign — then why should voters entrust THEM to office? Why would the public want people who make excuse after excuse for their own dismal performance?”

    In theory, yes the Dems still run the Senate, but in practice, the Repub filibuster threat dominates that body!

    “Why are you being such a racist? Nice stereotype — a black man who should go into music. Just imagine if one of us “righties” said something like that about Obama.”

    Are you implying that Herman Cain is running a serious and organized campaign for the nomination? I don’t think so. Besides, I’ve never heard President Obama sing; Cain’ I have, and he is quite good. He also has an engaging personality, very likable, but no, not Presidential timber, for sure. Thus, as you can see, no stereotype, nothing racist in mind here, only respect! I don’t believe you have had a kind word for President Obama ever, at least none that I have seen. You seem compelled to frequently picture the President with a cig hanging out of his mouth, hardly a sign of respect.

  12. In theory, yes the Dems still run the Senate, but in practice, the Repub filibuster threat dominates that body!

    As if this is somehow different from when the Dems were in the minority how …?

    Are you implying that Herman Cain is running a serious and organized campaign for the nomination? I don’t think so.

    Of course YOU don’t think so — it’s YOU. But obviously, many people DO think he’s serious. Many people believed Obama was serious, and comparing Cain to Obama I seriously don’t see how anyone could claim the latter is any more qualified to lead the nation than the former.

    Thus, as you can see, no stereotype, nothing racist in mind here, only respect!

    Sure — respect, by using a common stereotype. Nice try.

    I don’t believe you have had a kind word for President Obama ever, at least none that I have seen.

    Again, the fact that you “don’t believe” something means it’s most likely it DID happen. As for “respect,” just like the call for “more civility” and what we see with the OWSers compared to the Tea Party, it’s just a flat-out joke. Obama deserves as much respect as George W. Bush got from the likes of YOU. IOW, little to none.

  13. Perry:
    You seem compelled to frequently picture the President with a cig hanging out of his mouth, hardly a sign of respect.

    Respect is something you earn, it is not given to you.

  14. Respect is something you earn, it is not given to you.

    Then why do w1ngnuts whine about people treating them badly when they repeatedly prove themseleves ignorant, decietful, and completely out of toudh with reality?

  15. Unfortunately, His Holiness the Pope doesn’t understand economics.

    This is coming from someone who still doesn’t grasp that money is not wealth.

  16. If liberal economics really worked, where giving people things that they did not earn themselves actually worked, it would be great, but it doesn’t work!

    Norway. Sweden.

  17. “Respect is something you earn, it is not given to you.”

    I understand that, Yorkshire, and I believe that President Obama has earned the respect of all Americans, even though one may disagree strongly with some of his policies, as I do. Why have you chosen to disrespect him, Yorkshire?

  18. Perry says:
    28 October 2011 at 16:34
    “Respect is something you earn, it is not given to you.”

    I understand that, Yorkshire, and I believe that President Obama has earned the respect of all Americans, even though one may disagree strongly with some of his policies, as I do. Why have you chosen to disrespect him, Yorkshire?

    If BO was truly respected by ALL Americans, there would be no Tea Party, and BO would be above 60% approval rating.

  19. “If BO was truly respected by ALL Americans, there would be no Tea Party, and BO would be above 60% approval rating.”

    Good point! But that is probably going to be true with any leader from the opposing political party. However, you did not answer my question. Is it only because he is of the opposing political party, or is it because he has done some things which are disrespectful, or is it because he is black. For you, Yorkshire, I don’t think it is the last choice, but unfortunately, for some, that last choice is the first choice, which I believe is what explains the hatred of the man for many people, especially those from the Republican South. See here:

    “It is only the extreme right wing racists who actually hate him. The rest are disappointed that a man who has the gift of beautiful oration and is obviously intelligent has leaned to the right himself. He has allowed the USA to remain involved in wars, he has listened too much to right wing advisers on the economy and he has tried to be conciliatory to Republicans who don’t respect anything except hard line action.Obama has tried so hard to be reasonable with fanatics he is in danger of losing his base.”

  20. Perry:
    However, you did not answer my question. Is it only because he is of the opposing political party, or is it because he has done some things which are disrespectful, or is it because he is black.

    One, I couldn’t care less if he was purple, orange, green or turquoise. Before the elections when I read his background and other details, I was being painted a picture of a FAR, FAR left Marxists. Even he said in college he sought out the Marxists and leftist professors and friends. Sorry, Marxism I dispise in the worst way, and yet he all but said he was a Marxist. He lied about his associations with the Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers and others. He associated himself with far left Unions like SEIU where its leader said he would use the power of persuasion, and if it didn’t work, then he would use the persuasion of power (ref the black tea party member having the shit kicked out of him in St. Louis. He has an inordinate hatred of England since he sees them as the killer of his real father. He has associated himself with all the radical Islamists of the Muddled East at the expense of Israel. He has our good allies mixed up as bad allies. Should I go on?? All in all, he is not (IMO) worthy of the office of president. So, like I said, he has not earned my respect to treat the country this way.

  21. And, of course we’re side tracked from the subject of the thread. I HIGHLY, HIGHLY, MIGHTILY DOUBT the Muslims would allow a Christian Service in their Mosque meeting rooms.

  22. One, I couldn’t care less if he was purple, orange, green or turquoise. Before the elections when I read his background and other details, I was being painted a picture of a FAR, FAR left Marxists.

    Yorkie, you used to think there was something in the Birther nonsense untill we rubbed your nose in it. Have you considered that your standards for evidence are screwed up by your ignorance and hatred?

    Obama isn’t a Marxist. Deal with it. Or PROVE me wrong.

  23. Perry wrote:

    “If BO was truly respected by ALL Americans, there would be no Tea Party, and BO would be above 60% approval rating.”

    Good point! But that is probably going to be true with any leader from the opposing political party. However, you did not answer my question. Is it only because he is of the opposing political party, or is it because he has done some things which are disrespectful, or is it because he is black. For you, Yorkshire, I don’t think it is the last choice, but unfortunately, for some, that last choice is the first choice, which I believe is what explains the hatred of the man for many people, especially those from the Republican South. See here:

    “It is only the extreme right wing racists who actually hate him. The rest are disappointed that a man who has the gift of beautiful oration and is obviously intelligent has leaned to the right himself. He has allowed the USA to remain involved in wars, he has listened too much to right wing advisers on the economy and he has tried to be conciliatory to Republicans who don’t respect anything except hard line action.Obama has tried so hard to be reasonable with fanatics he is in danger of losing his base.”

    There will always be some who will disrespect anyone who is black, just as there will always be some who will vote for anyone as long as he is black.

    But most Americans were willing to give him a chance: he got roughly 53% of the total vote, and his job approval ratings were much higher than that when he was inaugurated.

    The problem for President Obama isn’t that some people don’t like him because he is black, but that he is actually being judged fairly, on his job performance. Had things gotten better under his administration, he’d be in no danger of not being re-elected; since things have gotten no better, and many think that things have gotten worse, it’s very probable, absent a dramatic economic turnaround, that he will not be re-elected.

    Th voters judging President Obama on how well he has done his job is exactly what you should want to see: not judging him on his race and not judging him on demagoguery, but how well he has done his job. Your problem — and his — is that he hasn’t done his job very well.

  24. “Obama isn’t a Marxist. Deal with it. Or PROVE me wrong.”

    No buttercup. I say he’s a phuckin’, lyin’, murderin’ marxist. YOU PROVE ME WRONG! (BTW, so are you).

  25. “The problem for President Obama isn’t that some people don’t like him because he is black, but that he is actually being judged fairly, on his job performance. Had things gotten better under his administration, he’d be in no danger of not being re-elected; since things have gotten no better, and many think that things have gotten worse, it’s very probable, absent a dramatic economic turnaround, that he will not be re-elected.”

    I agree with your statement, Dana, but an honest assessment may be made by Americans who vote, and that is, could any President have done much better given the magnitude of the problems he inherited, and given an opposition party whose announced first priority since 2009 has been to assure that President Obama be limited to one term. That priority by the opposition party is hardly laudatory or hardly patriotic, so it will be interesting to see if enough American voters perceive it that way when arriving in the voting booth.

    The other issue is the caliber of President Obama’s opposition. As it is right now, the top candidate currently is poorly organized and shoots from the hip and will probably fade soon, the next in line is a notorious flip-flopper, the one with all the campaign dollars is a poor debater with his foot in his mouth most of the time, and the next smart, but is a nasty person and demoted party leader with tons of baggage. The Libertarian has great problems making his case, and the bottom two pretty much belong where they are.

    With this opposition together with the do-nothing Republicans in Congress, it is hard for me to believe that President Obama can be denied his second term. Good!

  26. “No buttercup. I say he’s a phuckin’, lyin’, murderin’ marxist. YOU PROVE ME WRONG! (BTW, so are you).”

    Hoagie, you demean yourself with childish hyperbolic statements like that, especially since you know very well that in its entirity it is not true. You would make more sense if you would pick out an issue or two related to President Obama, then let us discuss those.

    By the way, Hoagie, I am curious: Which of the current Repub nominees would you like to see be nominated to oppose President Obama?

  27. “So, like I said, he has not earned my respect to treat the country this way.”

    OK Yorkshire, you answered the question and gave your opinion. Obviously, I don’t have the same perception as you have, but so be it!

  28. Unfortunately, His Holiness the Pope doesn’t understand economics.

    If you know better than the Pope, that’s fine. But understand that if you know better than the Pope, you are not Catholic, under even the most liberal definition of the term.

  29. cbmc wrote:

    Unfortunately, His Holiness the Pope doesn’t understand economics.

    If you know better than the Pope, that’s fine. But understand that if you know better than the Pope, you are not Catholic, under even the most liberal definition of the term.

    Oops, sorry, wrong answer. The Pope is our spiritual leader, but does not claim to be an expert on every subject.

  30. Perry wrote:

    “The problem for President Obama isn’t that some people don’t like him because he is black, but that he is actually being judged fairly, on his job performance. Had things gotten better under his administration, he’d be in no danger of not being re-elected; since things have gotten no better, and many think that things have gotten worse, it’s very probable, absent a dramatic economic turnaround, that he will not be re-elected.”

    I agree with your statement, Dana, but an honest assessment may be made by Americans who vote, and that is, could any President have done much better given the magnitude of the problems he inherited, and given an opposition party whose announced first priority since 2009 has been to assure that President Obama be limited to one term. That priority by the opposition party is hardly laudatory or hardly patriotic, so it will be interesting to see if enough American voters perceive it that way when arriving in the voting booth.

    The Republicans’ only weapon during the eleventy-first Congress was the Senate filibuster: the Democrats had a huge majority in the House, and a nearly-filibuster-proof majority in the Senate for most of the time, and an absolutely filibuster-proof majority for part of the time. And, unfortunately, President Obama did get his major legislation passed, despite the filibuster: the stimulus package, the health care bill, Dudd-Frank and several other things. The response of the voters in the 2010 midterm elections was to give the Republicans majority control in the House and cut the Democrats’ majority in the Senate from 59-41 to 53-47.

    The voters rewarded President Obama’s legislative successes and Republican obstructionism by increasing Republican strength for the next Congress.

    “Could any President have done much better?” President Obama’s problem is that the real question a lot of people are asking is: could any President have done much worse? Even amongst Democrats, we’ve seen calls for Hillary Clinton to challenge Mr Obama in the 2012 primaries, and claims that Mrs Clinton could have/ would have done better.

    The other issue is the caliber of President Obama’s opposition. As it is right now, the top candidate currently is poorly organized and shoots from the hip and will probably fade soon, the next in line is a notorious flip-flopper, the one with all the campaign dollars is a poor debater with his foot in his mouth most of the time, and the next smart, but is a nasty person and demoted party leader with tons of baggage. The Libertarian has great problems making his case, and the bottom two pretty much belong where they are.

    With this opposition together with the do-nothing Republicans in Congress, it is hard for me to believe that President Obama can be denied his second term. Good!

    Well, one thing certainly is true: at least thus far, Rick Perry has proven himself to be a better Governor than presidential campaigner. Mitt Romney seems to be a better campaigner, but he is, as you have said, “a notorious flip-flopper.” But one trait they both share is that, while both are poorer campaigners than President Obama, both were much better office-holders than President Obama has proved to be. And it may very well leave the American people with a real quandary on election day: do we vote for the guy who isn’t as good a campaigner, but who did pretty well as a governor, or the guy who is a great campaigner, but a failure as President?

    My guess is that, in the end, people will realize that they are voting not for a campaigner, but for someone who will be our next President, and I think that they’ll want to give someone who has not failed in office a chance, to see if he can do a better job than the guy who has failed in office.

  31. “My guess is that, in the end, people will realize that they are voting not for a campaigner, but for someone who will be our next President, and I think that they’ll want to give someone who has not failed in office a chance, to see if he can do a better job than the guy who has failed in office.”

    Please, Dana, you would feel that the Presidency is in better hands with Rick Perry at the helm, after what we have seen of him so far in this campaign? Are you being honest about this, or only ideological? Having seen Perry in action in recent weeks, I now conclude that any Governor of Texas could have produced the the same job creation and economic results for which he is attempting to take credit!

    Regarding Romney, yes I see him as Presidential timber, but he has demonstrated himself as being short on core principles, so his position taken today may be changed tomorrow. We don’t need a President like that, do we?

    Jon Huntsman is the only credible and capable candidate which you people have.

    President Obama admits to some mistakes, but considering where we are now regarding the economy and jobs (stock market up, GDP up, job creation up and unemployment down) compared to where we were (stock market crashing, GDP negative, jobs evaporating at a huge rate, unemployment skyrocketing), and all along having to deal with an opposition party whose stated main priority was/is to deny the President a second term, you just have to concede, Dana, President Obama and the Dems have done quite well. If you are unwilling to acknowledge this, you are dismissing the facts, and you are allowing your ideology to replace your reasoning powers.

    When the campaign is over and the American voters cast their ballots, I think that this perception of the Obama record will be the predominant one, in spite of all the swift boating that the Republican Party donors will launch in the campaign, and regardless of their continuing efforts to suppress the Dem vote in key states.

    If the Republicans do somehow prevail, then be prepared for growing chaos based on the class warfare meme that the Republican Party has been concocting for decades. Fact: Since 1979, the income of the upper 1% has increased 245%, according to the CBO. Therefore, also prepare for an economy returning to the negative, because, as the UK is now demonstrating, economic growth and job growth cannot occur with an austerity only policy, which is basically what the Ryan plan is all about.

    Please, Dana, tell me that you don’t really think we will grow stronger under Republican political leadership given the current crop of candidates (except Huntsman) and the current Congressional leadership. There is not a shred of evidence to support a growth outcome under a Ryan Plan approach, which is what we would get if your party wins!

  32. Perry asked, seemingly with a straight face:

    “My guess is that, in the end, people will realize that they are voting not for a campaigner, but for someone who will be our next President, and I think that they’ll want to give someone who has not failed in office a chance, to see if he can do a better job than the guy who has failed in office.”

    Please, Dana, you would feel that the Presidency is in better hands with Rick Perry at the helm, after what we have seen of him so far in this campaign? Are you being honest about this, or only ideological? Having seen Perry in action in recent weeks, I now conclude that any Governor of Texas could have produced the the same job creation and economic results for which he is attempting to take credit!

    Perry, the Presidency would be in better hands than Barack Obama’s if any of the Republican candidates won. Not a one of them would have pushed the crazy health care reform package; that would mean that they were all better. Not a one of them would have pushed the ridiculous porkulus plan, which makes all of them better. Every last one of them would have nominated better jurists than Elena Kagan and Sandra Sotomayor to the Supreme Court; that means that all of them would have been better Presidents.

    Now, some of them do lack executive experience, just as Mr Obama did when he ran for office; whether that means they wouldn’t be up to the job is unknown, but we already do know that our current President isn’t.

    Could “any Governor of Texas could have produced the the same job creation and economic results for which he is attempting to take credit?” Yes, actually, I think he could . . . since anyone who would be elected Governor of Texas would be a conservative, and the state legislature would have been in conservative — though sometimes conservative Democratic — hands. The fact is that Texas is a low-regulation, business-friendly, conservative, low-tax state, and those policies help to make the state a magnet for people who do want to take a chance in business. Maybe jobs wouldn’t have fled California for Texas had the Pyrite State been more business-friendly.

    The government doesn’t control the economy, but it can make a slight difference in people’s perceptions about what will happen and how likely they are to succeed in business. When you look at businessmen, and organizations like the Chamber of Commerce, you see near-unanimity of opinion that President Obama and his Administration simply aren’t helpful or business-friendly. Maybe the fleabaggers would think that is a good thing, but one very simple statistic has always seemed of overarching importance to me: four out of five Americans with jobs work for private businesses; when you hurt business, when you discourage business, you are harming working men and women in this country.

    Republicans understand that, Republicans know that the best friend the working man has is the employer who provides him with a job and a paycheck.

  33. Perry says:
    29 October 2011 at 12:34 (Edit)

    “My guess is that, in the end, people will realize that they are voting not for a campaigner, but for someone who will be our next President, and I think that they’ll want to give someone who has not failed in office a chance, to see if he can do a better job than the guy who has failed in office.”

    Please, Dana, you would feel that the Presidency is in better hands with Rick Perry at the helm, after what we have seen of him so far in this campaign? Are you being honest about this, or only ideological? Having seen Perry in action in recent weeks, I now conclude that any Governor of Texas could have produced the the same job creation and economic results for which he is attempting to take credit!

    What state created more jobs than any other state? Survey says? TEXAS

  34. I asked:

    “Are you being honest about this, or only ideological?”

    Dana responded:

    “Perry, the Presidency would be in better hands than Barack Obama’s if any of the Republican candidates won.”

    I give up! Dana, on this subject, their there is neither a rational nor an objective bone in your body. I was also going to question your honesty, but you are so far gone that you are even beyond any consideration of honesty! Ideology is sapping your intellectual energy, Dana!

  35. “What state created more jobs than any other state? Survey says? TEXAS”

    I have agreed with that, Yorkshire, I’m just saying that this had nothing to do with Governor Perry specifically, to which Dana agrees. From what I have seen so far of Governor Perry, he is not qualified in knowledge or style to be our next President, nor is any other than possibly Jon Huntsman. That’s my conclusion to date!

  36. “…I’m just saying that this had nothing to do with Governor Perry specifically, to which Dana agrees.’

    I agree also Perry. I’ve lived in Texas and believe me it has more to do with their core values and their work ethic than it does to any one man or even their legislature both of which reflect those things or they’d be tossed out. I also believe that a governor of a state can do more to create jobs within his state than the President can do in fifty. And any president who thinks he can create jobs is either a fool or dangerous or both.

    “From what I have seen so far of Governor Perry, he is not qualified in knowledge or style to be our next President…”.

    But Obama, with exactley ZERO experience in an executive position in either the public or private sector, somehow was to you? I believe your partisan inconsistency is showing once again. Bet Gov. Perry would be highly experienced if there were a D after his name, no? I mean, you do realize in the last election Sarah Palin, R had more executive and business experience that Obama, D did, right? And I’d really love to know how one qualifies to be the President of the United States through “knowledge and style”. I’d rather see experience and caracter.

  37. I give up! Dana, on this subject, their is neither a rational nor an objective bone in your body. I was also going to question your honesty, but you are so far gone that you are even beyond any consideration of honesty! Ideology is sapping your intellectual energy, Dana!

    Promises, promises.

    This is from the “man” who constantly says he wants “debate,” but then gives up and personally attacks someone who has a different opinion — merely because of a different opinion.

    How many more times will you prove yourself to be a completely dishonest scumbag, Perry?

  38. No buttercup. I say he’s a phuckin’, lyin’, murderin’ marxist. YOU PROVE ME WRONG! (BTW, so are you).

    You never learn, do you l0ser?

    It’s common sense that he’s not a Marxist.

    Ha-ha – COMMON SENSE!!! The simple fact that I say that means I win and you lose, by your own rules.

    In your FACE you incredible l0ser!

  39. “What state created more jobs than any other state? Survey says? TEXAS”

    It’s always fun to watch w1ngnuts screech that if one state can win, every state can win in a race to the bottom…

  40. Perry wrote:

    I asked:

    “Are you being honest about this, or only ideological?”

    Dana responded:

    “Perry, the Presidency would be in better hands than Barack Obama’s if any of the Republican candidates won.”

    I give up! Dana, on this subject, their there is neither a rational nor an objective bone in your body. I was also going to question your honesty, but you are so far gone that you are even beyond any consideration of honesty! Ideology is sapping your intellectual energy, Dana!

    Perry, it’s really very simple: Barack Obama has simply been a failure in his job as President of the United States, while all of the Republican candidates have been successful in their previous endeavors. Any one of them might or might not be a failure in the job of President, but we don’t know that yet for any of them, while we do know that President Obama is not up to the job. The 2012 election will be a choice between a Republican candidate who might or might not be a good President, and a Democratic candidate who has already proved he is a bad one.

  41. Oops, sorry, wrong answer. The Pope is our spiritual leader, but does not claim to be an expert on every subject.

    Wrong. When the pope speaks ex cathedra, you, as Catholic, either agree with him or you’re apostate.

    This is first-year-catechist stuff Dana.

Comments are closed.