It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Is a Muslim set to take over the Democratic National Committee?

page: 9
40
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 12:29 AM
link   
So you guys aren't going to address his actual qualifications to deserve the post?? Got it!




posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 04:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: enlightenedservant

In the court of public opinion religion is still a big issue in the US, that is a fact.


That's because a lot of people are small minded and scared of their own shadows. How many politicians have claimed to be religious but have still been corrupt? Nearly all of them! It's not our fault that so many people keep falling for the same BS. What's that saying about insanity and doing the same thing over and over again?

In presidential elections, I've voted for a Christian white male (Kerry); a non-practicing "Reform Jewish" white woman (Stein); a Christian & multiracial "black" male (Obama); and a Jewish male (Nader). You know why? Because I don't give a crap who or what you pray to; I just want results. I even voted for a Jewish atheist (Bernie) in the primaries. And if the next candidate I agree with is Hindu, animist, or follows the Church of the Spaghetti Monster, I'll still vote for him/her/it.

edit on 13-11-2016 by enlightenedservant because: added that Stein is a non practicing Reform Jewish woman



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 04:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
So you guys aren't going to address his actual qualifications to deserve the post?? Got it!

I already pointed out that Ellison was an early supporter of Bernie during the primaries. In fact, he was the second major Democrat to publicly support Bernie, and this was when all of the Super-Delegates were prematurely lining up behind Hillary. He's also been elected to his State legislature and to Congress, so he actually knows how to organize winning campaigns.

The DNC desperately needs to regain legitimacy with the far left wing and the Bernie supporters that fled the party. Actually, "fled" isn't the right word; we were actively pushed away. I've mentioned it before on here, how the major Democratic sites and forums silenced all anti-Hillary talk after Super Tuesday and aggressively banned users who continued to bring up her flaws. So an Ellison selection would help immensely in that regard.

But that still wouldn't be enough. The "Third Way" Democrats need to be removed from power ASAP. They've led the Democratic Party to abandon actual progressives views and values, such as single payer health care, military pacifism, expanded social programs, high speed rail, climate change legislation, etc. In fact, the modern "Third Way" Democratic leadership doesn't even mention other traditionally progressive policy positions like helping the Palestinians, trying Bush administration officials for war crimes, helping the US territories like Puerto Rico and Washington DC achieve statehood, etc.

Put it like this: there would be no need for the Green Party if the Democratic Party hadn't kept shifting to the right. Everything the Greens stand for could easily be co-opted by the Democratic Party. Either way, Ellison is one of the few politicians who's respected by Greens and Democrats alike,which is why he'd make a good choice for the head of the DNC. But that move couldn't be the only major shake-up or it would probably fail to reunite the Dems and the actual left wing.



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

That's because a lot of people are small minded and scared of their own shadows.



Whether or not someone is small minded is extremely irrelevant. Small-minded or scholar, they have equal rights. With that, intellect is a blurry secondary concern.

I often rail against religion, only because I find it to be a distraction from a well-thought out discussion or argument. BUT, religion definitely has value in that it gives a lot of people comfort and hope (me personally I cant stand the ignorance) and whether or not it has any basis in reality there is a lot of value in hope and comfort. To the elderly, to the terminally ill, to the oppressed. We all know Santa Claus doesn't exist, but how many parents try to utterly convince their kids that he does and why? Because it makes them feel good...in a way, a sense of hope and comfort.



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 11:54 AM
link   
He's a Muslim American citizen, born in Michigan.

Calling someone Muslim in a generic sense and suggesting that means they believe in X, Y, or Z, is the same as calling someone Christian and saying it means they believe everything doctrinal about every single Christian denomination.

This is a man who has lived here all his life. He was actually raised Roman Catholic, and one of his brothers is a Baptist pastor. He converted to Islam, as is the right of any citizen of this country, to worship as they choose.

If he has specific beliefs or policy positions one disagrees with, then I say disagree with them. Or even, if one takes issue with religion as a whole, in a broad sense on philosophical grounds, then raise that (but include all religions.)

But let us not predicate questions about the suitability of a candidate on the basis that he is Muslim.

I now return my temporary self-exile from the net. Just felt the need to say that.

Peace.



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone



Whether or not someone is small minded is extremely irrelevant. Small-minded or scholar, they have equal rights. With that, intellect is a blurry secondary concern.


With all due respect, what does that have to do with my post? Someone's post to me said that religion is still an important issue in the court of public opinion. This was supposed to support the idea that Representative Ellison's religion is important, which I think is not important.



I often rail against religion, only because I find it to be a distraction from a well-thought out discussion or argument. BUT, religion definitely has value in that it gives a lot of people comfort and hope (me personally I cant stand the ignorance) and whether or not it has any basis in reality there is a lot of value in hope and comfort. To the elderly, to the terminally ill, to the oppressed. We all know Santa Claus doesn't exist, but how many parents try to utterly convince their kids that he does and why? Because it makes them feel good...in a way, a sense of hope and comfort.

As for this, so? Some people would vote for a corrupt politician who's supposed religious values agree with their own, instead of supporting a politician with "opposing" religious values that is actually qualified and capable of doing their job? That's small minded & counter productive, no matter how you phrase it.

It's like saying they'd rather be screwed over by someone from their own religion than be treated well by someone from a different religion. How can you claim that's not small minded? You almost seem to be agreeing with me by comparing it to the belief in Santa Claus to make people feel good.

And since a lot of that mindset comes from the fear of the unknown or "other", my 2nd phrase is also true (the part about people being scared of their own shadows, though that's obviously an exaggerated way of saying it).



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Christosterone




It would seem Democrats need a reminder of this most obvious of human instincts that all men (and women) are created equal regardless of their sexual preference or gender...


Or ethnicity, or beliefs?

And you wonder why we think you guys aren't serious




edit on 11/13/2016 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Christosterone

Wow, and this is what is wrong with conservatives. Who knows what is going to happen to the DNC but its really sad that you people are attacking someone based on religion. Also very ironic because conservatives are the same crowd that believes everyone is attacking their religion and religious rights.


They think it's their religious right to shun other religions. So in a weird way, they're correct. Remember, many of them want an all Christian nation, though that doesn't seem to include LGBT Christians, Hispanic Christians, Christians in unions, Christians who believe in saving the environment (aka God's Creation Nature), inner city Christians, etc.



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 12:08 PM
link   
to all American Muslims, this right-wing Christian "party" hasn't even started yet....it's going to get a lot worse, your churches will be investigated, possibly vandalized or set fire to. you will be harassed and assaulted on the streets (already starting), you will be pointed out as being covert agents of ISIS, etc.....your life here in America is going to get a lot more painful...you better have a plan "B"
edit on 13-11-2016 by jimmyx because: spelling



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
With all due respect, what does that have to do with my post?



Keywords #1 when someone is trying to thinly veil aggression "With all due respect"

What do you mean what does it have to do with your post? Everything...a: You said it, therefore b: it has everything to do with your post. The End.....





I often rail against religion, only because I find it to be a distraction from a well-thought out discussion or argument. BUT, religion definitely has value in that it gives a lot of people comfort and hope (me personally I cant stand the ignorance) and whether or not it has any basis in reality there is a lot of value in hope and comfort. To the elderly, to the terminally ill, to the oppressed. We all know Santa Claus doesn't exist, but how many parents try to utterly convince their kids that he does and why? Because it makes them feel good...in a way, a sense of hope and comfort.

As for this, so? Some people would vote for a corrupt politician who's supposed religious values agree with their own, instead of supporting a politician with "opposing" religious values that is actually qualified and capable of doing their job? That's small minded & counter productive, no matter how you phrase it.


Right, and IF they're doing precisely that, it becomes irrelevant whether or not theyre small-minded..theyre not going to change their habit because YOU, on the internet, happen to think theyre making decisions errantly.


You almost seem to be agreeing with me by comparing it to the belief in Santa Claus to make people feel good.



I absolutely AM agreeing with you on that, that still doesn't make what you or I believe any more relevant...it only makes us in agreement.



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
With all due respect, what does that have to do with my post?


I absolutely AM agreeing with you on that, that still doesn't make what you or I believe any more relevant...it only makes us in agreement.


Wait, what?

So you're just arguing for the sake of arguing? You're straight up admitting that you don't think that either of our words are relevant. So what's the point in replying if you admit that your words aren't relevant?



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: enlightenedservant

In the court of public opinion religion is still a big issue in the US, that is a fact.


That's because a lot of people are small minded and scared of their own shadows. How many politicians have claimed to be religious but have still been corrupt? Nearly all of them! It's not our fault that so many people keep falling for the same BS. What's that saying about insanity and doing the same thing over and over again?

In presidential elections, I've voted for a Christian white male (Kerry); a non-practicing "Reform Jewish" white woman (Stein); a Christian & multiracial "black" male (Obama); and a Jewish male (Nader). You know why? Because I don't give a crap who or what you pray to; I just want results. I even voted for a Jewish atheist (Bernie) in the primaries. And if the next candidate I agree with is Hindu, animist, or follows the Church of the Spaghetti Monster, I'll still vote for him/her/it.


This coming from the guy who thinks it's ok for Islamic Terrorist to kill Americans as long as it's less than those killed by cancer, car wrecks etc...

Sorry - but your opinion is meaningless.



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Steak

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: enlightenedservant

In the court of public opinion religion is still a big issue in the US, that is a fact.


That's because a lot of people are small minded and scared of their own shadows. How many politicians have claimed to be religious but have still been corrupt? Nearly all of them! It's not our fault that so many people keep falling for the same BS. What's that saying about insanity and doing the same thing over and over again?

In presidential elections, I've voted for a Christian white male (Kerry); a non-practicing "Reform Jewish" white woman (Stein); a Christian & multiracial "black" male (Obama); and a Jewish male (Nader). You know why? Because I don't give a crap who or what you pray to; I just want results. I even voted for a Jewish atheist (Bernie) in the primaries. And if the next candidate I agree with is Hindu, animist, or follows the Church of the Spaghetti Monster, I'll still vote for him/her/it.


This coming from the guy who thinks it's ok for Islamic Terrorist to kill Americans as long as it's less than those killed by cancer, car wrecks etc...

Sorry - but your opinion is meaningless.

You're a straight up liar. Anyone can read my posts for themselves and see that you're full of crap.

ETA: And for anyone bored enough to look into it, here's my thread that the troll above is lying about.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 13-11-2016 by enlightenedservant because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant

You've got nothing to prove enlightenedservant - we know you


edit on 11/13/2016 by Spiramirabilis because: what the hell is wrong with people?



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
With all due respect, what does that have to do with my post?


I absolutely AM agreeing with you on that, that still doesn't make what you or I believe any more relevant...it only makes us in agreement.


Wait, what?

So you're just arguing for the sake of arguing? You're straight up admitting that you don't think that either of our words are relevant. So what's the point in replying if you admit that your words aren't relevant?


What is wrong with you? ....stop with the "I'm so progressive and I need to find something to talk about" BS ok? The original point was what we BELIEVE isn't relevant...the BELIEF isn't relevant.... our BELIEF ISNT RELEVANT .. was it said enough time so you effin understand it and not question it again with your moral highground garbage?

And one last time, what we believe isn't relevant....how other people perceive things is all that will matter to them and whether or not WE think people should NOT vote or endorse someone for a position based upon religious belief is IRRELEVANT...they will do it anyway.

Some of you truly revel in your need to be held by the hand to glean things from context.
edit on 13-11-2016 by alphabetaone because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 10:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: enlightenedservant

You've got nothing to prove enlightenedservant - we know you



Wrong...he has plenty to prove to me, I don't him from shinola



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 10:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
So you guys aren't going to address his actual qualifications to deserve the post?? Got it!


It's beyond obvious that the Democrats constantly favor people purely because of their race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation.

So, now when they appoint a minority to a position, people are going to assume that they did it because of racist or sexist motivations even if that's not the case.

It's like the left crying racism all the time. Now, no one takes claims of racism seriously even if they're real because 99% of the time they're not real.

This is a situation that the left made for itself.
edit on 11/13/16 by RedDragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone




Wrong...he has plenty to prove to me, I don't him from shinola


Nobody needs to prove anything to you. Who are you anyway?

What are you even doing here? Can't even type a complete sentence...

Needy and whiny



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 11:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: alphabetaone




Wrong...he has plenty to prove to me, I don't him from shinola


Nobody needs to prove anything to you. Who are you anyway?

What are you even doing here? Can't even type a complete sentence...

Needy and whiny


LOL needy? Whiny? ok i'll bite on your trollery....what do I need? And what am I whining about? Other than the rampant ignorance of course, it's hard not to whine about that when it is constantly flailing around me.

And yes, he does need to prove a lot to me, if I'm to take anything he has to say with any level of credulity. Yes, I will stand by patiently while you google all the multi-syllabic words.



posted on Nov, 13 2016 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: alphabetaone



LOL needy? Whiny? ok i'll bite on your trollery....what do I need? And what am I whining about? Other than the rampant ignorance of course, it's hard not to whine about that when it is constantly flailing around me.


Don't be ridiculous

It's obvious - he wasn't here. You needed to get me - someone you're not even talking to - to pay attention to you. You're so important...he has to prove something to you? Why? You're nobody to him - you're nobody to me

But here we are - with you begging for attention

Whining because you think you need someone to prove their credibility - to you

:-)


And yes, he does need to prove a lot to me, if I'm to take anything he has to say with any level of credulity. Yes, I will stand by patiently while you google all the multi-syllabic words.




Trolling? How about pointing out that you have no manners - and that you're needy

Let's not forget - I wasn't even talking to you. You came to me

Trolling - that's rich



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join