RkFast

Funny, a few posts up, you said it was a "great point." Seriously...do you act this way intentionally?

Funny how they want the benefits of the day and the season. you BETTER invite all these folks to the parties, the parades, givem them the day off, all that stuff. But show them the TRUE REASON for all those good things...show them a few statues of a man, woman and a baby in a straw hut and all of a sudden, then get a little squirmy, like vampires exposed to the sun. I pity them.

The two resident idiots COMPLETELY MISSED THE POINT. Shocker.

By AA I meant African American, not Affirmative Action. I thought a bit about this over some dim sum tonight. I think for me it comes down to this....the CONCEPT of "diversity" is a very noble worthwhile endeavor. However, IMHO, the way its being carried out is completely !@#$ed up.

Pretty much every major corporation forces them on their vendors. I know...Im subject to them. I dont hire at least 10% of my suppliers for what my client calls a "diverse vendor", Im automatically removed from their preferred vendor pool. We are on an NFL board, right? Ever hear of the NFL "minority coaching policy."? We see time and time again an analysis of "ratios" and the percentage of diversity in a given field and if it doesnt meet some imaginary number, than whammo....that business.group.institution is criticises for their "lack of diversity." And those same quotas havwe also compromised the talent pool just so the "numbers are met." which is what makes AA programs and forced diversity so evil in my book. Hire on merit. Period. Thats MY "IMO." The example I gave above...my client? Run by ultra rich WHITE MEN. Many companies and other organizations running the diversity programs and enforcing them are also run by these same folks. Voluntarily. Thats right. Lets keep class/race warfare alive and well for some kind of half assed game of "catch up" or to "get revenge." Whats next? Reparations? Are there even minorities in some of these locations and industries that can even FILL those jobs? To spend money on these holiday displays? Or do you plan to "force" minorities to take them? Maybe bus them in? How about this? You hire the best vendor or candidate based on merit. You spend money on the holiday displays based on what kind of people live in your area. And....I just hired an AA assistant. Becuase she was the best qualified. Imagine that.

Mr. Coli can speak for himself but he seems to be pushing that old far left nonsense that any kind of conformation to authority.... in this case, reciting a Pledge to our Nation's Flag, is automatically "bad." Just like that other line of BS, that any kind of "non-diverse" enviornment is also automatically "bad."

You mention diversity, yet fail to note that in most cases its a forced endeavor. Its "you must hire at least XX per cent of your workforce from "diverse" classes of people" or other such nonsense. The practice of encouraging diversity is rarely done without being forced, often by law or loss of business for non compliance. So...to rail against what youre calling coercion to recite a Pledge, yet at the same time embrace the concept of "diversity" is a bit questionable.

Last I checked, the American Flag doesnt represent anarchy.

I dont think its a BS issue at all. There arent enough activities like this. Reciting the Pledge, civics courses, more detailed teaching of American history, etc. Schools are not doing a good job of teaching "the American Experience", IMO. Bu....youre making it sound like the kids are "forced" or "coerced" here. I really doubt thats the case. Can anyone harken back to their days in elementary school and remember feeling "forced" to recite the Pledge? I cant.

If the kid doesnt conform to or participate in "undertaking a jihad" or reading about "my two daddys" does he get in trouble?

I know....terrible thing that students are taught a little love of Country.

I dont appreciate the racist term you just used.

Not saying youre doing this, deb...but I do find it funny that a lot of the same people who rail against and mock those who choose to "Keep Christ in Christmas" and psuh hard to make it more of a so-called "inclusive" and whitewashed day are the same people who ALSO rail against events like these. IMO, they ARE connected. You want to make Christmas LESS of a solemn day and make it MORE of a secular "free for all?" Want to make it more about store sales with 50% off and stampedes and office parties where people get too drunk, then expect stuff like this to take place. When you bastardize the meaning of something, especially when you do so intentionally, you often get VERY undesirable side effects.

I always love those who rail against "hate filled, judgement filled posts" with a hate-filled judgement filled retort. FWIW, the military looks down on HETEROSEXUAL relationships between servicemen and servicewomen, too. For example, a man and woman have relations on a Navy boat and they are both in DEEP schitt. But dont let facts get in the way of a good rant.

www.michellemalkin.com Playing games at Gitmo by Michelle Malkin Creators Syndicate Copyright 2008 The human rights crowd is right: Life is hard for a Guantanamo Bay detainee. The deprivation is unspeakable. Their brains have not been “stimulated” enough, according to the facility’s “cultural advisor.” Which is why this Thanksgiving, America is drawing up plans to provide the 250 or so suspected jihadists at the “notoriously Spartan” detention camp with basic sustenance including movie nights, art classes, English language lessons, and “Game Boy-like” electronic devices, according to the Miami Herald. Next up: Wii Fit, Guitar Hero, Sudoku, People magazine, and macramé. Anything less would be uncivilized. On a deadly serious note, the detainees aren’t the only ones playing games at Gitmo. Some top legal advisors and supporters of Barack Obama, whose name detainees chanted on election night, are now rethinking the President-elect’s absolutist campaign position on shutting the center down and flooding our mainland courts with every last enemy combatant designee. Yes, reality bites – and Democrats must now grapple with the very real possibility that an Obama administration could potentially release a Gitmo denizen who would turn around and commit mass terrorist acts on American soil or abroad. Nothing clarifies the mind like a jihadi boomerang. Never before have an administration and its followers matured so quickly in office – and they haven’t even taken office yet. While Obama paid lip service to the “Close the Gitmo gulag!” agenda on 60 Minutes over the weekend, his kitchen cabinet is proceeding more pragmatically. Believe it or not, the Obama crowd is now contemplating a preventive detention law and an alternative judicial system for the most sensitive national security cases involving the most highly classified information. Information that has no place being aired in the civilian courts for public consumption. Listen to relentless Bush critic David Cole, who told the New York Times last week: “You can’t be a purist and say there’s never any circumstance in which a democratic society can preventively detain someone.” Added Ben Wittes of the Brookings Institution: “I’m afraid of people getting released in the name of human rights and doing terrible things.” Moreover, Obama transition team members have suggested to the Wall Street Journal that despite his campaign season CIA-bashing, “Obama may decide he wants to keep the road open in certain cases for the CIA to use techniques not approved by the military, but with much greater oversight.” Next thing you know, they’ll start arguing that the world has been fooled by years of sob-story propaganda about the Gitmo detainees — funded by Kuwaiti government-subsidized lawyers who cast them all as innocent potato farmers and schmucks dazed and confused on battlefields. Next thing you know, they’ll rediscover the facts that detainees have systematically lied and exaggerated stories about mistreatment at Gitmo and that interrogators and military personnel have bent over backwards to accommodate their personal and religious needs and wants. Next thing you know, they’ll start reminding us that dozens of former Gitmo detainees have been released and recaptured on the battlefield while committing acts of terrorism. Funny, when President Bush and his homeland security team realized these very realities seven years ago, they were branded terrorists and hounded relentlessly by Congress, the media, and the Left. When Attorney General Michael Mukasey eloquently defended these administration’s counter-terrorism policies at the Federalist Society before he collapsed, he was heckled as a “tyrant.” And when I wrote my second book expounding on this very thesis, I was branded a racist and fascist whose ideas exploring the proper balance between security and civil liberties had no place in public discourse. Now, at long last, some liberals have realized that the sacred goal of “regain[ing] America’s moral stature in the world,” as Obama put it, may be less important than ensuring that al Qaeda killers don’t strike on American ground again.

I never said dont do that. I like the suble comparison of the Bush Administration to Apartied and dictators, though. Very realistic, that. I said dont make our entire counterterrorism operation public knowledge. Why is it that liberals feel our enemeies will "play nice" and wont use this divulged information to their benefit? How about this: The US carries out its interrogation practices to the same exact standards as the rest of the so-called "civilized world?" The same as Germany and Europe. Russia. And yes.....China. Whats good and "works" for them should be just fine for us? Seems fair to me.

A liberal would rather give comfort to an American enemy than an American Citizen. They would rather see Sarah Palin or Ann Coulter destroyed and "silenced" than Khalid Sheik Mohammed. Disgusting. And yeah...sorry..Id like to see the masterminds of 9/11 and ALL the enemeies of this Nation who plot to kill us strung up by their balls and destroyed. If that makes me "sink to their level" then so be it. BTW...there is one person who agrees with me.... OUR NEW PRESIDENT.

Ah, so maybe he should just take power RIGHT NOW, as many on the left are suggesting. Funny how the same people who pulled their hair out over "Bush's trashing of the Constitution" now have ZERO PROBLEM doing JUST THAT to meet the needs of "Our Savior, Barack H Obama."

Which had NO effect on world events or anything.

It was a joke. Pull the stick out of your ass.

OH.....MY.....GOD.....

WHAT COURT, you !@#$ing idiot? Where do you want to "try" KSM? !@#$ing traffic court?

From what youve read about it? Where? Bazooka Joe comics? back of Lucky Charms boxes? Go drown yourself. Putting your face in that bowl of cereal would probably do it.

Then explain "Rachel Maddow." Its not MY fault all liberals are ugly.

Dont forget such "atrocities" as cold rice and loud music. So ok...Ill play. NO TORTURE. None. How does the US then go about obtaining information from combatants in custody?