fc857c6607b0a0d702cb…

I’m sure many Christians are future Muslims
Enrique on April 16, 2007 at 5:48 PM

Oh?

Because the United States and other nations will be overrun by Muslims?

Because religions are products to be chosen by a person based on what it can offer them in the short/long term and Muslims have a superior product to Christians?

Or is it because of the fact that Christians are stooopid hicks that hate science and Muslims are teh sm4rt because they used the number zero and had rhyming poetry 258,000 years before those stooooopid Christians (who, on orders of Pope Hypocriticus XXVI were assassinating men and women of science on a daily basis with the help of Duke Cheney I of Haliburton-Upon-Thames)?

Look, I’m all for “absurd things” said in jest but… Dude. John Walker-Lindh, Adam Gahdan, Peter Murphy, and Cat Stevens are all off the top of my head prime examples of what Ms. Schussel’s point.

Regarding your response – Debbie Schlussel on April 16, 2007 at 8:50 AM – to my comment that Rachel would be right at home on “The View.”

That was meant as sarcastic because Rachel seems to be as outrageous as the women at “The View.”

I was not endorsing her as a panelist on “Red Eye” or as a great orator. I find her comments deplorable, and I find her comments regarding the Duke students offensive.

Did my comment not come off as sarcastic?

Regarding her rape allegations, sorry, I did not know about them at all. Your comment is the first I head about them.

Thanks.

William

As for your name-calling, that is general the refuge for those who have no argument.

Here’s another name: Hair-splitter. You clearly implied that atheists and Muslim extremists are cut from the same cloth. Everyone who read your post knows that. I’m sure many Christians are future Muslims, but you sure didn’t call attention to them.

For the record, I do agree with you that Rachel is a whackjob who says absurd things. I’m only comparing you to her in the “says absurd things” category.

And I’ve said my fair share of absurd things, so there you go. :)

Never ever wrote such a thing.

I’m not conservative across the board, but I can read quite well.

I didn’t say you were worse than Rachel, although I certainly implied you were equivalent.

Now go to sleep, crazy lady.

Must be because we’re forgiving people. Say Debbie, didn’t you once write a blog post about how atheists are morally equivalent to Islamic terrorists?

Enrique on April 16, 2007 at 12:45 PM

Never ever wrote such a thing. Hmmm . . . I thought most conservatives could read. You must be the exception. RIF–Reading is Fundamental. But just love how you are saying I am worse than a woman who stalked three men, was criminally prosecuted, and falsely accused a man of rape. Glad your sense of perspective is, er . . . “in order.”

Also, will you forgive Crystal Gail Mangum, the Duke accuser, who did the same thing? Think she should have a show on FOX? How about Jayson Blair? He did a lot less.

And you’re concerned that RACHEL is giving conservatism a bad name by making irresponsible, hysterical statements?

Enrique on April 16, 2007 at 12:45 PM

Rachel ain’t a conservative, but it’s disturbing to discover how so many people are calling her one, and it appears that the media is trying to pass her off as one. Like they are creating an excuse to give conservatives a bad name?
What’s going on here?

What I find incredible is how many commenters here want to forgive and forget or not even mention any of this about her.

Debbie Schlussel on April 16, 2007 at 8:50 AM

Must be because we’re forgiving people. Say Debbie, didn’t you once write a blog post about how atheists are morally equivalent to Islamic terrorists?

And you’re concerned that RACHEL is giving conservatism a bad name by making irresponsible, hysterical statements?

What kind of self-absorbed rich silver spooners worry about trivia like that when there’s a war on.

I’m sure if Rachel were looking at a year plus court trial, with the possibility of decades in jail, she wouldn’t even show up to the courthouse because she wants to focus solely on the war. She’d just ignore it and go on with her 24/7/365 concern of the war.

That, or her perception of reality is that everyone should react to everything based on how it affects her. Honey, sweetie, your ego doesn’t have a gravitational force, so the world doesn’t revolve around you.

I will.

And her jokes suck.

HUGE.

Thank gaaawd this is on when no sane person is awake.

Buck, while I admire both your purity of essence and your essence of purity, I prefer “hipster doofus.”

Levy on April 16, 2007 at 1:57 AM

Good morning. Gee, now that I’ve learned more about the show than I intended at the outset – I guess I’ll have to tune in. If red-eye is going to be a topic around here I’d better educate myself if for no other reason than to raise my critique above side-swipe. You win. I’m in.

Rachel would be right at home on “The View.”

William

William2006 on April 16, 2007 at 1:30 AM

Uh, no. No-one on “The View” has been criminally convicted of stalking and falsely accused a man of rape, ruining his career. Which is why it’s especially ridiculous that FOX News hired and employs her. Even ABC doesn’t have anyone with this sort of record on staff.

More details:

* Criminal Court of Regina, British Columbia v. Marsden

* Stalking three men, falsely accusing one of rape, and other seriously creepy, bizarre behavior

What I find incredible is how many commenters here want to forgive and forget or not even mention any of this about her (even though many have written that they knew about it). Ask yourself: Would you reward Crystal Gail Mangum, the Duke false rape accuser, with a position (especially a position allegedly representing conservatives) on a major news network? If FOX News doesn’t have a problem doing so, then their whole coverage and moralizing against the Duke false rape accuser–now that the men have been cleared and they’ve outed her as Mangum–is phony.

Buck, while I admire both your purity of essence and your essence of purity, I prefer “hipster doofus.”

Levy on April 16, 2007 at 1:57 AM

By the way dude, I’ll go toe to toe with you on Seinfeldisms any day.

Again, guys, it was manageable a couple times, but RM is becoming a train wreck.

Anyway, time to check in with Andrew Levee Levy to see what’s in store for tomorrow’s stories, and what’s coming up next on Special Report with Brit Hume.

William

I made comments strangely similar to Buck’s earlier in this very thread…. and I’m in my 20′s…. I must just be laaaaame :(

And to think, all these years I thought my “friends” were laughing with me :(

RightWinged, you will live to be 100 yrs. You must be healthy given the conditions there. Remember to eat your vegetables. That is first step.

Ouabam on April 16, 2007 at 12:42 AM

Ha! I don’t feel healthy, though I look it… just high metabolism, but I’ve eaten more crap in my life than most people 3 or 4 times my age.

That said, interestingly enough I’m the only person I know that still has all 4 grandparents living, and I’ve found that odd even since I was in elementary school. All but one are in their early to mid 80s, and one grandmother is almost 77.

Considering modern medicine, I don’t see why many of us won’t live to be 100… but I’m not sure if I want to.