Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 102

Thread: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

  1. #51
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Building a compound in Texas is easy too, and you know full well that was not the problem there.
    And you know damned well that those people were just following their own religious beliefs..... and look what that got them.
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  2. #52
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,592

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Building a compound in Texas is easy too, and you know full well that was not the problem there.
    If you're referring only to Waco, I know full well that people were weirded out and made lots of accusations that no one proved. (Which doesn't mean they weren't true, only that there's scant evidence of it, and even that only came along after everyone was dead.) Almost everyone was acting on accusation and innuendo and the fact that they were just so darn weird. It's actually not a bad parallel to the accusations against the mosque leaders, except that there hasn't been anyone killed.

    But any time someone builds a similar religious commune, someone wants to stop it, and often accuses them of doing terrible things inside. And usually, the mainstream accepts those accusations as fact.

    THAT'S when religious freedom gets hard.

    (Someone would probably go after the Amish if they weren't so well-established.)
    Last edited by Harshaw; 08-17-10 at 06:17 PM.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  3. #53
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    Scarborough's had a hard on for Newt since the 1990's when he was in the house and Newt was the speaker. If you haven't watched very much, you'll see that Scarborough and Newt never really hit it off - so making comments on MSNBC criticizing Newt... that's a weekly occurance.
    Do you agree with Newt's comments on this issue or not?

    In order for me to watch, I would need to get up a 3AM. No thanks.


  4. #54
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    If you're referring only to Waco, I know full well that people were weirded out and made lots of accusations that no one proved. (Which doesn't mean they weren't true, only that there's scant evidence of it, and even that only came along after everyone was dead.) Almost everyone was acting on accusation and innuendo and the fact that they were just so darn weird. It's actually not a bad parallel to the accusations against the mosque leaders, except that there hasn't been anyone killed.
    Yet.........

    But any time someone builds a similar religious commune, someone wants to stop it, and often accuses them of doing terrible things inside. And usually, the mainstream accepts those accusations as fact.

    THAT'S when religious freedom gets hard.

    (Someone would probably go after the Amish if they weren't so well-established.)
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  5. #55
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Well, actually, no, it's not.
    Yes, it is. Any expression in the public domain falls under TPM arguments. This mosque is proposed on private property though and that is the one thing I didn't think of, so yes I'm wrong on that part. But TPM arguments do in fact pertain to legal restrictions on speech based upon Time, place, and manner and the law must be narrowly implied, not overbroad. I had to study this stuff in at least two curriculum classes man.



    Doesn't have anything to do with TPM.
    It absolutely does. In fact there was a case involving disturbing the peace laws near school zones.



    Split hair.
    Nope. Some usage involves permit time, however some usage denotes times that are appropriate for the FCC to allow more lax standards to broadcasts. And still others refer(as in yelling fire falsely in a crowded theater) refers to the time of no danger and danger being created.



    Not always.
    Always. Protesting a funeral is hard to do at a barmitzvah. Yelling fire in a crowded theater is impossible at a golf course. You cannot have a public parade/rally outside of public domain necessarily and for all intents and purposes legally.




    Never. Refers to restrictions on manner of expression, such as not allowing fireworks on a city street.
    Not true, I'll have to dig up some cases later. Let's just say "incitement to riot" is not about the speech but the intent to cause harm by the speech. As is slander/libel, which is defended by proof of truth.




    Hardly. Besides, who would be the "plaintiff"? Who could possibly have standing to bring the suit? Who is being harmed by what a religious organization does on its own property?

    With as much energy is behind opposition, don't you think that if this could be done, and any good attorney could do it, it would be happening?
    If a lady can sue McDonald's for her own mistake and win anyone can sue for anything. It's that simple whether right or wrong.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  6. #56
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,592

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Yes, it is. Any expression in the public domain falls under TPM arguments.
    No.

    A time/place/manner analysis is applied to restrictions of expression. As in, a restriction could survive if it restricts ONLY the time, place, or manner (among other things). If there's no restriction, no prior restraint, there's no TPM argument.

    And my "no, it's not" referred to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater always being illegal. It's the most misquoted, misused legal canard I can think of this side of "finders keepers."

    But TPM arguments do in fact pertain to legal restrictions on speech based upon Time, place, and manner and the law must be narrowly implied, not overbroad.
    Uh, yes, I said that.

    But you can't sue someone and enjoin their conduct based on TPM if there's no restriction. It is a test as to the constitutionality of a prior restraint.



    I had to study this stuff in at least two curriculum classes man.
    And I kinda had to know a little bit about it to pass the bar, so if you want to pull out a ruler . . .



    It absolutely does. In fact there was a case involving disturbing the peace laws near school zones.
    OK, fine; in specific circumstances, TPM review could come into play.



    Nope. Some usage involves permit time, however some usage denotes times that are appropriate for the FCC to allow more lax standards to broadcasts.
    Yeah, that fits with what I said. But "for a generation" just ain't gonna cut it.


    And still others refer(as in yelling fire falsely in a crowded theater) refers to the time of no danger and danger being created.
    When it is so, it turns on the facts of the situation, not the time it's done. This is not a "time" restriction.



    Always. Protesting a funeral is hard to do at a barmitzvah. Yelling fire in a crowded theater is impossible at a golf course. You cannot have a public parade/rally outside of public domain necessarily and for all intents and purposes legally.
    I don't even know what you're arguing here. This doesn't make sense, considering what you're responding to. But it looks to me like your'e again applying TPM analysis to the activity, not restriction of the activity.




    Not true, I'll have to dig up some cases later. Let's just say "incitement to riot" is not about the speech but the intent to cause harm by the speech. As is slander/libel, which is defended by proof of truth.
    Those do not refer to "manner."


    If a lady can sue McDonald's for her own mistake and win anyone can sue for anything. It's that simple whether right or wrong.
    If you knew the facts of that case, you would understand why that's not a good response.
    Last edited by Harshaw; 08-17-10 at 06:42 PM.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  7. #57
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    Scarborough has moved to the left. I believe to keep his job at MSNBC
    Exactly - defending the separation of church and state and the 1st Amendment as a whole is certainly proof that he's rejecting the right-wing wackiness that's taking over too many Conservatives in this country.

    I never thought I'd see so many Republicans against religious freedom, but there it is. Obvious as day.

  8. #58
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by FilmFestGuy View Post
    Exactly - defending the separation of church and state and the 1st Amendment as a whole is certainly proof that he's rejecting the right-wing wackiness that's taking over too many Conservatives in this country.

    I never thought I'd see so many Republicans against religious freedom, but there it is. Obvious as day.
    You need to keep up...... most are no questioning their right to build, but whether it is right to build where they want to build, got it?
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  9. #59
    User
    Chappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    04-07-15 @ 01:50 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,443
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Excerpted from “Olbermann: There is no ‘Ground Zero Mosque’” By Keith Olbermann, Anchor, 'Countdown', msnbc.com, updated 8/16/2010 9:06:23 PM ET, SPECIAL COMMENT
    There is, in fact, no "Ground Zero mosque." It isn't a mosque.

    A mosque is a Muslim holy place in which only worship can be conducted. What is planned for 45 Park Place, New York City, is a Community Center. It's supposed to include a basketball court. And a cullinary school. It's to be thirteen stories tall and the top two stories will be a Muslim prayer space. …

    "We are calling it Park 51 because of the backlash to the name Cordoba House," he told the Financial Times. "It will be a place open to all New Yorkers and that is a very New York name." A very New York name. Like "Ground Zero." Except this place — Park 51 — is not even at Ground Zero, not even 'right across the street.' Even the description of it being "two blocks away" is generous.

    It is two blocks away from the northeast corner of the World Trade Center site. From the planned location of the [Sept.] 11 memorial it is more like four or even five blocks. …
    Not a mosque.

    Not at ground zero.

    Hmm.
    “Real environmentalists live in cities, and they visit what's left of the wilderness as gently and respectfully as possible.” — Donna Moulton, letter to the editor, Tucson Weekly, published on August 23, 2001

  10. #60
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Scarborough: 'Screw' GOP if they kick me out for defending mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    Do you agree with Newt's comments on this issue or not?

    In order for me to watch, I would need to get up a 3AM. No thanks.
    I agree that a Japanese being built near the Arizona 10 years after Pearl Harbor wouldn't have happened. Nor would a German monument anywhere close to Auschwits, nor Janowska, nor Chełmno 10 years after WWII would be tolerated. In fact, Germany outlaws the public display of the swastika on almost all accounts.

    Let's make sure we all are reminded of what Gingrich said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Newt Gingrich
    This happens all the time in America. Nazis don’t have the right to put up a sign next to the Holocaust Museum in Washington. We would never accept the Japanese putting up a site next to Pearl Harbor. There’s no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center.
    I wouldn't accept such a Mosque as an "outreach" center by any means. Were it really an outreach center to bring people together - all 4 of the major religions would be represented. In Germany or in Poland - today's Nazi's (if there are such a thing) wouldn't be tolerated putting up a building near the death camps - they just wouldn't. Yes I realize there's a Shinto shrine within 10 miles of Pearl Harbor --- which is just fine and dandy. Let's go with that plan ... these folks can put up a mosque within 10 miles of ground zero. I got no problem with that at all.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •