“I got it down pat”
or
“how patronizing”
or
“let’s play patty cakes”
or
“give the dog a pat”

The next time I hear someone use one of those expressions then I will burn their effigy.

I’m sure it will take much more then some stupid overpriced phone to help your problem. You might try some stupid overpriced medical help first.

birthday announcements only?

Now, besides offer me an overpriced solution, I’m not sure how the phone would solve my problem, but isn’t that any worse than the overpriced solution we’re already attempting (as a nation) to apply?

However, in terms of purchases, like the AppleTV, the thing is already a success: It will make money.

At some point, a sense of perspective will take hold among a minority of liberals, and they will finally accede to the fact that tolerance must be conditioned on it’s reciprocation, or it’s nothing more than high-minded social hara-kiri.

Cheerfully offering freedom to people who are more accustomed to and comfortable with paternalistic authoritarianism is seen by them as approval for them to bring those authoritarian ways with them, and impose them on all. All freedom means to religious serfs is ‘freedom to spread religious serfdom.’

Get it through your heads, folks; just because we collectively worship individual freedom doesn’t mean everyone else shares our enthusiasm for it. It scares a lot of people, and often for good reason, since they have so little experience of it, they don’t know quite what to do with it.

43–Free speech is not something you “get away with.” You either exercise it or not. FREEDOM, the right of other people to do that which you would not. And yes, we would all be better off turning to porn rather than violence.

44–You have identified both major reasons why that group is getting coverage. The fact that it is covered is more important than how it is covered. We all are responsible to filter/doubt the media for the spin it provides. That means more coverage of any issue, not less. I didn’t find your post gloomy at all ===but then I thought the newstory revealed the loonies in the Muslim world as much as with the Danes.

What they didn’t highlight enough was the difference between cause and effect. Important don’t you think?

So why cover these guys – is it because they raise the problem in a new way and ask some provocative
questions that make you think and maybe reevaluate your view of the problem, or is it their display of intolerance?
Is this article on Dvorak because its important what a small lunatic fringe group is doing, or is the
anticipation of the violence that may follow.

This is an important subject, but the base for the discussion is so radical that every participant in the discussion is already in the defensive position.

Furthermore a small group of people make a hateful video and the headline reads ‘is the country ready to explode in violence?’.
Well not quite, and do such a dramatic headline help giving the reader information, that will help him/her, in analyzing/decide about the problem?
The journalist should be more aware of their power over which topics are hot, and how we talk about them, and just referring that somebody said
‘Burn Muhammed’ or ‘Burn baby Jesus’ is not starting a debate but just being an amplifier for stupidity.

The only information you get from this article is that free speech, religious tolerance and intolerance still are hot topics, and that are some loonies in Denmark,
and that journalist prefer form over matter – number of readers over information.

I’m usually not this grumpy, but this repetition of the same info in a new even more inflammatory form gets to me on rainy Wednesdays.

Imbeciles.

Cursor_