Why does the media keep trying to hide the fact that Obama is a Muslim?

He could be a zebra painted hare krishna. If he can get us to stop spending money on wars we can't win, I will book my next session with him..

You really are amusing me!!
It's too bad that I can't actually hear you talk, maybe one day at one of your soap box lectures on the corner.
I would then just hear "bla, bla, bla"

You are one badhusband, witty too. Originally Posted by WTF

We can still say "Zebra"?

Assuming for the sake of argument that President Obama was in fact a Muslim -- one hell of a big fucking assumption -- how the fuck is that a "grievance?" A Muslim, a Jew, a Buddhist, an agnostic or an athiest has every bit as much right to be President of the United States as does a Muslim.

Or have all you right wingers cut out this little section in your copy of the Constitution: . . . but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States"? Originally Posted by TexTushHog

First of all, I didn't say he was a muslim. I said people have right to ask the question without you libs jumping into their shit. For the sake of argument if he was a muslim why lie about it and IF he is lying about it, that shows a character flaw, IMHO.

You have some nerve quoting the "no religious test" clause when you would deny a christian church to built in public place and then say a muslim has a right to build a mosque or allow a christian to pray in a public area, but it's ok for a muslim to do the same. You cannot argue against one and for another. It shows your bias and your liberal ideology offends me. Hypocrit much?

I've taken the time to read about sharia law and it is a system of government through the edicts of the Koran. Where is the seperation of church and state? I dare you to argue the truth.

i used to do some statistical sampling

it is a science

a relatively small sample size will reveal attributes of a population to a confidence level of 95% or more

really what that means is 95% of the time the sample will include the true mean of the population Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Essentially, you are correct. Most of the presidential polls of 2008 that I saw had a sampling size of around 1000 people. The Pew explanation on how they sampled looked well chosen (random).

If you read the whole article most of the people did NOT know what Caliphate Obama's religion was NOR did they care. More people did not know his religion than thought he was a Christian (43-34).

Still, this is a perception problem that Caliphate O will need to address in the 2012 election. I wonder if how many people in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran think he's Christian, Muslim, Jewish or "don't care."

I guess you must not believe in any poll then...because all polls are just a mere subset of the total. Sounds to me like CT's "pounding of the table". Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Well, I didn't say that did I? Never ass/u/me.

Never ass/u/me. Originally Posted by Sa_artman

What kinda gay shit ya'll got going on?

What kinda gay shit ya'll got going on?
Originally Posted by WTF

Why, you want in WTF? You know I would never exclude you Is this headed to Another Realm?

Well, I didn't say that did I? Never ass/u/me. Originally Posted by Sa_artman

You having trouble reading? I guessed...I didn't assume. There is a difference.

I'm gonna guess again, that maybe he just liked the thought of u and ass, WTF.

I'm gonna guess again, that maybe he just liked the thought of u and ass, WTF. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

No it was ass and u. Go back and read his post RK.

I will say that I might have to change him from my bestest friend to my bestest funny lil friend if he keeps talking about yo ass!

You having trouble reading? I guessed...I didn't assume. There is a difference.

I'm gonna guess again, that maybe he just liked the thought of u and ass, WTF. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

If your 'guessing' I want some old wrinkly ass---assume the opposite. I'm confident in my manhood...now WTF...jumped on that topic waaaay to quick.

Anyhoo, back to topic or not... http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...-im-gay/62065/
gotta love the irony.

somehow the discussion of a guys ass comes up

Why, you want in WTF? You know I would never exclude you Originally Posted by Sa_artman

Awwwwwwwwwwww........You are just to good to me

...now WTF...jumped on that topic waaaay to quick.

. Originally Posted by Sa_artman

Hey, what you two do in your personal life is between the two of you but for God's sake fella's this is a public board. Take that manlove BCD!Plus you can't take back your offer artman!

wherever WTF is.....somehow the discussion of a guys ass comes up Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Hey, I got a nice ass, what can I say?

First of all, I didn't say he was a muslim. I said people have right to ask the question without you libs jumping into their shit. For the sake of argument if he was a muslim why lie about it and IF he is lying about it, that shows a character flaw, IMHO.

You have some nerve quoting the "no religious test" clause when you would deny a christian church to built in public place and then say a muslim has a right to build a mosque or allow a christian to pray in a public area, but it's ok for a muslim to do the same. You cannot argue against one and for another. It shows your bias and your liberal ideology offends me. Hypocrit much?

I've taken the time to read about sharia law and it is a system of government through the edicts of the Koran. Where is the seperation of church and state? I dare you to argue the truth. Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Not sure what you mean by a "public place." But I have no problem with houses of religion of any stripe building on private property. If, however, by "public place," you mean government property, then yes, I'd have a problem with any house of religion of any sort being built there.

Under the First Amendment, the government can't discriminate against religion or favor religion. Likewise, it cannot favor one religion over another, nor can it advantage the religious to the disadvantage of the irreligious.

As for praying in a public area, again, I think it depends on the public area and the circumstances. But under no circumstances can the government prohibit practitioners of one religion praying where they allow practitioners of others to pray.

And nothing you said at all addresses my initial post of what it would be about a Muslim being President that would constitute a "grievance" within the meaning of the First Amendment. You entirely ducked that issue.

Not sure what you mean by a "public place." But I have no problem with houses of religion of any stripe building on private property. If, however, by "public place," you mean government property, then yes, I'd have a problem with any house of religion of any sort being built there.

Under the First Amendment, the government can't discriminate against religion or favor religion. Likewise, it cannot favor one religion over another, nor can it advantage the religious to the disadvantage of the irreligious.

As for praying in a public area, again, I think it depends on the public area and the circumstances. But under no circumstances can the government prohibit practitioners of one religion praying where they allow practitioners of others to pray.

And nothing you said at all addresses my initial post of what it would be about a Muslim being President that would constitute a "grievance" within the meaning of the First Amendment. You entirely ducked that issue. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

If and when you speak out against the Port Authority and city of NY doing everything they can to block the RE-construction of the Greek Orthodox church in a public place that was destroyed during the events of 911, maybe you can have your anti-religious retoric card back. Or maybe you can look at yourself in the mirror and say with a clear voice, "I am a hypocrit and I don't like other peoples opinions even if they are factually supported."