RUSSIAN ROULETTE
with
M&M'S?
If anyone is able to find fault in the logic expressed here, I'd love to hear what he or she might have to say.
Tuesday, January 31, 2017
48 comments:
IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FOLLOWING, YOU DON'T BELONG HERE, SO KINDLY GET OUT AND STAY OUT.
We welcome Conversation
But without Vituperation.
If your aim is Vilification ––
Other forms of Denigration ––
Unfounded Accusation --
Determined Obfuscation ––
Alienation with Self-Justification ––
We WILL use COMMENT ERADICATION.
IN ADDITION
Gratuitous Displays of Extraneous Knowledge Offered Not To Shed Light Or Enhance the Discussion, But For The Primary Purpose Of Giving An Impression Of Superiority are obnoxiously SELF-AGGRANDIZING, and therefore, Subject to Removal at the Discretion of the Censor-in-Residence.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Of course the logic of this analogy cannot be refuted. That is why lefties scream, throw a tantrum and derisively dismiss it when you bring it up.
ReplyDeleteWell, the psychopathic, egomaniacal narcissist ex-president couldn't keep his damned mouth shut for more than ten days. He just had to come out and blast President Trump's legal and sane actions put in place to protect the nation.
ReplyDeleteWe have one president at a time, Obummer! You had your turn, no STFU!!!
I think your question makes a category error: the meme does not express logic, it makes an appeal to our intuitive grasp of risks and rewards.
ReplyDeleteThe analogy fails on that basis for a couple of reasons. 1) the rewards involved in candy are trivial, it is an entirely optional treat, whereas providing asylum to a genuine refugee is a life-saving act; 2) the scale is wrong, if rogue m&ms were as rare as malicious refugees, you'd have to eat many, many bowls of skittles before you'd expect to find one; you'd be far more likely to choke to death on one before you did.
This has been discussed in many places, decent critical analyses are not hard to find. eg. http://www.vox.com/2016/9/20/12986886/donald-trump-jr-terrorist-skittles-wrong seems reasonable.
Very well, you claim the scale is wrong, but it is still a useful analogy.
DeleteWhat is the acceptable risk we Americans must take? What is the compelling need to bring in dodgy people?
How many attacks on workplaces and nightclubs by screaming murderous muslims falls below your threshold? One or two?
Kate Steinle was just one woman, but to her parents and siblings, that one death was too high a price to pay for nuthouse california's sanctuary city idiocy.
It is about risk/reward. There is no compelling need to bring muslims to America. They are to a society as ants to a picnic, termites to a structural foundation. They have their lands, they need to stay there, and we must learn to leave them alone and stop launching Bushite follies attempting to bring them "democracy" and "freedom."
The key insight a sense of scale should give you is that statistically refugees are less lethal than actual skittles.
DeleteDo you eat skittles? If you don't, is it for some reason other than the acute risk of death from skittles?
"statistically refugees are less lethal than actual skittles"
DeleteHow do you know? can you provide us statistics to prove that?
There must have been billions and billions of skittles produced over the years. I don't remember ever hearing of one causing any deaths, blowing up consuls, decapitating anyone or lighting people on fire.
We do have news reports of muslim immigrants and their spawn doing those evils.
People choke on food; you may recall W's close call with a pretzel. It's far more common than terrorism, among the top causes of accidental death (a few thousand per year in America) -- far more common than terrorism -- candy is a frequent culprit. I can only estimate how often skittles are implicated, but it's a pretty good size for choking on.
DeleteI wouldn't expect an unexceptional death by choking to get any news coverage, unless a celebrity like W were involved. Whereas terrorism attacks are news-worthy, in every sense of the word -- ie genuinely in the public interest, but at the same time ghoulishly sensational, so are covered ad nauseum.
The rewards of saving refugees is...?
ReplyDelete...life saving? Who's life? Terrorist lives MATTER!
There are many other nations they can go to besides the United States. Muslims should be settled in other Muslim nations due to their severe religious strictures, language and culture.
DeleteBringing them to the decadent and blasphemous west is begging for trouble.
True, Syrian refugees aren't American. Calculate their worth by applying whatever multiplier you feel comfortable with.
Deletehere's where the refugees are ending up...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War
We should send em all to Obama's house, since he's the one who armed the terrorists, drew the red line and then pissed his pants and slinked away when the dictator Basher crossed it.
DeleteLate Breaking News at Lucianne.com:
ReplyDelete'DEATH TO AMERICA': Iran-backed rebels' attack on Saudi ship may have been meant for US
Suicide attack by Iran-backed rebels targeting Saudi frigate off Yemen may have been meant for an American warship, defense officials tell Fox News exclusively. 'Death to America' heard on video showing the attack
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteWell meaning European citizens of the world were shocked and dismayed when muslim immigrants claiming refugee status saw a welcoming sign on a shelter but mistook it for a symbol for gay sex and burned the shelter to the ground to shrill ululations and choruses of "Allahu Akbar!"
ReplyDeleteFYI from WIKI [I admit I had no idea what SKITTLES were. Guess my good health is secure.]
ReplyDeleteSKITTLES is a brand of fruit-flavoured sweets, currently produced and marketed by the Wrigley Company, a division of Mars, Inc.
They have hard sugar shells which carry the letter S. The inside is mainly sugar, corn syrup, and hydrogenated palm kernel oil along with fruit juice, citric acid, and natural and artificial flavors. The confectionery has been sold in a variety of flavor collections, such as Tropical and Wild Berry.
History and Overview
Skittles were first made commercially in 1974 by a British company. They were first introduced in North America in 1979 as an import confectionery. In 1982, domestic production of Skittles began in the United States.
Skittles' "taste the rainbow" theme was created by New York ad agency D'Arcy Masius Benton & Bowles.
On March 2, 2009, Skittles launched a web-based marketing campaign where their official website became a small overlay with options to view different social media sites in the main area, including its official YouTube channel, a Facebook profile, and a Twitter account.
The move was debated by people interested in social media.
Skittles has one of the most-"liked" brand pages on Facebook, with over 25 million followers. The page's success may be due to its eccentric posts, such as: "Most cacti are just looking for hugs."
Skittles have been involved in two political incidents in the 2010s. In the aftermath of the shooting of Trayvon Martin, protestors used Skittles, which Martin had reportedly been carrying, as a symbol during rallies. Though Mars' brief statement of condolences was criticized by some outlets, such as Adweek, for being too subdued, Mars' response in 2016 to a Skittles-based image macro was praised for its tact and directness. MWWPR said Mars' responses could influence public relations best practices. ...
PART ONE
ReplyDeleteJEZ said (above quoted here with FT's responses inserted between the lines):
JEZ: I think your question makes a category error: the meme does not express logic, it makes an appeal to our intuitive grasp of risks and rewards.
FT: "Logic" may mean something different to me than it does you, Jez. Also, I've never understood this term "meme" which many seem to bandy about these days any more than I understand "conflate" another trendy expression which I never saw or heard till I started blogging. So, I may be too ignorant of the language you younger people use today to be qualified to answer your assertion properly, but, of course, I'll try. ;-) It's rare when analogies, parables, parallels or figures of speech are sufficiently exact to meet scientific, mathematically precise materialistic standards. Figurative language, however, is not mere fantasy. It's just another way of evoking understanding in those sensitive to it. It is the essence of poetic expression which almost never deals with plain literal statements of facts and figures but rather of the subtle nuances and affect these things imply to those with a poetic turn of mind.
JEZ: The analogy fails on that basis for a couple of reasons.
1) the rewards involved in candy are trivial, it is an entirely optional treat, whereas providing asylum to a genuine refugee is a life-saving act;
FT: As I see it, candy per se has nothing whatsoever to do wth the point at issue, neither do the moral imperatives of saving human lives. It also has nothing to do with the percentage of lethal poison in a given batch of candy. The POINT –– as I see it –– is whether American citizens should be DELIBERATELY subjected to even the FAINTEST possibility that they may be decapitated, beaten, bludgeoned, knifed, tortured, raped, shot, burned alive, buried alive, stoned to death, or run over by a truck some demented fanatic decided to hijack and use as a weapon of mass destruction. Yes, these happen now and then. Members of ALL groups of human beings are capable of deceit, horrific violence and extreme cruelty. Sadly right now the greatest preponderance of terrorist activity comes from MUSIMS. Of course not ALL Muslims are terrorists, but the fact remains that MOST terrorists are MUSLIMS, and we have no way of knowing which ones are rabid lunatics bent on the brutal murder of "Infidels" and which are not. We already have more than enough problems to deal with. The idea of deliberately ADDING to the roster of possible threats to our peace and safety in service to some ABSTRACT humanitarian ideal too which leftists ascribe strikes me as frankly insane.
(CONTINUED)
I don't mean to be confusing. "Logic" is a chain of irrefutable inferences leading us from premises to a conclusion; an "internet meme" is any widely shared artefact (in this case a captioned picture, but could be bare text or video). I don't think I used conflation here (not a "trendy" term as far as I know, but I am woefully under-informed about what kind of language the kids are using these days), but it is where two similar-sounding but distinct ideas are used in each others' place, eg. if I were to answer your point about pounds of feathers and iron with a point about the value of the pound sterling, I would be conflating the two meanings of "pound". It can be used artistically, but it is often used by mistake or as an underhand rhetorical trick. Watch out for it!
DeleteOf course analogues only need to be similar in one respect, and are allowed to be dissimilar in all others. But that one aspect of similarity should support the wider point being made. If that wider point is about risk and reward, then I don't think the analogy supports that. Could be that's not the point at all, and I'm mistaken.
I think you're treating muslims as a special category of risk, separate from all the other risks you negotiate every day. I think you habitually take much larger risks in your stride, and I'm not sure what good reason there could be for considering them differently.
What is abstract about humanitarian ideals? How can someone who often seems to struggle to find superlatives adequate to sufficiently denounce muslim lands dismiss those actually suffering under them and seeking to escape as abstract concerns. I don't understand.
Obviously I think that the risk/reward ratio is absolutely the point: on what other basis should my attitude to the one mirror my attitude to the other? But you think the point is something else: what? Does it have something to do with the pound of feathers?
Under what circumstances would accepting a refugee not be treason?
Thank you for the reply, Jez.
DeleteYou said, "What is abstract about humanitarian ideals? How can someone who often seems to struggle to find superlatives adequate to sufficiently denounce muslim lands dismiss those actually suffering under them and seeking to escape as abstract concerns. I don't understand."
First, I never "struggle" to find adjectives and adverbs. NEVER! };-)> But more importantly "concepts" or "mental constructs," if you prefer are always abstract in the true meaning of the word, To wit:
ABSTRACT
noun
1. existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence. "abstract concepts such as love or beauty"
synonyms: theoretical, conceptual, notional, intellectual, metaphysical, ideal, philosophical, academic; rare ideational
verb
1. to consider (something) theoretically or separately from something else. "to abstract science and religion from their historical context can lead to anachronism."
My point is exactly what I said it is. I see absolutely nothing illogical in what-to-me-are the obvious implications of the M&M picture and its accompanying caption.
Despite sharing the same vocabulary, we really do speak a different language. I'm afraid it's generational and probably a matter of two entirely different styles of social conditioning.
If you knew me, you would soon learn that I am one of the most humane and generous people alive. I'm not going to list the eleemosynary uses to which I have put my money; that would be unseemly and in poor taste, but anyone who truly knows me would tell you I am generous to a fault, and have been helpful to many all my adult life.
I love animals, and often suffer pangs of sorrow that so many are doomed to lead wretched lives –– unloved, uncared for, physically abused, abandoned, and left to die in misery from untreated ailments or simply from starvation.
With that in mind I have done what I can by adopting animals and giving them a good home, or I take it upon myself to find homes for foundlings, but I realize there must be LIMITS, because it would not do the animals –– or ME –– a particle of good were I to take in so many that my house became overwhelmed and ths uninhabitable with urine feces, disease and the carcasses of poor dead, or sorely undernourished creatures.
As individuals we are only able to do what we are able to do.
I believe the same 'logic" apples to COUNTRIES,
Of COURSE I feel deeply sorry for ALL the wretched people who inhabit the earth, but at the same time I realize there are STRICT LIMITS in practical reality as to what we can do for them lest we become overwhelmed by THEIR wretchedness.
I often wish things were not as they are, but "wishing," as has oft been said, "will not make it so."
Not intending to badger you, but just wanted to point out what is missing from my understanding of your position. Although you have said that you believe the skittles analogy supports your belief that America should not increase its exposure to foreign-born muslims, you have not said how it supports that belief.
DeleteYou have said that it is obvious, and you have said it is nothing to do with how I understood the analogy to work, but you have not stated how you think it actually does work.
Not that you have to, of course.
Oh hello again, Jez. I'm glad you came back, although I'm not sure any reply I might make could ever satisfy you. I don't believe I said your example of the potentially deadly effects of Skittles has anything to do with my thoughts about the presence of Muslims in our midst –– quite the opposite in fact.
DeleteAfter all ingesting Skittles –– or any of ten dozen other potentially harmful commercial products –– is something an informed consumer may reject and avoid by a simple act of will, whereas the possible presence of deadly Jihadists in any given group of Muslims is mostly hidden, and remains unknown until it's too late to avoid violent confrontation, gruesome murder, possible maiming, and devastating loss of valuable property.
In other words we may CHOOSE to avoid Skittles or any other potentially harmful substance such as drugs and alcohol, but when we deliberately import and welcome an unknown quantity of potentially deadly terrorists into our midst we are in effect playing a kind of Russian Roulette with the lives of innocent citizens.
I'll take the liberty of repeating what i said to Jersey below, since you might have missed it.
"Do you remember the Tylenol Poisoner? He she or it was never caught, managed to introduce a lethal substance into some of the capsules that contained the product then, thus killing several people at random for no reason whatsoever.
"This forced the makers of Tylenol to remove ALL their products from the shelves of ALL their source of distribution,the REDESIGN the product by getting rid of capsules altogether and replacing them with tamper-proof "caplets," which are nothing more than solid, old-fashioned "pills."
"The tylenol Poisoner ALSO caused the manufactures of virtually EVERY ingestible product to redesign their packaging to as to make it impervious to efforts at tampering –– changes that make using these products much less convenient for consumers.
One rotten apple in a barrel ...
One Tylenol capsule out of millions injected with poison ...
A few M&M's laced with poison ...
A small percentage of Muslims who are Jihadists ...
Do you NOW begin to get the idea at last?
Oh, and I nearly forgot poor old Typhoid Mary. Do you remember her? If not ou can easily learn from Google.
There is a fundamental PRINCIPLE at stake here, Jez, –– a principle I believe should be held should be held both sacrosanct and inviolable.
I am very sorry for the millions of poor benighted so
ups who've had the bad luck to be born and raised in Islamic States and forced to live inner Sharia Law, but I am adamantly opposed to introducing their perverse culture, demented ideology, savage views on what constitutes morality, decency and proper governance into OUR admittedly-flawed, but far more enlightened society.
PART TWO
ReplyDeleteJEZ: 2) the scale is wrong, if rogue m&ms were as rare as malicious refugees, you'd have to eat many, many bowls of skittles before you'd expect to find one; you'd be far more likely to choke to death on one before you did.
FT: That may be true, but the significance or relative value of the "reward" or "punishment" involved is not at issue. This reminds me of that old trick question we used to ask children: "Which weighs more a pound of feathers or a pound of iron?" Of course, the property of feathers and of iron is immaterial. A POUND is simply a POUND. –– unless you insist on bringing in the difference between troy and avoirdupois weight, which would only serve to confuse the child and obscure th,e "lesson" you attempting to teach.
JEZ: This has been discussed in many places, decent critical analyses are not hard to find. eg. http://www.vox.com/2016/9/20/12986886/donald-trump-jr-terrorist-skittles-wrong seems reasonable.
FT: Unfortunately, I was unable to get the linked article to appear. I assure you this is not a cop out. ;-) I do think, however, that having OUR politicians willing to compromise the peace and security of American citizens in order to mollify hostile opinions of MY country by the so-called International Community is not only unwise and counter-intuitive, it is in my view both ignoble and treasonous.
We must also consider those disruptions short of terrorism involving 7th century throwbacks squatting in fetid self-made ghettos here in the west. They spawn "home grown" terrorists, send for child brides to sate their pedo-lust and refuse to assimilate, creating just the conditions that wrecked the toilets they escaped from. We don't need that here.
ReplyDeleteI am also fed up with being finger-pointed and lectured to by hijab-wearing sassmouth smartass girls who would be locked in a kitchen roasting rats over a dungfire and knocked-up with her fifth little jihadi while her husband is out playing ass-pokey with dancing boys. No, we don't need any of that here.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteSUE, –– as surely you must know by now –– normally I just ERADICATE your OBSCENE raving and VICIOUS INSANE ATTACKS, but I want to put it on record for all to see that YOU are NOT WELCOME to POST COMMENTS at THIS BLOG –– EVER.
DeleteUnless by some miraculous turn of events you should reform, learn some manners, and start to act like a civilized human being respectful of the rights and feelings of others.
Those who stay where they're not welcome
ReplyDeleteMust be demons who from hell come!
~ Biemmo Portapotti
I'd say the numbers are out of proportion. It seems most accept 10% of moslem vermin as radicalized'. That would make it a 100 M&M's to 10 poison ones.
ReplyDeleteAdd to this, a poll of Pakistani's reveals greater than 90% support violent jihad against the infidels.
But no I wouldn't even take my chances with 10 out of 10,000
I woundn't want to take a chance even it were just ONE out of every thousand, Kid.
DeleteWhy take any chances at ALL when you have NOTHING to GAIN and possibly a great deal to lose?
Look at what a mere NINETEEN of those filthy, insane bastards did on 9/11/01!
Three-THOUSAND lives lost THAT DAY, then thousands more DEATHS over time from diseases caught cleaning up the wreckage, and untold BILLIONS of DOLLARS worth of PROPERTY DESTROYED.
Just NiNETEEN lousy stinking ragheads did ALL that damage.
I wouldn't trust ONE of them no matter how "nice" they might appear on the surface.
America belongs to AMERICANS. She does NOT being to the entire world, and anyone who thinks otherwise should either be tried for TREASON or DEPORTED.
PERIOD!
The Smug Self Righteous Leftists, are going Nuts!
ReplyDeleteThey just can’t get used to Going from a President who was a 18 Hole Golfer to a President who puts in 18 hour days and actually works and gets things done... . Must suck to be them.
And by the way, whats the difference between what Mr. Trump is doing by his “Temporary Ban on Moslem travelers” to what Barrack Hussain Obama’s did during his last week in office, when Obama repealed a long-standing executive order known as “Wet Foot/Dry Foot,” which allowed all Cubans legally touching U.S. soil to stay here illegally. The objective of the executive order was to give sanctuary to Cubans risking their lives on makeshift vessels trying to sail to the United States and escape the oppressive communist regime that has governed there for over half a century. Where was the Protest and “Pussy Hat” March about that?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMcDonalds Flew the American Flag Upside Down in Uniondale, New York yesterday,
ReplyDeleteBoycott Them for heaven sakes!!
This was recorded from the speech of a Pre-School Teacher at an all black anti-Trump rally in Seattle (last weekend?), please see the transcript of some excerpts from the woman's screed:
ReplyDelete“F*ck white supremacy, f*ck the U.S. empire, f*ck your imperialist a** lives. That sh*t gotta go.
White people, give your f*cking money, your f*cking house, your f*cking property, we need it f*cking all!”
“And we need to start killing people.”
"First off, we need to start killing the White House. The White House must die. The White House, your f*cking White House, your f*cking presidents, they must go! F*ck the White House! Your f*cking White House. ”
“I am a f*cking preschool teacher who’s going to f*cking (unintelligible). Teach your kids to throw that f*cking cop car in the garbage. That sh*t has got to go. That sh*t has got to go.”
And the all black audience enthusiastically cheered all of the above statements.
Wonderful!
DeleteThe Senate Republicans pushed through a pair of President Trump’s Cabinet nominees Wednesday, upending standard committee rules to circumvent a Democratic boycott.
ReplyDeleteIf you Democrats/ Liberals are still confused, let me know and Mommy will explain it to you with little words so that you can understand.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHow do these “useful or useless idiots” claim that Trump’s Executive Order is a ban on Muslims when not all Muslim countries were not affected? In fact most of the Muslim countries were not affected.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteBy this logic, FT, we would never allow any immigration or travel from anywhere at all. Heck, by that same logic, we'd be caught in a heck of a paradox, as we are far more dangerous to each other than foreigners are to us!
ReplyDeleteWe haven't taken many of these refugees and we check them pretty thoroughly. With the travelers, we're talking about a lot of professionals, students, missions and charity work, and so forth. It's not like we're accepting hoards of these folks. Just look at the small numbers of people involved in the initial days. That's why is was such an easy political move. Great distraction theater.
JMJ
Well, Jersey, all I can see is that I disagree profoundly with your observations. Do read my statements to Jez above –– especially the last one. I would hope that would make my position on this issue clear.
DeleteI'm hardly unfeeling, but I do have a firm belief that "CHARITY BEGINS at HOME."
By the way, please feel free to alert us here as to what's happens at your blog, and be sure to provide a link each time you do.
By the way, Jersey, do you remember the Tylenol Poisoner? He she or it was never caught, managed to introduce a lethal substance into some of the capsules the product came in then, thus killing several people at random for no reason whatsoever.
DeleteThis forced the makers of Tylenol to remove ALL their products from the shelves of ALL their source of distribution,the REDESIGN the product by getting rid of capsules altogether and replacing them with tamper-proof "caplets," which are nothing more than solid, old-fashioned "pills."
The tylenol Poisoner ALSO caused the manufactures of virtually EVERY ingestible product to redesign their packaging to as to make it impervious to efforts at tampering –– changes that make using these products much less convenient for consumers.
One rotten apple in a barrel ...
A few M&M's laced with poison ...
A small percentage of Muslims who are Jihadists ...
Do you NOW begin to get the idea at last?
Oh, and I nearly forgot poor old Typhoid Mary. Do you remember her?
There is a fundamental PRINCIPLE at stake here –– a principle that should be held both sacrosanct and inviolable.
The medicines (and groceries) you buy are "guaranteed" to meet certain quality requirements, including purity. Yes, sometimes mistakes or tampering happens, but when it does the industry is held responsible, so they go to extraordinary lengths and take pre-emptive measures to meet those requirements, eg. a lot of product is destroyed, even if there's only a low probability of any of it being unsafe.
DeleteWe can't treat people like that: justice cannot be pre-emptive. On the other hand, people don't come with guarantees. You might meet an absolute rotter, and no third party would accept responsibility for that encounter. Maybe that's the difference.
Well, we will simply have to agree to disagree on this, and leave it at that, Jez.
DeleteYou said "we can't go to extraordinary lengths and take pre-emptive measures [to protect ourselves from potential harm]."
I say we not only CAN, but we MUST, unless, of course, we do not value ourselves, and have no wish –– or any feeling of need –– to survive.
When it comes to matters of personal safety, the safety, security and well-being of loved ones, my community, my country, my preferred system of governance, and the standards, values and principles I hold dear, there are virtually NO LENGTHS to which I would no go to preserve, protect and defend them.
Not to wax trite, but the obvious truth remains:
AN OUNCE of PREVENTION is WORTH a TON of CURE.
Sadly, there will always be "BARBARIANS" of one sort or another lurking "outside the gates" waiting to ATTACK, ROB, then DESTROY what they have not been able to produce for themselves.
"He who would be kind to the cruel will be cruel to the kind."
That, I've been told, is an ancient Jewish proverb, and as all ought to know by now, no identifiable ethnic identity has done a more effective job of surviving against insuperable odds than the Jews.
Could their incredible DETERMINATION to BE THEMSELVES regardless of the cost, be the reason they have been almost universally feared, ridiculed, despised, rejected and mercilessly persecuted?
Fine by me. I've just realised that the deepest difference between us is that you don't care about epistemology, and I'm obsessed by it.
DeleteAnd I am obsessed primarily with Beauty, Order, Refinement, Nobility, and tangible evidence of the highest possible degree of Aspiration to Excellence –– especially in matters aesthetic.
DeleteAll of these things in my view point us toward a more intimate knowledge of God which cannot help but increase and strengthen Faith, Hope, Courage, and Determination as it increases our capacity for Loyalty and ever-deepening Affection.
Out of 10,000 legal American citizens, it might be safe to say that 10 are morally-reprehensible scum who should be put down like rabid dogs.
ReplyDeleteA good point,Rob, but in BARRING ENTRANCE to ALL MOSLEMS, –– which I would make MANDATORY for the FORESEEABLE FUTURE ––, still makes perfect sense, because it is not only FOOLISH, it is INSANE to import MORE potential trouble than we ALREADY have.
DeleteExpressing sympathy for Muslims is too much like feeling sympathy for CANCER CELLS.
Another for instance: I love dogs, but I realize a certain percentage of them are bound to be RABID. Of course, I feel sorry for any animal so afflicted, but no one in his right mind would want take one into his house and try to live with it as a pet.