All Forums | Politics

Bill O'Reilly ,,,Trump has destroyed the republican party that I knew and loved

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2274
Posts: 81
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #26
Quote Originally Posted by MoneySRH:

Point out where I said "ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952." The FACT is the law is REAL and IS currently in place and CAN be enforced against Muslims! My advice to you is before you call someone out for not reading. You best be sure you can read yourself.  Did you fail to notice the writer’s conclusion was that the law goes against “Any accepted interpretation of Islam?”

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it, but it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." The word prescribed is in this verse.
Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
Quran (3:85) - “Muslims must not take the infidels as friends”
Quran (5:33) - “Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable”
Quran (8:65) - “Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Quran”
Quran (8:65) - “Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels”
Quran (9:30) - “When opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you find them”
Quran (9:123) - “The person and Christians are perverts, fight them”
Quran (22:19) - “Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood”

None of these verses are out of context, misconstrued, or need historical interpretation. The Quran itself claims to be clear and complete; you pedophile worshiper apologists speak of the "risks" of trying to interpret verses without “proper assistance." I don’t need assistance. I can read. The above is quite clear. The Quran is a prescriptive book for terrorism.

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. You can’t just ignore things away. You can’t just subjectively mitigate the verses so that the message fits your personal preference. This argument that it’s “mistaken interpretation” is a complete joke. Now go be a ghost troll again because I know I’m not getting any response real from you.


A very interesting website:

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2007
Posts: 5527
Posted: #27
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:

Rejection of Trump by big name republicans such as the Bushes show that Trump has divided the party.

 I know. I'm a meany for picking on you all the time. Take it as an opportunity to get informed. 

Let's take a closer look at what just happened this past year in the GOP.  

Trump, who had never held political office and had no experience in any political job, faced a field of sixteen tested political leaders, including nine governors and five senators from major states. Most of his political opponents were conservatives. During the primaries, several hundred million dollars were spent in negative campaign ads, nastier and more personal than in any Republican primary in memory. At least 60,000 of those ads were aimed at Trump, attacking him as a fraud, a corporate predator, a not-so-closet liberal, an ally of Hillary Clinton, indistinguishable from Barack Obama, an ignoramus, and too crass to be president.

And in spite of this all out assault to stop him. Trump won. And he won in a landslide. A blowout. It was never close. 

So yeah you are right, the GOP was divided. And then it was f%cking conquered.



 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #28
Quote Originally Posted by MoneySRH:

Point out where I said "ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952." The FACT is the law is REAL and IS currently in place and CAN be enforced against Muslims! My advice to you is before you call someone out for not reading. You best be sure you can read yourself.  Did you fail to notice the writer’s conclusion was that the law goes against “Any accepted interpretation of Islam?”



I cannot tell if you have bad reading comprehension skills or aren't that intelligent. Probably a little of both. 

Actually, you did state that the law allowed the banning of Muslims. 

And the author concluded with this:

The meme "ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952" claimed that adherence to Islam and/or Sharia law constituted definitive membership within an "organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by 'force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.'" Multiple non-factual statements or implications were presented in the meme, including the notions that all Muslims strictly adhere to Sharia law, that Sharia law is a cohesive faith-based form of governance, that adherence to Sharia law is mutually exclusive with adherence to the laws of the United States, that Islam in some way demands the eventual overthrow of the United States government, or that any "organization" to which Muslims purportedly belong by merit of their faith somehow places them under the provisions of section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. Not one of those assertions or implications is supported by extant law, precedent, or any accepted interpretation of Islam, United States immigration policy, or the act in question.
 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #29
Quote Originally Posted by MoneySRH:

 

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it, but it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." The word prescribed is in this verse.
Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
Quran (3:85) - “Muslims must not take the infidels as friends”
Quran (5:33) - “Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable”
Quran (8:65) - “Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Quran”
Quran (8:65) - “Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels”
Quran (9:30) - “When opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you find them”
Quran (9:123) - “The person and Christians are perverts, fight them”
Quran (22:19) - “Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood”

None of these verses are out of context, misconstrued, or need historical interpretation. The Quran itself claims to be clear and complete; you pedophile worshiper apologists speak of the "risks" of trying to interpret verses without “proper assistance." I don’t need assistance. I can read. The above is quite clear. The Quran is a prescriptive book for terrorism.

The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. You can’t just ignore things away. You can’t just subjectively mitigate the verses so that the message fits your personal preference. This argument that it’s “mistaken interpretation” is a complete joke. Now go be a ghost troll again because I know I’m not getting any response real from you.


Using your interpretations above, the law could be used to ban Christians too. 

But of the cities of these peoples which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance, you shall let nothing that breathes remain alive, but you shall utterly destroy them—the Hittite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, and Jebusite—just as the Lord your God has commanded you, lest they teach you to do according to all their abominations which they have done for their gods, and you sin against the Lord your God

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the [holy man] who represents God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged.


I will fill your mountains with the dead. Your hills, your valleys, and your streams will be filled with people slaughtered by the sword. I will make you desolate forever. Your cities will never be rebuilt. Then you will know that I am God.


Then I heard God say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children.”

If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death.

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

A [holy man’s] daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death.

Everyone who would not seek God was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.

Cursed be he who does God’s work remissly, cursed he who holds back his sword from blood.

Anyone who blasphemes God’s name must be stoned to death by the whole community of [believers].

Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2010
Posts: 8480
Posted: #30
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:


I cannot tell if you have bad reading comprehension skills or aren't that intelligent. Probably a little of both. 

Actually, you did state that the law allowed the banning of Muslims. 

And the author concluded with this:

The meme "ISLAM WAS BANNED FROM THE USA IN 1952" claimed that adherence to Islam and/or Sharia law constituted definitive membership within an "organization seeking to overthrow the government of the United States by 'force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.'" Multiple non-factual statements or implications were presented in the meme, including the notions that all Muslims strictly adhere to Sharia law, that Sharia law is a cohesive faith-based form of governance, that adherence to Sharia law is mutually exclusive with adherence to the laws of the United States, that Islam in some way demands the eventual overthrow of the United States government, or that any "organization" to which Muslims purportedly belong by merit of their faith somehow places them under the provisions of section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. Not one of those assertions or implications is supported by extant law, precedent, or any accepted interpretation of Islam, United States immigration policy, or the act in question.
What a joke. Anyone with basic reading comprehension can see what the writer said is subjective and complete and total BS. It DOES apply. The author is saying the law doesn’t apply to Muslims because according to “HIS interpretation” and “OTHER” Muslim pedophile terrorist apologist’s “interpretations,” the law doesn’t apply. My response to that was “None of the verses that declare war on non-believers are out of context, misconstrued, or need historical interpretation.

The Quran itself claims to be clear and complete; you murderous pedophile worshiper apologists speak of the "risks" of trying to interpret verses without “proper assistance." I don’t need assistance. I can read. The Quran is a clear prescriptive book for terrorism. The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule.

Like I said, you can’t just ignore things away. You can’t just subjectively mitigate the verses so that the message fits your personal preference. This argument that it’s “mistaken interpretation” is a complete joke. Islam or Sharia Law or the Hadith advocates infidels to submit or die, which refers to United States citizens. The Islamic faith requires total submission to Islam and its form of government. The law in question states that Aliens affiliated with any organization that advocates the overthrow of our government and its people are prohibited.

The Immigration and Nationality act can be used or 8 U.S. Code S 1182. If I was Trump, I’d use 8 U.S. Code S 1182. It applies to aliens that is engaged in or is likely to engage after entry in any terrorist activity or members of a political, social, or other group that endorses or espouses terrorist activity or endorses or espouses terrorist activity or persuades others to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or supports a terrorist organization or to have a physical or mental disorder and behavior associated with the disorder that may pose, or has posed, a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the alien or others. This law is much better.

The bible is passage you used is a writer describing the events and telling a descriptive story about what Moses said. That’s a silly argument. The bible is a descriptive book. The Quran is a prescriptive book. You can’t compare something descriptive to something prescriptive. Unreal. Big shot lawyer lacks reading compression skills and doesn't know the difference between descriptive and prescriptive. You suck as a lawyer.

 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #31
Quote Originally Posted by MoneySRH:

What a joke. Anyone with basic reading comprehension can see what the writer said is subjective and complete and total BS. It DOES apply. The author is saying the law doesn’t apply to Muslims because according to “HIS interpretation” and “OTHER” Muslim pedophile terrorist apologist’s “interpretations,” the law doesn’t apply. 



You typed in post 25, the following:
Did you fail to notice the writer’s conclusion was that the law goes against “Any accepted interpretation of Islam?” 


Now you're saying the writer's conclusion is BS? 

Reading comprehension! You can't make this stuff up. 
 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #32
Quote Originally Posted by MoneySRH:

 

The bible is passage you used is a writer describing the events and telling a descriptive story about what Moses said. That’s a silly argument. The bible is a descriptive book. 


It is? You mean the Ten Commandments are not prescriptive? 

You might have trouble convincing about 30 million pastors your above assertion. 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2003
Posts: 27850
Posted: #33
I guess if it's prescriptive than I guess the theocrats that seek to completely destroy the separation of church and state putting that on schools and govt buildings makes sense. 

Lol
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #34
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:


It is? You mean the Ten Commandments are not prescriptive? 

You might have trouble convincing about 30 million pastors your above assertion. 

OK DJbrow, Fill in the blank. The religious organization that causes the most turmoil worldwide is ______________?

Even Bill Maher gets it right. He earned a lot of my respect for telling it like it is.

Ben Affleck... Rich dude who surrounds himself with people that don't/won't challenge him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vln9D81eO60
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2003
Posts: 27850
Posted: #35
Quote Originally Posted by TILTOLOGIC:


 I know. I'm a meany for picking on you all the time. Take it as an opportunity to get informed. 

Let's take a closer look at what just happened this past year in the GOP.  

Trump, who had never held political office and had no experience in any political job, faced a field of sixteen tested political leaders, including nine governors and five senators from major states. Most of his political opponents were conservatives. During the primaries, several hundred million dollars were spent in negative campaign ads, nastier and more personal than in any Republican primary in memory. At least 60,000 of those ads were aimed at Trump, attacking him as a fraud, a corporate predator, a not-so-closet liberal, an ally of Hillary Clinton, indistinguishable from Barack Obama, an ignoramus, and too crass to be president.

And in spite of this all out assault to stop him. Trump won. And he won in a landslide. A blowout. It was never close. 

So yeah you are right, the GOP was divided. And then it was f%cking conquered.




Yes divided and conquered. 
5/4/16 is the day conservatism officially died 

I honestly feel bad for the GOP's that have spent their lives building a reputation and working hard in govt for people they represent to be completely discredited and humiliated.  And not by their own doing, they just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and regardless of their history, positions, reputation, hard work, etc, their own voting base abandoned them and wouldn't look at any of the reality of their record and instead sides with trump and his name calling like little marco, lying Ted or looked like complete sell outs with no integrity like Christie. 

All they have worked for in their life now gone because the GOP majority voting base is that emotion driven and rhetoric/talking point based and could be taken over by trump with no record of service to his country or consistent principles. 

I actually feel kinda bad for those guys because it's not their fault.  It really is the gullibility and emotional instability of GOP majority voting base in how they think and make decisions on who or what issues to support and oppose. 


 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #36
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


OK DJbrow, Fill in the blank. The religious organization that causes the most turmoil worldwide is ______________?

Even Bill Maher gets it right. He earned a lot of my respect for telling it like it is.

Ben Affleck... Rich dude who surrounds himself with people that don't/won't challenge him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vln9D81eO60

Ben Affleck or Donald Trump?

As for the the religious organization, which religion committed the second worst genocide ever just 20 years ago? Does that mean all Christians are killers?

And try not to 'disprove' this statement by saying your brother's roommate is Christian and not a killer. 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #37
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:


Ben Affleck or Donald Trump?

As for the the religious organization, which religion committed the second worst genocide ever just 20 years ago? Does that mean all Christians are killers?

And try not to 'disprove' this statement by saying your brother's roommate is Christian and not a killer. 


Both.

Are you speaking about Kosovo?

Wow I thought it was just darkhorse12 that liked to live in the past. 

I think it's safe to say that 90% + Christians strongly disapprove of genocide in these modern times. 

You watched the video and you're still trying to make the same argument as Ben Affleck? Wow
 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #38
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


Both.

Are you speaking about Kosovo?

Wow I thought it was just darkhorse12 that liked to live in the past. 

I think it's safe to say that 90% + Christians strongly disapprove of genocide in these modern times. 

You watched the video and you're still trying to make the same argument as Ben Affleck? Wow

20 years is the past that we are supposed to overlook? I'll keep that in mind when people are criticizing HCR for her husband. Better yet, when people are criticizing HCR for actions a few years ago. Its the past right?

I actually don't really care what Affleck says or Trump for that matter. You love Trump because he has an -R- after his name. I get it. If he said the said and did the same things with a -D- you would call him crazy. 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2007
Posts: 18777
Posted: #39
Quote Originally Posted by darkhorse12:

Where did I say it was faux's Bill O'Reilly slim? In fact the link clearly shows which O it is.

You knew what you were doing when you started this dumb thread.  You're very very sneaky and dishonest.
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #40
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:


20 years is the past that we are supposed to overlook? I'll keep that in mind when people are criticizing HCR for her husband. Better yet, when people are criticizing HCR for actions a few years ago. Its the past right?

I actually don't really care what Affleck says or Trump for that matter. You love Trump because he has an -R- after his name. I get it. If he said the said and did the same things with a -D- you would call him crazy. 

Once again you show you haven't been paying attention. I'm very much on record being very critical of Trump. Only reason I love Trump is because he aint Hillary OR Bill.

If Muslim religion as whole sorted out their anger problem and stopped killing apostates and nay sayers merely 4 years ago I would give them credit. Problem is, they aren't trending anywhere near sorting that out in the next 30 years.
 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #41
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


Once again you show you haven't been paying attention. I'm very much on record being very critical of Trump. Only reason I love Trump is because he aint Hillary OR Bill.

If Muslim religion as whole sorted out their anger problem and stopped killing apostates and nay sayers merely 4 years ago I would give them credit. Problem is, they aren't trending anywhere near sorting that out in the next 30 years.

Please link me to one story where the Muslim religion killed anyone. There are plenty of examples of Christians, J-E-W-S, and yes, Muslims killing people. Which is exactly my point...examples of individuals killing others. When the Christians were killing the Muslims 20 years ago, were you saying the Christian religion killed the Bosnians? 

As for Trump, you did criticize his personality, yet once it was clear he would be the nominee, you defend him to no end.
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2004
Posts: 10738
Posted: #42

Quote Originally Posted by 165yds:

You knew what you were doing when you started this dumb thread.  You're very very sneaky and dishonest.

Well you posted here so ............

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #43
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:


Please link me to one story where the Muslim religion killed anyone. There are plenty of examples of Christians, J-E-W-S, and yes, Muslims killing people. Which is exactly my point...examples of individuals killing others. When the Christians were killing the Muslims 20 years ago, were you saying the Christian religion killed the Bosnians? 

As for Trump, you did criticize his personality, yet once it was clear he would be the nominee, you defend him to no end.

Since you have chosen to use the red herring to argue with me, ( somehow I don't remember saying all Muslims are murderers ) I am going to answer your question with a question. I'll even make it multiple choice for you.

Worldwide, which religion is statistically the most dangerous to leave?

A. Christian
B. Hindu
C. Judaism
D. Muslim
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:


Please link me to one story where the Muslim religion killed anyone. There are plenty of examples of Christians, J-E-W-S, and yes, Muslims killing people. Which is exactly my point...examples of individuals killing others. When the Christians were killing the Muslims 20 years ago, were you saying the Christian religion killed the Bosnians? 

As for Trump, you did criticize his personality, yet once it was clear he would be the nominee, you defend him to no end.

Lets keep score then for one month eh? What are the stakes?

Here's my tracking site: www.thereligionofpeace.com

 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #45
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


Since you have chosen to use the red herring to argue with me, ( somehow I don't remember saying all Muslims are murderers ) I am going to answer your question with a question. I'll even make it multiple choice for you.

Worldwide, which religion is statistically the most dangerous to leave?

A. Christian
B. Hindu
C. Judaism
D. Muslim

The only red herring in this thread was the following comment:

<<If Muslim religion as whole sorted out their anger problem and stopped killing apostates and nay sayers merely 4 years ago I would give them credit.>>

Do you understand why it was a red herring?

As for the rest of your thread, I have no idea what you mean. 
 
Covers Referee
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2004
Posts: 15596
Posted: #46
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:


Lets keep score then for one month eh? What are the stakes?

Here's my tracking site: www.thereligionofpeace.com



You are using a site that says the following:
TROP is a non-partisan, fact-based site that examines the ideological threat that Islam poses to human dignity and freedom.

Why not just use your brother who knows a violent Muslim as your example. 



 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2008
Posts: 5625
Posted: #47
Thats interesting that Bill Maher sees it the same way as I do and the website.

Deflection!
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 6178
Posted: #48
The Republican Party destroyed the Republican Party by pandering to liberal causes and putting up stiffs like McCain & Romney. Trump will smoke Madam Corruption in November and things will be wrecked and they need to be wrecked...
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2003
Posts: 27850
Posted: #49
5/4/16. The day conservatism died 

It's funny to see the revisionist history here.  The GOP did not destroy itself by pandering to liberal causes.

The GOP base itself stopped believing in conservative principles and voted based on their beliefs or lack there of. 

It's always funny how some people believe in personal accountability and responsibility while others do everything they can to try to break the connect between peoples actions and outcomes 
 
 
Covers Rehab
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 33996
Posted: #50
Quote Originally Posted by Killer_B:

The Republican Party destroyed the Republican Party by pandering to liberal causes and putting up stiffs like McCain & Romney. Trump will smoke Madam Corruption in November and things will be wrecked and they need to be wrecked...



Isn't that he truth  ...
All Forums | Politics
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2025 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.