Well, why was it OK for you to scream foul then, but not for others to
question the list now?

I think Bruce summed it up quite nicely.  It seems that the rules are
different depending on who is involved.  If a group of white guys put
together a list of potential candidates and they were all white, Sharpton
and others would be up in arms about how its racist.  White, black, Muslim,
Jew, whatever...if you have a list of people and they all have a similar
trairt (liek religion, race, gender, etc), its biased and its bullshit.  Now
way a Muslim will always be the best person, nor white, nor male, nor Jew..I
think you get the point.

On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Larry Lyons <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> >And I bet you sat quitely and did not voice your opinion? My point was not
> >that it didn;t happen, but that it did nopt happen without people getting
> up
> >in arms (as they should have - and as I think they should now).
> >
>
> Nope I did object, especially when unqualified republican idiots were put
> into positions of authority making decisions over scientific research.
>
> Another thing to consider which the other posts by some did not mention,
> how many of these people on your objectionable list have been appointed. BTW
> why so offended, is it because they were Islamic?  Last I looked none of
> these people have been appointed to a federal job. At this point in the
> first Shrub term, there were over 50 from equivalent lists from Focus on the
> Family and several right to life groups who were already appointed to
> equivalent positions.
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to 
date
Get the Free Trial
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:293875
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to