During the 9/11 search and rescue and recovery, two beams that were found were connected in the form of a cross. It became a symbol of hope (just like the flag that stood in the rubble) for the rescuers.
It is now on display in the 9/11 memorial with other artifacts.
Buuuuut…….one of those…
FUck, I just hate all these atheists coming in with their Constitution and their ideals upon which the country was founded and their understanding of how secular principals in government is actually beneficial for all religions because they’re just really draggin me down. I can’t fucking believe they’re making me confront my illusions by forcing me to acknowledge that not every single person in America believes in the particularly narrow vision of God that I do. It’s so unfair! Why can’t I just go on marginalizing everyone who is not exactly like me and, at the same time, using their tax dollars to actively promote my religious superstitions!? WAH!
Two were injured, both survived.
I heard about it from USAToday, Politico, ABCNews, The Washington Post, The Huffington Post, CNN, Slate, Fox News, NBCNews, CBS News, the Miami Herald and it was the top trending story on Twitter for a while.
The number one comment I saw about this story from conservatives: The liberal media is blacking out coverage of this.
Dispatches from the bubble, ladies and gentlemen.
There’s a campaign going around among Ron Paul supporters. It’s not a campaign to not vote. It’s not a campaign to write-in Ron Paul’s name on Election Day.
It’s a campaign to actually cast a vote for Barack Obama.
The reasoning they give is that America deserves to be destroyed by Obama since we didn’t nominate Ron Paul.
A prime example of how dangerous selfishness and stubbornness are.
Here, dear readers, we have a prime example of the paranoid delusions of a right-wing nutcase. This particular specimen, leftybegone (a name that fully reveals his myopic, black-and-white, nuance-free worldview) puts forth, with no evidence or reason, just a demand his readers accept his authority on this issue, the idea that Ron Paul supporters
A) Think Obama will “destroy America”
B)That Paul supporters, like the league of shadows, welcome this destruction in order to usher in a new era of balance. I mean, I agree that libertarian ideals would result in a dystopian nightmare, but I don’t think they’re in favor of the America being destroyed before they can achieve the change they want.
C) That Paul supporters are going to vote for Obama or that there is any movement, small or large. Where’s the evidence? Where’s the supporting link? Is this idea sprung from his imagination fully formed or is there a shred of overheard conversation that resulted in this snowballing terror?
The last line of his post, I find very interesting. It betrays so much about his image and this post. For starters, it’s not “a prime example,” because it’s not an example at all, it’s a straw-man claim and a bizarre one at that. It’s not selfish to vote for a candidate who is running for office. It seems like it would be more selfish and stubborn to write in the name of someone not even on the ballot. But even if I were to accept that this was a real phenomena, that Paul supporters think that Obama will destroy America and want the destruction of America so they can rebuild a libertarian fantasy land, how is this an example, prime or otherwise, or selfishness? It sounds to me like he’s talking about an (imaginary) fringe who would rather sacrifice the comfortable society they live in, a rebuilding process that could take longer than their individual lifespans, just to institute what they see as real freedom.
It may be stubborn and wrong, but I don’t think it stems from a place of selfishness. Sounds pretty selfless.
This guy is fractally wrong, every little shard of his comment is based on false premises, lies, fear, exaggerations, hyperbole.
He’s a “prime” (cliche repeated for emphasis) example of how silly the thought process of the right-wing blogger with a boner for fox news can be.
Here’s why this is sexist. By presuming that men are so dumb that they can’t handle grocery shopping and need it simplified is to consent to the stereotype that women are to be responsible for grocery shopping. In other words, it’s a special case when a man goes shopping, they need to be coddled and specially accommodated because it’s women’s work. Women are supposed to be doing that, but in the rare instance your female servant is incapacitated, here’s an aisle for you. When your personal assistant recovers, she’ll resume this duty.