I have read multiple interviews with various imams, some western-based, some in islamic hell holes, kindly explaining to us that the koran existed from eternity, that the laws based on koranic teachings are therefore heavenly & 'man made' laws are "unjust" by definition, that BECAUSE the koran existed from all time it can never be changed, and therefore none of mohammad's teachings or sharia can ever be changed. As a result, the teaching that moslems MUST force all non moslems to convert or accept death or slavery (dhimmitude) can NEVER be changed....Moslems might have to wait indefinitely till they're strong enough to establish a global islamic state, but that *MUST* remain the goal of any and all true moslems .

So why don't leftists admit that this satiric video is expressing essentially the truth about islam? Are they so arrogant that they believe that these imams are just too ignorant to realize that what they *really* want is "economic justice" or a better sex life? Are leftists just incapable of taking religion seriously? Are they too lazy to read up on islam?

Or is it something worse?

There is a group of activist men online who call themselves "men's rights activists" or MRAs for short. That men are often treated unfairly in matters of divorce , custody, child support, accusations of abuse etc, is accepted as truth by many people including women. But a few of the MRAs seem to be less interested in fairness and more in re establishing male dominance. In the online MRA boards on which I lurk, I have read a few posts from MRAs who state that once sharia courts are established in their countries , that they intend to convert to islam and use these courts, believing these courts will be biased in favor of men, particularly in matters of custody or spousal support. Granted, talk's cheap...But is it just possible that these MRAs are not the only westerners hoping to use islam for their own gain? Are at least a few of the pro islam leftists not so much ignorant, as thinking THEY can feign conversion & then have power over 'society', both moslem and those westerners who will refuse to convert & so will be forced into dhimmitude? That leftists want to control everyone else's lives is a given; look how they tried to use AGW . Why not try to use islam as they are trying to use environmentalism?

A year or two ago, my cable company accidentally did the exact same thing! I was all set to watch me a good supernatural serial killer show (sometimes only a serial killer movie really hits the spot), and then that sap fest came on! I was so mad!

Or...was it an accident....?

Stephen King's early works (and The Stand is a VERY early work) treat blue collar and poor people with respect and as individuals. By the time his It was published, I noticed a tendency to put in little asides in to remind the reader that the author hob nobs with wealthy celebrities. This tendency grew until not only were most of his protagonists upper class, wealthy , successful people, but those of his characters which were not were often treated as degenerate failures and were mostly cardboard caricatures . IOW, as King became wealthy he associated with wealthy people, he began to take on their attitude towards middle class and working class people as his own, and it shows in his works.

The last figures I saw (this was from a few years back, maybe circa 2000-2002) had whites as only 33% of all welfare recipients nationwide-even though whites are 70+ % of the nation's population. Blacks, at only 12-13% of the nation's population, make up 36% of all welfare recipients nationwide. Asians were 2% of the nation's population but 6% of welfare recipients, the remaining 25% are divided between Latinos and everyone else (American Indians, Pacific Islanders, and *probably* unknowns/refused to say. )

So whites are no doubt the majority of welfare recipients in some largely white cities and states, but nationwide? Not even close.

Wouldn't surprise me. I have been reading comics since the early 1970s, and I have NEVER seen so much lickspittle adulation of a sitting president in all those years. Not just the "biography" comics, but the comics in which BHO made an appearance as a heroic figure, for pete's sake! Sure , presidents have always popped up in comics now and then as the plot demanded, but I have never seen a sitting president treated as a fantasy/action hero in my lifetime any way. And there were, what 5-6 comics doing that from 20008 on till maybe late 2009/early 2010. I guess lousy sales killed those comics-a sign of hope?

Me, too. The film was quite enjoyable, but all through it , I would think of the contrast between then and now, and various...THINGS...I read about daily (obamacare/"personal mandate" aka Death of the 13th amendment, flash mobs, attacks on the 2nd amendment, the debt debacle, unemployment-too many things to list, really...And my eyes kept stinging. But it was one of the best super hero movies I've seen. I thought it better than Thor (which I also enjoyed) and certainly better than Green Lantern (it's not good when , the first time the "hero" uses his power, you're hoping the unemployed men beat the crap out of him any way.)

First Iron Man was great, but I thought the first Spider-Man was pretty good too.

Yep, I mostly just buy GNs and TPBs these days....Right now, I buy Mice Templar, The Unwritten, Fables, and...that's about it. Every other purchase is a "nostalgia" buy : eg, DC Showcase TPBs of the horror comics I was reading as a child back in the 1970s, or collections of romance and crime comics from before my time (1930s-early 1960s).

I was really sorry to see Strangers in Paradise, the Sandman, Bone, and ElfQuest come to their respective demises. :-( but at least all those stories wrapped up . What I REALLY hate are the great story lines and comics (especially the self published/small publisher comics from the late 1980s-1990s) that just petered out. Disappeared. Just weren't showing up in Advance or Previews. A Touch of Silver, HepCats, Naughty Bits...too many to mention, really.

Pretty much all the collections, GNS, and archives being published today are readily attainable on amazon and for substantially less than cover price , but I am buying them at my one local comic book store to help keep the place going. I will do that for as long as I can afford to.

By the way, I am a 46 year old woman.

"Mohammedans"? For followers of islam? That doesn't make sense-their prophet's name was mahound ! ;-D

(I was reading a book published in 1972, and as late as that, mohammedan was used and apparently considered an acceptable, interchangeable term with moslem. It would be interesting to find out exactly when all that changed : I'm guessing late 1980s/early 1990s.)

I believe they actually HATE the moslem spelling and pronunciation...Which is why I use it, of course.

Apparently 'moslem' sounds somewhat like their word for oppressor, if you believe wikipedia:

"Until around the late 1980s, the word was commonly spelled Moslem. The spelling has since fallen into disuse. Muslims do not recommend this spelling because it is often pronounced "mawzlem" /mɒzlɛm/ which sounds somewhat similar to an Arabic word for "oppressor" (Za'lem in Arabic). The word is pronounced /muslem/ in Arabic, but often /mʊzlɪm/ in English. The word is now most commonly written "Muslim".

They may hate the obsolete 'musselman' even more, so perhaps that's the term we should be using.