[mrsmel]

sk a DUmmie what's a bigger threat.

A: The Muslim with a bomb strapped to their chest screaming "KILL KILL THE INFIDEL, JIHAD, DEATH TO AMERICA"

B: The little old Christian lady across the street who never bothers anyone.

They will all say B, They want to vent their hate and anger of a "soft" target. They know the little old lady will never hurt them, that's why they attack and berate them. They don't have the courage to stand up and speak out against the true threats.

Just like all these "brave" and "risk taking" filmmakers who bash Christians, they know that no harm will come to them from their pieces of celluloid garbage. They know deep down they a Christian won't plunge a dagger into their chest. They are cowards, all of them. They just want fame and people to love them. They don't want to actually take risks and put their pampered lives at risk by even saying a negative word about Islam.

Exactly! They're all mouth and no azz,that's why they won't actually go after the group that really would kill them, because they would kill them! So because they know what weasels they really are,they go after a "safe" target to feel better about their cowardice. That'll do them a lot of good,won't it,when the real murderers(jihadists) come after them. They won't have any choice but to take their heads out of the sand,so the jihadists can cut them off.

[William Tell]

mrsmel said: So because they know what weasels they really are,they go after a "safe" target to feel better about their cowardice. "

Yes.

This is perhaps a corollary to the practice pointed out by Ann Coulter. The Libs choose spokes-people who cannot be challenged because of their special status.

Sheehan is a bereaved mother of an Iraq casualty.

Brady is the near-widow of the injured Jim Brady.

Jackson is the "colored" reverend who sacrificed for civil rights in the not-quite-forgotten past.

Only a heartless Republican would challenge any of these people's right to pronounce what the government should do to improve the nation.