I wasnt talking out of my ass, I dont comment on things I know nothing about. I am familiar with this topic and thus I felt like commenting.



Prager consistently espouses the neoconservative line on both foreign and domestic affairs, including championing the Iraq War and hardline Israeli policies. In a December 2003 op-ed for the WSJ titled "Ten Lessons from Saddam Hussein's Capture," Prager says: "America is the greatest force for good on the planet. America, with the support of Britain and some other countries, and against the rest of 'world opinion,' liberated Iraq from evil." "The positive effect on humanity of good vanquishing evil cannot be overstated. ... Many on the Left are ... not particularly happy [with Saddam's capture]. Saddam's capture is a victory for American force and for George W. Bush, and the Left hates both more than it hates Saddam. ... Most of the Left does not hate evil; hatred of evil is primarily found on the Right. ... For years leading up to 9/11, Islamists were respected for their increasing power and America was losing respect as it suffered blows at the hands of Islamic terror. Now America is seen as the powerful one, and is earning the respect once accorded Saddam and Osama. The importance of this cannot be overstated."

There's also the controversy surrounding Congressman Keith Ellison, the first Muslim to be elected to Congress, who Prager argued should not be allowed to be sworn in to office using the Koran instead of the Bible, because it "undermines American civilization". He wrote that it would be "an act of hubris that perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist activism—my culture trumps America's culture. What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book. Forgive me, but America should not give a hoot what Keith Ellison's favorite book is."



I post those to provide comedic relief/make a particular point not cause I cant articulate my views. Quite the contrary. I learned a long time ago on these forums to pick and choose my battles and not to engage in every single debate that comes up because you will quickly find yourself in the same dragged out discussion usually with the same people on the same topic, and in the end nothing gets accomplished as usual because both camps are entrenched in their own personal views. It's the same song and dance over and over again (I'm sure you can relate). I dont have the leisure time to devote to this.



Believe it or not, I have listened to various podcasts from both Prager and the LDS Church along with reading their op-ed's and books on different subject matter. Their not on my favorites list, but I do listen and read random things I like that on occasion. I give people a chance to voice their different viewpoint (regardless of what it is) before I make my own personal judgement on a matter.

I'm not a partisan anything. I have voted for more conservatives than liberals in my lifetime. Actually since graduating from business school, I have been working at the pleasure of a very prominent conservative.


My comment dealt with private institutions (Harvard, Standford, Yale, etc). Yes, the mainstream media does have a liberal bias.



I live in an evidenced based world and thus rely on hard data (numbers, statistics, history, etc) to make my policy decisions. It just so happens that liberals are more often than not (not always on the correct side of the evidence. I am not in the bag for anybody with anything beside their name, I care about what I think is right and who will be the best person to carry that out.

You on the other see everything blindly through the prism of your religious beliefs and base all your views through it.