Originally Posted By JohnS1 "In Europe if you pulled this sort of stunt, you'd be disgraced and out of office" Don't they still have outdoor plumbing in Europe?
Originally Posted By woody >>In this country, these politicians seem to feel a need to wear their beliefs on their sleeves. In Europe if you pulled this sort of stunt, you'd be disgraced and out of office.<< Do you want the US to be more like Europe? The politicians are pandering. There are many constituents to attract. Somehow, Obama and Hillary's religious pandering doesn't seem to both you. I give two reasons for that. (1) No matter what their religion, their politics are in line, thus pose no threat. (2) They are faking it. No religious threat is ever in question. Despite your disdain for Huckabee, he has governed as a secular politician. In many ways, very liberal as well.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Do you want the US to be more like Europe?" It would probably not be a bad thing. "Somehow, Obama and Hillary's religious pandering doesn't seem to both you." I don't see them doing it as much, but any of it is very distasteful and inappropriate.
Originally Posted By Jetlag "Don't they still have outdoor plumbing in Europe?" Only in the trailer parks. Oh...wait..
Originally Posted By woody <<"Somehow, Obama and Hillary's religious pandering doesn't seem to both you." <<I don't see them doing it as much, but any of it is very distasteful and inappropriate.<< How could you miss Obama's religious pandering? <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/28/AR2006062800281.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/28/AR2006062800281.html</a> "Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation. Context matters," the Illinois Democrat said in remarks to a conference of Call to Renewal, a faith-based movement to overcome poverty. "It is doubtful that children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance feel oppressed or brainwashed as a consequence of muttering the phrase `under God,'" he said. "Having voluntary student prayer groups using school property to meet should not be a threat, any more than its use by the High School Republicans should threaten Democrats." ... His speech included unusually personal references to religion, the type of remarks that usually come more readily from Republicans than Democrats. "Kneeling beneath that cross on the South Side of Chicago, I felt I heard God's spirit beckoning me," he said of his walk down the aisle of the Trinity United Church of Christ. "I submitted myself to his will and dedicated myself to discovering his truth."
Originally Posted By woody One more quote from the referenced link above. ... Obama coupled his advice with a warning. "Nothing is more transparent than inauthentic expressions of faith: the politician who shows up at a black church around election time and claps _ off rhythm _ to the gospel choir." At the same time, he said, "Secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering the public square." ... Are you ready for the polician that acts on faith?
Originally Posted By Mr X **Are you ready for the polician that acts on faith?** No need to get ready for that, I'm fairly certain most if not all of them use faith as a tool just like all the rest of their rhetoric. Nice slam by Obama to the White Man up there in post 26, by the way... Gee, he's not pandering or playing to a particular audience is he? (I'm white, and my rhythm is a hell of a lot better than his!)
Originally Posted By jonvn Actually, I hope Obama gets elected. Because when he gets in, ends up doing absolutely nothing and/or ends up getting shot, maybe it will make people realize they need to vote for individuals who actually have some reason for being on the job, and stop getting rid of anyone who are far more qualified just because they got a speeding ticket in 1978.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: Bravo, jonvn, duckling! By the way, my sisters and I are curious to know if you've done any investigations into Ron Paul?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I am hoping Obama gets elected and relapses.... Proof that what happened in the past is relevant to the character of a person.
Originally Posted By Maxxdadd As sick as the suggestion is that Obama might be shot, you are probably right Jon. Sooner or later, someone will do something stupid like assasinate a president, and then guys like Morva will be delighted in "knowing" they predicted it all along. It is easy to go ahead and predict that "Some disaster" will befall the US... because odds are, some disaster will strike. That certainly reflects no level of higher thinking for being correct in the matter. Disasters happen everywhere. As for Huckabee, I think it is actually more helpful when someone with an agenda does wear it on their sleeve... it is more honest and forthright, and makes it easier for those who oppose the agenda to recognize and vote accordingly. What is creepy is when someone like Hillary has a very socialized agenda, but tries to hide it in flip flops, obfuscation, and flat out lies. Unfortunately, I disagree Jon, that Obama getting killed would wake up a nation to vote for someone who has more reason to be in the job. American voters are not going to do that. They will just continue to vote on party lines or good looks or stupid reasons, like the color of their skin or their gender. I am just not sure if anyone can recognize a good candidate when they come along... and I am doubtful if anyone good would run anymore. It takes insanity to run for the job anymore.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Proof that what happened in the past is relevant to the character of a person." If you are going to exclude anyone who has not led a blameless life, then the only person you feel is qualified would be Jesus Christ. What I've seen of Ron Paul is that he appears sincere, and that he actually is a real conservative and says a lot of good things. But he seems to not understand the importance of the separation of church and state, and seems weak on the environment which is so critically important now, that even President Bush is starting to pay lip service. He's also anti-abortion. Otherwise, he has some very good ideas and opinions I strongly agree with. A lot of what he has to say is dead on right. The war on drugs, terrorism, immigration, civil liberties, taxes, and a whole list of other items. He's right. Very right. The problem is with him is that he sees the federal government as having an absolutely minimalist role in things. And while that sounds good, and probably in most cases IS good, many things we need to do today require action at the federal level. While it may be true that too much is attempted at the federal level, there needs to be a middle ground of common sense and base pragmatism. You don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The main problem with Dr. Paul is that he seems to want to ignore the Equal Protection Clause and say that states have the right to do things they really do not. That's a problem. I would like to vote for him, but his pro-life, anti-environment stance makes that very hard. The thing is would anyone ever run that would agree with me 100% on down the line? Probably not. So, you have to pick with whom you best agree with. I probably agree most with Edwards, but right now it does not look like he is getting anyplace, and even if he does, will he accomplish anything? For that matter, will Dr. Paul? At this point I am just about of the opinion that it simply doesn't matter who wins. My life won't change for the better, the government will continue to devolve, and our life in this country will continue to get worse. We're on a hardwired track straight to ruination and without a radical change in what we are doing and what we are saying, then nothing is going to stop it.
Originally Posted By jonvn "I disagree Jon, that Obama getting killed would wake up a nation to vote for someone who has more reason to be in the job." I would hope that it would cause some people to become more pragmatic in the electoral process, but that is certainly a pipe dream.
Originally Posted By Mr X **I am hoping Obama gets elected and relapses** Um, you are aware that Clinton smoked pot and Bush did coke right?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 If you are going to exclude anyone who has not led a blameless life, then the only person you feel is qualified would be Jesus Christ. << I disagree heavy cocaine use as a teenager is worse than minor use of marijuana or even extra-maritial affairs. My dad is a recovering addict and he still has urges to this day. He has said himself, you never fully break free of the binds of drugs. Is that really someone we want in the White House?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 Um, you are aware that Clinton smoked pot and Bush did coke right?<< No evidence Bush did coke, just Obama's comments from his own mouth that he used to be an addict.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Is that really someone we want in the White House?" If he will do a good job, I don't care if he likes to drink horse piss.
Originally Posted By woody >>Actually, I hope Obama gets elected. Because when he gets in, ends up doing absolutely nothing and/or ends up getting shot, maybe it will make people realize they need to vote for individuals who actually have some reason for being on the job, and stop getting rid of anyone who are far more qualified just because they got a speeding ticket in 1978.<< When Kennedy or Reagan got shot, people realized their greatness. I think we deserve our candidates. We want candidates that have good character, but Clinton got a pass. The people who drop out aren't the ones who can't handle a fight or smears. They don't have public support. Sometimes waiting out a scandal works, but it doesn't always.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I just don't like the idea of a recovering addict being arguably the most powerful man in the world. I mean as much as I hate Hillary Clinton, if I was forced to choose between the lesser of two evils, I would support Hillary Clinton and watch the military be destroyed, than have Obama in the White House.
Originally Posted By Mr X **Sooner or later, someone will do something stupid like assasinate a president** Impossible for an assassin to kill a sitting president these days...when's the last time anyone's ever even heard of a legitimate attempt? **I disagree heavy cocaine use as a teenager is worse than minor use of marijuana or even extra-maritial affairs. My dad is a recovering addict and he still has urges to this day. He has said himself, you never fully break free of the binds of drugs.** A drug is a drug. If what your Dad says is true, it certainly applies to smoke and alcohol as well. There's no such this as "minor", vs "major" use. Here's a video of George W. Bush completely drugged out... <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WwF76iMkDs" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =7WwF76iMkDs</a>
