Originally Posted By ecdc >>Are they all nuts, too?<< Nope. Not nuts at all. Personally (and I know most disagree) I would argue that you're products of your culture. I personally think believing in this sort of thing doesn't make any sense, but I also understand the power of one's environment and surroundings. So, to use an example, I think it doesn't make any sense to believe in Santa Claus. But I also don't fault children who believe in it given that everything around them is telling them it's true. However, I do think adults ought to engage in a little bit more critical thinking. Josh, I don't have any problem with you believing these things. But again, you're an intelligent enough person to realize that one man's religion is another's superstition. You're intelligent and presumably educated enough to know about Egyptian Gods, Greek Gods, and even modern Gods like Vishnu or Allah. Further, you ought to be able to recognize that there's no difference between your evidence for your beliefs and the evidence for these other beliefs. As much as people want theirs to be "the right one" - they just have no way of knowing that. They can believe it, they can have faith in it, and they can hope for it with all their might. Good for them. But where they need to stop is when it starts hurting other people. You have to understand, on one level, I see, for example, the LDS attempt to shut down gay marriage as not all that different than flying the plane into the building. Of course on another level, they're very different things. But at it's core, it's a group of people who are so certain of themselves that they have no problem imposing their beliefs on another group to their own detriment. Finally Josh, I'll reiterate what I said above. If you want to believe a man walked on water, that's just fine. But just because you believe it, doesn't make it true. A lot of religious people seem to have tremendous difficulty with that simple truth.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Given some of the crap spewed by Obama's good Reverend Wright, I think Palin's religious idiosyncrasies don't seem so bad. I don't think she or her witch doctor ever God damned America.<< I've heard this argument pop up. There's one key difference here: Palin was being prayed over by the guy who believes in witches. She was there and an active participant. There's still no evidence that Obama was present when Wright said what he did. There's no evidence, and Obama's said quite the contrary, that he believes what Wright said. Big difference. BTW, RT, did you see the interview with Katie Couric? You're still on board, are you? (Serious question.)
Originally Posted By hopemax You can read about the work of Thomas Muthee in this 1999 Christian Science Monitor article. <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/1999/0923/p15s1.html" target="_blank">http://www.csmonitor.com/1999/...5s1.html</a>
Originally Posted By mele There are literal witches...they're Wiccans and nearly all of them believe in a "harm none" approach and have nothing to do with the Devil. I'm not sure what this video has to do with any of that. It was too irritating to watch and listen to. I do think praying against witches in this day and age is absurd. Some people would say that it's hate speech and just as intolerant of the Wiccan religion as evangelicals (or other Christian denominations) seem to be always accusing other people of doing. Maybe I'm just not understanding the point of this video? I was merely annoyed by the backwards playback but probably would have felt more uncomfortable with what the minister (?) was really saying. I grew up going to church and usually feel quite anxious when I hear sermons, etc. Even though it's not how I choose to live my life, I certainly don't think what was happening in this video is creepy or cultish. I guess I'm just not getting it?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<BTW, RT, did you see the interview with Katie Couric? You're still on board, are you? (Serious question.)>> No, frankly I did not. But then the last time I thought Couric was any good was when she was paired with Matt Lauer. Did Katie show Palin didn't know squat about hockey or something? That she really wasn't married to First Dude? That with or without lipstick, she had absolutely no similarity to a Pit Bull? If not, Couric was doing nothing but preaching to the choir. She did not change one vote. That is the thing about a candidate when her supporters expect nothing other than she be herself. Teflon baby, freaking Teflon. McCain is a genius.
Originally Posted By mele Maybe you should watch the video before you comment on it. Couric didn't have to do anything. She asked a question and Palin sputtered away. If anyone can watch that and think she should be VP, I feel very sorry for them.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>No, frankly I did not.<< Here's what you missed, Palin's quote on her dealings with Russia: "We have trade missions back and forth, we do. It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia. As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state." >>That is the thing about a candidate when her supporters expect nothing other than she be herself.<< It's good they expect nothing. That's what they got.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip VP's we've survived: Richard Nixon Spiro Agnew Gerald Ford Dan Quayle Dick Cheney If Palin can just look good and not actually try to do anything, she will be an improvement over the four I've listed above.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip ^^^ If I was voting for Obama I would probably still count. FIVE Vice Presidents -- not four.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan She isn't looking so good, RT. Watch the interview. Even Rush Limbaugh's site has no mention of it, not a word. There's nothing even he can find to spin. LOL
Originally Posted By hopemax Wait, doing my own math...does that mean that there is a 40% chance Sarah Palin does become President?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip If I was voting for Obama I would probably also have said could instead of would. Uppity Harvard stuff and all... ;-)
Originally Posted By dshyates Hey, she can believe in whatever she want. Witches, Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny, or the frickin' tooth fairy for all I care. But it is my vote that I get a voice with, and with that voice I will say keep the freaks out of office. And to answer Josh's question. Yes, nuts.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Well, you listed 5, and 2 of them went on to become President.>> Damn good point actually. One of the first I've heard here that wasn't based on flat-out hatred of Republicans. Hmmmm.....
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder And Cheney's been a co-president. And the obvious one argument- McCain will be the oldest president ever, health issues or not.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Damn good point actually.<< It is, but it's what people have been saying here for 4 weeks now, why the VP pick matters. All along that has been the issue: Is Sarah Palin ready to be president? It isn't about being vice president. In theory, anyone can be the second string quarterback if all you have to do is warm the bench. But it's critical that the VP nominee be ready to go immediately. We have had assinations and thwarted attempts and resignations and impeachments and terrorists attempting to crash a plane into the white house just in the 46 years I've been alive. It isn't unrealistic (let alone anti-Republican) to seriously consider a VP's qualifications. And qualifications are more than being folksy.
Originally Posted By dshyates "One of the first I've heard here that wasn't based on flat-out hatred of Republicans." What's not to hate? I just wish for a moment you could see the GOP through my eyes. Killing for profit of private corps. Creating a new class called the CEO Class with their trickle up theory. And economic warfare on the middle and lower class of the country by flooding the labor market with illegal labor and off shoring of manufacturing jobs. All that said, the Dems (Clinton) had their hands in a lot of what I mentioned and that is why I don't like them either.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<And economic warfare on the middle and lower class of the country by flooding the labor market with illegal labor and off shoring of manufacturing jobs.>> And don't forget the H1-B Visa program, or as I like to call it: no foreign white collar worker left behind. Patriotic Americans like Bill Gates are constantly lobbying for all H1-B caps to be removed. It must really kill him to think that some of his employees are still well paid.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<And to answer Josh's question. Yes, nuts.>> Its friendly remarks like this that keep people like Josh firmly in the GOP camp. The GOP certainly has contempt for people like Josh (true conservative, middle class), but they are at least smart enough to not insult him to his face.
