Originally Posted By woody >>Uh, I said "moderates". So you quoted me wrong.<< In parenthetical. No, you're misrepresenting what you wrote. >>Democrats don't have that. Even their hatred of Bush (and tons of moderate Americans join them in it) doesn't seem to be enough to do it. Instead, they're like the party of dozens of special interest groups. It fractures them.<<
Originally Posted By woody BTW, Low approval rating for the President does not mean hate. You used the word Hate so you much know a lot about the subject.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Low approval rating for the President does not mean hate.<< Fair enough. But it sure doesn't mean love and support, either. Watching this campaign, I haven't seen people try to climb over each other in an effort to distance themselves from someone since the last time I watched a Pepe LePew cartoon.
Originally Posted By DAR I'm just wondering how many people realize that it's Hillary Clinton who's running for President and not Bill Clinton. And I'm sorry but observing your husband at the same job he did for eight years does not make you qualified for that job. That's like saying Deanna Favre could play quarterback in the NFL because she's watched Brett play all these years. And no this is not a "fear" of Hillary, the sad thing is that this might be the best we have to offer. Come next November the choices can be equated to to a punch to the stomach(Republicans) or a kick to the groin(Democrats) neither choice is appealing if you ask me.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 "I haven't seen people try to climb over each other in an effort to distance themselves from someone since the last time I watched a Pepe LePew cartoon." And when, exactly, did you watch this aforementioned cartoon, Toonie?"
Originally Posted By gadzuux As I've said, I carry no water for hillary, but I actually do think that serving as first lady for eight years is a valid qualifier. Especially for her - I think she had a greater day-to-day involvement in government affairs than, say laura or barbara bush or even nancy reagan and betty ford. But I agree with you when you say that hillary is not bill, and they don't necessarily have the same ideas when it comes to how best to run the country. Foremost is her almost pathological need to appear tough at all times - almost as an overcompensation for being a woman and a democrat, and her fear of appearing "soft". Many of my issues and concerns about her closely mirror the conservatives and their gripes. I think she's too shrewd and calculating for my taste, but without the warmth or charm of bill. She has charisma, but it's not a warm and welcoming kind. Still and all, we're electing a politician and she is one through and through. If she ends up with the nomination, she'll have my support. It's more important that the republicans are turned out of power - they deserve far worse things than they'll ever receive for how they've corrupted our government and turned our nation on each other for their own ends. And that has to stop.
Originally Posted By jonvn " I think she's too shrewd and calculating for my taste" True. Who would want someone shrewd in the White House. We've done so very well with a complete moron these last 8 years.
Originally Posted By jmoore1966 <<Conservative Christians are as scary as the other over-the-top religious zealots in other countries.>> I don't get this thinking at all. I'm not religious at all -- no faith, but I certainly don't have anything to fear from a Conservative Christian that I disagree with. The worst they are going to do is vote in a law I don't agree with. Have you been paying attention to what other religious zealots around the world do to people they don't agree with? I know many consider the beast at their doorstep more of a problem than the beast far away, but some of these statements are ridiculous.
Originally Posted By woody Being afraid of "Conservative Christians" ignores the real threat from violent extremest Muslims. Look at the Middle East with non-functioning, non-democratic Islamic governments. That's the result.
Originally Posted By barboy "Republicans have what essentially boils down to unity under hatred: hatred of gays, immigrants, and abortion." hatred of gays.... wrong hatred of immigrants..... depends hatred of abortion.... correct
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <Foremost is her almost pathological need to appear tough at all times < You mean that sort of Cowboy mentality ? Remind you or anyone ? That alone should scare ya
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Being afraid of "Conservative Christians" ignores the real threat from violent extremest Muslims. Look at the Middle East with non-functioning, non-democratic Islamic governments. That's the result.<< Ignoring the separation of chruch and state and creating fundamentalist religious that wish to exert their will over the populace also leads to non-functioning, non-democratic governments. So when people say they fear the mix of religious zealotry that sometimes comes from the Christian right, it is because it's easy to see how it can get out of hand pretty quickly. As violent as Muslim extremists? Nope. But in terms of affecting liberties of others in the name of their narrow interpretation of religious family values, you betcha.
Originally Posted By woody >>Ignoring the separation of chruch and state and creating fundamentalist religious that wish to exert their will over the populace also leads to non-functioning, non-democratic governments.<< Isn't that happening in America where the Liberals are ignoring the separation of Church and State of the Muslim religion? In fact, the liberals are actively promoting the Muslim religion in the name of diversity while keeping a short lease of anything resemblying religious expression of Christians. >>So when people say they fear the mix of religious zealotry that sometimes comes from the Christian right, it is because it's easy to see how it can get out of hand pretty quickly. << Goodness, any Christian who are expressing themselves by exercising their 1st Amendment rights are a threat to Liberals and Democrats. It doesn't take very much to get under the skin of Liberals, which they are very much promoting, I suspect, the less threatening Liberal Christianity religion since the politics are so similar. Zeolotry for you, not for me. Liberals are more afraid of Christians than Muslims.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Liberals are more afraid of Christians than Muslims.<< I'm not afraid of either one. What does worry me is when religion starts to tamper in governmental business, or when politicians running for office wear their religion on their sleeve as a tool to get more votes. >>Goodness, any Christian who are expressing themselves by exercising their 1st Amendment rights are a threat to Liberals and Democrats.<< More shadow boxing. No one said anything of the kind. >>Isn't that happening in America where the Liberals are ignoring the separation of Church and State of the Muslim religion?<< Can you clarify this, or give a specific example?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>the liberals are actively promoting the Muslim religion in the name of diversity<< They are? How so? Where is this happening? Examples?
Originally Posted By woody The lack of "separation of chruch and state" is most evident in these examples for Muslims. Of course, the opposite has occurred for Christians where they were expelled. ----- <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070829/NATION/108290057/1002" target="_blank">http://www.washingtontimes.com /article/20070829/NATION/108290057/1002</a> School to provide Muslim students with foot baths By Andrea Billups August 29, 2007 DEARBORN, Mich. — Plans to construct two foot-washing stations continue at the University of Michigan at Dearborn amid concerns that such action would constitute an establishment of religion by the public university. --------- <a href="http://www.smartpastor.com/2007/09/foot-washing-le.html" target="_blank">http://www.smartpastor.com/200 7/09/foot-washing-le.html</a> Savannah State University in Georgia is facing a lawsuit from the Christian campus group it expelled after the university decided the group's practice of foot-washing was a form of hazing. On Aug. 24, a federal judge denied the school's request to have the entire case dismissed. The student group is called Commissioned II Love, and was given official-organization status by the university in 2003. It was later suspended after some students complained that the group's practices were cult-like – specifically, the foot washings and baptisms. The group was expelled in 2006.
Originally Posted By woody >>More shadow boxing. No one said anything of the kind.<< You said much. Ridiculous as it is.
Originally Posted By woody Diversity for Muslims.... "The university, in a statement posted on its Web site, said the foot baths reflect a "strong commitment to a pluralistic society" and "a reflection of our values of respect, tolerance and safe accommodation of student needs." <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070829/NATION/108290057/1002" target="_blank">http://www.washingtontimes.com /article/20070829/NATION/108290057/1002</a>
Originally Posted By woody More Muslim accommodation. Gosh, no separation of church and state. The ACLU has twisted the argument completely on its head. I hope they will lighten up on Christian in the same spirit, but probably not. ---- <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-07-25-muslim-special-treatment-from-schools_N.htm?csp=34" target="_blank">http://www.usatoday.com/news/n ation/2007-07-25-muslim-special-treatment-from-schools_N.htm?csp=34</a> Barry Lynn, of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, says however that the law is murky on these expressions of faith. And the American Civil Liberties Union says overt religious symbols like crucifixes are not legal, but whether Muslim foot baths and prayer rugs fall into that category is not clear. "That's a difficult one, and it's right on the edge," says Jeremy Gunn, director of the ACLU program on freedom of religion and belief in Washington, D.C. --- Yeah, very difficult. Double Standards galore.
