Patterico's Pontifications

Well, he and Obama can compare notes on the economies they were left by GWB.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:27 pm

He’s so dumb and weird. Ignore his accomplishments.

/The Best Democrat Argument In The World

Anyway, I like his approach to financing and administration. I remember how he approached Rita. Texas has been hit with a lot of bad luck in the past several years, from weather to the EPA, and we’re still doing quite well anyway. I think had our government reacted less effectively, or more intrusively, we wouldn’t be relatively OK.

So he’s good at nuts and bolts. He’s solid on policy. They say he’s a hard worker, which is a huge change from Obama, who seems to hate his job.

What I want to know is: What would Perry do about Iran, specifically? What would he do about Somalia? Syria? I need to hear solutions, and I personally do not know of any really good ones.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:33 pm

#1 ding ding ding that will be interesting

Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:34 pm

Heh, AD.

Gig’em, Rick.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:34 pm

Dustin,

Rick Perry, hawk internationalist.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:35 pm

I like him for mostly one particular reason. Cause of how Obama has waged a vicious war against Texas. This is a first-they-came-for-Texas thing I think, and I’m glad to see him take the fight straight to bumble, and I hope people everywhere understand they have a stake in the outcome.

The federal government is a bully anymore, and it’s time someone kicked its ass. That someone is Rick Perry.

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:40 pm

TOTUS is going to catch on fire, what with all the spinning it’s going to need to do.
Work it, work it totus. Work. Work to left. Work. Work to the right.

Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:41 pm

Perry or Romney
colonel will cast his vote for
the Last Man* Standing

*or Woman

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:45 pm

Thank you, DRJ.

It’s been great reading your commentary again, btw.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:45 pm

Comment by happyfeet — 8/12/2011 @ 5:40 pm

And if he isn’t, your favorite ex-governor is.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:46 pm

pickles.

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:47 pm

It’s about damned time…

Scott Jacobs (6ab327) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:51 pm

Hey there Blackburnsghost
you left out stand up, sit down
fight fight fight part, damn

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:52 pm

If you look at Perry’s behavior for the past few years, I think it’s easy to see he’s been running for president that entire time.

Yet it probably surprised the hell out of Obama’s campaign to realize they are running against him instead of Romney. They are basically on record trying to paint Romney as weird, so they look nasty and pathetic and got nothing for the trouble.

He’s really held the line on many issues, too. Much of his plan so far has been to actually show us how he will try to do his job by doing it in Austin.

I think we are looking at someone who can plan ahead and show discipline in following that plan. I’ve never really loved the guy, just for whatever petty reason, but his record is strong.

In your head, sit him next to Obama and pretend you are interviewing them for absolutely any position of responsibility.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:54 pm

I hope that Texas post-Bush exhaustion doesn’t work against him. It might be of concern as I’ve read him described as Texas on steroids.

I think it will be Romney and Perry. I’d vote for either. Heck, I’d even vote for Newt, holding my nose while I did.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:56 pm

Ya think we’ve had enough Texans? It seems like every presidential election lately is full up with Texans. Ya can’t swing a cat without banging into two or three of ’em.

ropelight (9ee20b) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:57 pm

Texas is the future it makes the jobs and it makes no apologies

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 5:59 pm

Things in TX do seem to be a little “larger than life”, don’t they.
But, look at the bright side.
We won’t have Ron Paul to kick around any more after next year.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:00 pm

I know people want specifics from candidates and get frustrated by talking points etc.

But frankly we need a true conservative in office, with GOP majorities in both houses, who will do what you can’t campaign on – drastically cut & streamline entitlement programs, and drastically overhaul our tax system. Just saw a news piece today, that showed a 100% increase in SSI disability benefits recipients over 20 yrs. Unbelievable.

And we need someone who can get really tough w/ Iran etc – but obviously we don’t want to play our hand before we do that.

So what I want – what I know we absolutely must have – is someone of such good character and integrity – but even more importantly, a true Christian – who knows – KNOWS in his gut, that he will be going up against the pure evil that has infected the White House. We need a warrior. I really think Perry has the fire in the belly – and the spiritual discernment – to do it.

And for those agnostics & the can’t-stand-evangelicals folks out there – really, what would Perry do, as an evangelical, that would harm America? I think we’ve had enough of godless Marxism. If there wasn’t so much at stake, I’d have no problem with nice guy Mitt as President (not that he’d be my #1 pick). But he’s no match for the Soros/Obama machine, and the fawning, sycophantic press.

The next election will not be a normal presidential election – it will be brutal. Look at the race mobs we have already. The Great Divider will only make it worse.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:02 pm

My real #1 pick would be Congressman/Lt Col Allen West. I’ll have to settle for him as VP.

Perry/West 2012!

Miranda (4104db) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:05 pm

The Texas Governor has a lot of advantages.

The state legislature won’t be in session for quite a while, so it’s harder for little tricks to come up and force him to deal with a pesky issue when he gains steam.

Yet he’s still doing a full time job running a state larger than most countries.

He’s even seen the credit rating go up on his watch.

And while Texas is bright red thanks largely to the polarization post Bush v Gore, I think it’s not a state where a hard right ideologue can get away with being an idiot. We’re pretty picky. If he’s managed to survive this long, he’s a great politician.

But it would be unwise to get too invested in him before he’s debated. I also think it’s time to see Romney actually attack an active competitor to his face. It’s easy to attack Obama in the middle of a GOP debate (And Romney is great at it), but let’s see him strike a target that strikes back. Same for Perry.

Obama will indeed strike back, and harder than any politician has ever slung mud in American history, I bet. It is the only play he’s got.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:06 pm

Apparently, Rick Perry’s personal life has been gutted and he’s come out squeaky clean, so the other side will have to find a target to hit him on, but geez, this just seems weak.

“His record will get scrutinized,” David Axelrod, senior political adviser to President Barack Obama, said Friday. Axelrod suggested Perry was taking too much credit for Texas’ relatively healthy economy and job creation.

“He’s been the beneficiary down there of the boom in oil prices and increased military spending because of the wars,” Axelrod said on CBS’ “Early Show.” “I don’t think many people would attribute it to the leadership of the governor down there.”

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:08 pm

Rick Perry, hawk internationalist.

Comment by DRJ — 8/12/2011 @ 5:35 pm

Yes, many thanks, DRJ. This was what I was hoping to see proof of. I suspected, and hoped.

If I can’t have Allen West, I’ll be delighted to pull the lever for Mr Perry.

And I’ll hold my nose and pull it for anyone but Obumbles *sigh* Enough is enough.

that annoying morning person we all hate (1df0c8) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:10 pm

ack…off morning person we hate sock..jeeze

ppk_pixie (1df0c8) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:11 pm

Apparently, Rick Perry’s personal life has been gutted and he’s come out squeaky clean, so the other side will have to find a target to hit him on, but geez, this just seems weak.

That goes to Miranda’s point. It’s pretty amazing that Perry has been under so much scrutiny with so little moral scandal. He’s got a couple of mistakes from a libertarian perspective, sure, but no moral turpitude. He seems like a bona fide decent human being.

Also, Dana, it’s important to note that Texas has a weak governorship, and an attitude of staying out of the way of the economy.

David Axelrod is right. Texas is prosperous not because the Governor personally led us. It’s prosperous because Texas knows better than to let the government get in the way.

Axelrod is dead wrong to claim Texas just got lucky, though. We’ve basically been under attack by our own federal government as well as mother nature to some extent. We’re in a near-depression and border a nearly warlike country of gangs Obama is practically arming.

It is an accomplishment that Texas is doing so well, and if Axelrod and Obama want to sneer at that, they had better try to match our record. Which they can’t, and that probably stings.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:12 pm

Don’t forget that the Bush clan wasn’t too happy with Perry not so long ago. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison ran against Perry in the ’10 primary. Think of that – a sitting Senator, running against an incumbent Gov, in the primary. Crazy.

And who supported & officially endorsed Hutchison over Perry? The Bush clan. Let’s not forget that they were also pushing bland, mumbly, unassuming Indiana Gov Mitch Daniels to run for Pres. Daniels has done a nice job as Gov – but to run for Pres against Obama? seriously? No way – even without the family drama he had.

In Texas Perry is known as the anti-Bush. But it looks like GWB & Perry have resolved their differences – I watched the Halperin interview of Perry for the TIME article – Perry called GWB on his b’day & got encouragement from him to run for Pres. Good for him to put that out publicly.

I do feel more hopeful about our chances now than ever before – that’s for sure.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:15 pm

Mr. Perry is the hope and change candidate for an America what been down so so long, what been down in decline, what been down in despair, what strayed from the path of prosperity.

What Mr. Perry gonna do?

Mr. Perry gonna put America back to work, he gonna make America feel confident again, make America feel strong.

Sing it Sister Tharpe tell us how it gonna be.

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:18 pm

Think of that – a sitting Senator, running against an incumbent Gov, in the primary. Crazy.

It really is. There’s an old little alignment in Austin with Rove and Rylander and Bush. Lots of weird little deals. Perry is an outsider to that. Not that he’s somehow better, but he’s certainly in a different clique. If you recall, Rylander (or Strayhorn… I can’t remember her damn name anymore, but she’s the mother of Scott McClellan, Bush’s press secretary for a time and IMO the worst in history) also ran against Perry for Governor and was quite hostile about it.

I actually really like Mitch Daniels. But that ship has sailed. I admit I think Perry would be a stronger opponent to Obama in today’s media climate. He just looks like a president.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:20 pm

Colonel
It didn’t fit into auto-totus

Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:20 pm

Mitch Daniels would’ve been the best of the lot he’s smarter than anyone else Team R has even fantasized about fielding in 2012 and he’s got a stronger record to back it up.

I hope Mr. Perry puts Mr. Daniels to work for America in his administration. Be damn surprised if he didn’t, actually.

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:22 pm

Romney/Rubio in 2012!

Change We Can Afford

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:23 pm

That’s a crazy clan, the McClellan’sover there, with Kennedy conspiracist Barr, with mama Carol,
and Hoss (Scott) and the other one, Dustin.

Crassus (81c5c2) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:25 pm

Yes, Crassus. One thing you can say about Austin politics is that we do not like it boring.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:28 pm

Mitch Daniels is too short to be president.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:28 pm

==And I’ll hold my nose and pull it for anyone but Obumbles *sigh* Enough is enough==

Oh god, yes Pixie. I look forward to a fair and instructional and well fought primary season that produces a quality presidential candidate that R’s and independents can support. But I will stroke out if we have to go through another general election with some purist R’s saying “so and so is just not conservative enough–we might as well have a Dem as to have a RINO.” I truly hope people who said that last time have learned the illogic of that argument after experiencing Barry the Marxist in the White House.

elissa (986262) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:30 pm

Just watched the IA Fair video of Palin up over at HotAir…
a lot of questions about last night’s debate…
a reporter incredulous that Palin would claim that the media didn’t vet Obama in ’08…
some serious security Dudes keeping the press of the press away, and Todd right there to make sure it all worked (I wonder if he brought those guys down from the North Slope?)…

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:30 pm

Colonel say yeah, love
can be found in Austin at
Texas Rose Café

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:31 pm

Sock off, I think that was Michael Shear,(sic) at least he wrote it that way.

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:33 pm

==.Mitch Daniels is too short to be president.==

Rahm may not agree with that. (The too short part, I mean.)

elissa (986262) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:35 pm

When the chips were down, Allen West turned his back on the TEA Party and voted to raise the debt limit to give Obama a blank check for Trillions. West isn’t trustworthy. He talks the talk, but he doesn’t walk the walk.

ropelight (9ee20b) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:36 pm

walking and talking at the same time is tricky

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:39 pm

Yep, especially when someone’s talkin’ out of both sides of their mouth at the same time.

ropelight (9ee20b) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:52 pm

I think Allen West made a mistake. His choice came early. He isn’t perfect. He probably is not as savvy about these deals as others in politics.

You won’t find a more patriotic human being, though. Give him a little time, and perhaps his future votes on budget deals will be more impressive.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 6:56 pm

Let’s see, we went to the same school; had about the same GPA; similar background growing up; he was a yell-leader, I watched the yell-leaders; he was in the Corps, I wasn’t; he was a pilot, not me; Conservative and check.

What’s not to like?

I did meet him once. I would still vote for him over Obama.

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:02 pm

Mr. West is fine with me I don’t see any reason to make him a vp candidate anytime soon though let’s see if he can hold his seat first

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:03 pm

but Mr. Perry is in now so all the other candidates need to go away thank you for playing

Mr. Perry got this

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:04 pm

…except, happyfeet, we still don’t know whether or not Palin will throw in, too. That would certainly weed out the majority. I would see Romney, Perry, Bachmann and Palin, with Bachmann first to go from that group.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:12 pm

I actually don’t know much about him. The GOP has been starved for someone who combines style and substance a la Reagan. Maybe he’s the one.

Gerald A (9d78e8) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:13 pm

==Give him a little time==

I agree with that, Dustin. I like his style and hope West is being well mentored–along with the rest of the class of 2010. Not “mentored” in the sense of being shaped or brainwashed. But mentored in the sense of helping them get the lay of the land and learning whom they can trust and not trust–and having a discreet sounding board when needed.

elissa (986262) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:14 pm

The bagger King.

Bring it.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:15 pm

Palin’s negatives are too high she’s simply not viable

and once she announces the negatives only go in one direction

I see Perry and Romney and Romney looks like a JC Penney catalog model and something about eating dog food while Mr. Perry creates jobs and promises to basically leave people alone unless they’re gay or a pregnant woman, which, gay people and pregnant women are just gonna have to eat it cause our debt is so high we have to focus on that

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:16 pm

Oh, I get it, he’s the King of the teabaggers. I’m sure that will assure an easy cruise to victory for the former messiah.

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:21 pm

I like Allen West too, but in a vote that may well prove to have been the most important one of his political career he not only got it dead wrong, he betrayed the principles he campaigned on. I still support him, but I don’t trust him.

ropelight (9ee20b) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:23 pm

As a Texan for 40 years and an Aggie for 27, a vote for Gov. Perry will be a good vote. His philosphy about government is identical to mine…get out of the way. Taxes and regulation are low ( no state income tax; 6% sales tax); a 9 billion dollar “rainy day’ fund; pro-life and pro traditional family; he drives a pick-up ( hell, we all drive trucks down here!). He ain’t perfect and some of his decisions have been annoying (TransTexas corridor; mandatory STD vaccine for 6th grade girls). Bottom line…my business is UP over last year and no sense of despair here.

Gig’em Rick.

Bro. Bill (fbba58) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:26 pm

The bagger King.
Bring it.
Comment by Spartacvs — 8/12/2011 @ 7:15 pm

— Says the bagless queen.

Icy Texan (bee204) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:29 pm

I’m sure that will assure an easy cruise to victory for the former messiah.

He’ll take TX and the rest of the Confederacy, but the rest of the country has had its fill of the aw shucks nonsense with the not forgotten W. Plus his religiosity is worrisome, plus the teabagger movement is overrated. They shot their load already, their zenith didn’t last long once they unfurled their true colors over the debt ceiling fight.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:29 pm

Bro. Bill –

he drives a pick-up

So did Fred Thompson, remember him? Now he’s pitching reverse mortgages on the TV.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:31 pm

Sparty we took an informal vote while you were gone and voted to just ignore you and your comments. Kind of like you’re invisible.

elissa (986262) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:31 pm

I have no doubt doubling down on everything that hasn’t worked will suddenly work with the voters in 2012.

I mean, that’s simple logic.

Oh, we’re still one nation, despite your fetid fantasies. But disenfranchising a large segment of the population might be a good move for you and the rest of the left. Sounds like a sound strategy.

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:34 pm

Speaking of Clueless, Ruth Marcus, has a column onthe debate, where she mixes up Gilligan’s Island
with the Munsters,

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:37 pm

Elissa agreed but I’m a tenacious little ghost. I haunt
Sparticus,
Please complete one homework assignment.
Thanks!
Ms. B

Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:38 pm

his religiosity is worrisome
— Here is your challenge: explain, in a detailed coherent manner, WHY it is “worrisome”.

the movement is overrated
— Good thing, then, that Perry is NOT a part of that movement.

their zenith didn’t last long once they unfurled their true colors over the debt ceiling fight.
— Yeah, ’cause you know that prior to that fight their stated philosophy was completely different. [eye roll]

Icy Texan (bee204) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:45 pm

The Bagger King

Your running for president SpartacVS?

Icy you know the troll is worried because Islam is being exposed as a communist version of a religion.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:52 pm

his religiosity isn’t worrisome it’s disgusting but you gotta figure it’s mostly for the primaries

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:52 pm

@62 Praying for rain is what chaplains and pastors are for if you are of a mind, not Governors or Presidents.

Church and State, separation of, for the protection of both.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:56 pm

Isn’t it interesting that religiosity is worrisome, except when it’s issued or received from a pulpit in a Black, Fundamentalist, Christian Church?

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:56 pm

And just where in the Constitution is that “separation” written?

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 7:57 pm

My 2 cents-
I am not troubled by West’s vote to OK the debt ceiling increase. Neither am I troubled by some like Bachman holding on to the “purist” position.
Whether or not many won election in 2010 on the promise to cut spending, I don’t think the debt ceiling was the battle to bet the war on. With a Dem Senate and Obama in the presidency, there is no way the Repubs were going to get anything consistent with conservative goals. My desire was for them to agree to a time-limited increase in the debt ceiling with no other strings attached, let the Dems own it 100%, and let the public see that the credit rating was going to go down anyway because the govt. was not serious about dealing with runaway spending. Spilling blood on this battlefield only to lose the war in 2012 does not make sense. Nothing of significant benefit will happen until there is a conservative majority controlling Congress and hopefully the presidency too (unless the Lord chooses to return first and remind everyone who the Messiah really is…)
But the conservatives/Repubs could have made that clear and not bothered with “compromise deals”.
From what I know of West’s stand on interrogation techniques to protect his soldiers, I don’t think lack of integrity or commitment is likely to be one of his faults. But a good commanding officer is mindful of both strategic objectives and tactical means of success. While I understand and agree that the problem was NOT with the Repubs had the “no raise in the debt ceiling” crowd won out, I am sure there would have been a lot of chaos and a public perception that “the Tea Party” was to blame, setting up an Obama victory in 2012, and that is not to our/US advantage.

MD in Philly (44383c) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:07 pm

1st amendment as interpreted by the SC. Which doesn’t mean it can’t be re-interpreted perhaps to define the US as a Christian nation, but I don’t fancy anyone’s chances at success with that.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:08 pm

Yeah, that was detailed and coherent. Yeesh.

Icy Texan (bee204) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:09 pm

So, elected officials can’t pray. That’s an interesting interpretation of a constitutional exclusion that doesn’t exist.

Wouldn’t that disqualify a lot of potential candidates? Not necessarily Christian, mind you.

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:13 pm

Praying for rain is what chaplains and pastors are for if you are of a mind, not Governors or Presidents

[Sarcasm Warning] Washington and Lincoln should be held up and despised for the radical religious fundamentalists they really were. Among the top 3 mysteries in the world is how Jefferson ever allowed government buildings in DC to be used for religious services. There must have been some large scale conspiracy to put false historical documents in the National Archives to cloud the waters of strict Jeffersonian separation as all came to understand it in the 20th century. (In fact, I bet it was some of those fraudulant papers that Sandy Berger was purging from the National Archives for the good of the country).

MD in Philly (44383c) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:15 pm

That’s right, Sparticles. The SCOTUS interpreted the COTUS to say that the POTUS does not enjoy the same rights as the people he governs to practice his religion.

Icy Texan (bee204) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:16 pm

I don’t know anything about him, except that he is presiding over a successful state–no small feat in Obamamerica.

And, he reminds me of Jack Lord!

I am truly an ABO – Anybody But Obama. I would even vote for Mickey Mouse. Disney has been pretty successful and could possibly save the US.

Patricia (1832e5) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:17 pm

Times change MD, there have been advances in science you may have heard of, perhaps not?

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:18 pm

Times change MD, there have been advances in science you may have heard of, perhaps not?

What’s that supposed to mean?

Gerald A (9d78e8) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:19 pm

Texan – I’m no theologian or constitutional scholar, nonetheless my summary though brief is accurate. To tell you truth the subject doesn’t interest me. But politicians who wear religion on their sleeve are a red flag.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:22 pm

I think our Brave Gladiator just called the Doc a “Fuddy Duddy”.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:24 pm

So, advances in science trump the Constitution? That’s another winning platform the left should run on.

Sporty, you are a font of political wisdom.

It’s also funny arguing science with an actual medical doctor, just saying.

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:26 pm

Unless they are a muslim…………….Spartac will defend them then.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:26 pm

That’s because they scare the $hit out of him, and all of his Leftist friends.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:27 pm

You mean like Keith Ellison?

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:28 pm

Keith Ellison?
Oh, yeah, the junior Louis Farrakahn;
smaller mouth, smaller scammer.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:32 pm

Times change MD, there have been advances in science you may have heard of, perhaps not?

What’s that supposed to mean?

Comment by Gerald A — 8/12/2011 @ 8:19 pm

He’s excited he’ll be getting a new ass since its been soundly spanked repeatedly here 😉

ppk_pixie (1df0c8) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:34 pm

But politicians who wear religion on their sleeve are a red flag.

Like these politicians?

President Obama: ‘I am a Christian By Choice…The Precepts of Jesus Spoke to Me’

Senator John Kerry and other Democrats: “Kerry said in Malibu, Calif., that he ‘wandered in the wilderness’ after the Vietnam War but came back to the Roman Catholic Church after a sudden and moving revelation in the late 1980s. *** Kerry is the third high-profile Democrat to give a reflective, deeply personal speech on religion and politics in recent weeks, following Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and Robert P. Casey Jr., the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania.”

Former Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton: “Candidate Clinton goes public with her private Faith *** She quoted one of her favorite passages in Scripture – where it says in the Epistle of James that ‘faith without works is dead.’ She spoke of ‘the sustaining power of prayer,’ and how her own faith journey is approaching the half-century mark. She applauded the work of churches in ministering to the sick, as Jesus did. ‘For many of us the golden rule calls on us to act,’ she said.”

DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:36 pm

Oh, I heard they’re doing face implants;
are they doing new butts too.

I sure hope that spvrty hasn’t pissed off too many docs, wouldn’t want them to get confused and swap out the wrong parts – it would give new meaning to the term “Richard Cranium”.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:37 pm

Praying for rain is what chaplains and pastors are for if you are of a mind, not Governors or Presidents

Didn’t Obama have a ‘pray for the deficit to go down’ event?

Seriously. I know how stupid that is. It’s like praying for 100 minus 200 to equal 0.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:39 pm

“But politicians who wear religion on their sleeve are a red flag.”

Spvrty – Do you mean politicians who call racist, America hating ministers their moral compasses and spiritual mentors?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:39 pm

Nothing causes a man to reflect on his faith like an appointment in the morning with the hangman.
– with apologies to Samuel Johnson.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:40 pm

The Precepts spoke to him, not Jesus. There’s a difference and he doesn’t wear religion on his sleeve to the extent Perry and his ilk do.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:40 pm

DRJ’s got a point. Democrats love to wear religion on their sleeves. Some get a pass because the hard left wishfully assumes they are being dishonest.

And they don’t give the Palins and Bachmanns and Bushes a pass because they assume they are more sincere.

Seriously. In their screw up minds wearing religion on your sleeve is better if you’re just conning people.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:40 pm

Comment by Another Drew – Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! — 8/12/2011 @ 8:37 pm

not…exactly 😉

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-08/wfbm-ruh080911.php

ppk_pixie (1df0c8) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:41 pm

Too many followers of Amy Semple McPherson, and Jim Jones.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:42 pm

and he doesn’t wear religion on his sleeve to the extent Perry and his ilk do.

Comment by Spartacvs — 8/12/2011 @ 8:40 pm

That’s just not true.

Obama named his memoirs after an extremist America basher’s sermon. ‘Audacity of Hope’.

Obama is very much a bible thumper when it suits his purposes.

I’ve lived in Texas 100% of Perry’s term and simply cannot recall him making a big deal out of religion. He just does his job. I guess if he’s actually asked by a reporter about a moral issue, he’ll give you an answer. That’s not bible thumping.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:42 pm

Comment by Spartacvs — 8/12/2011 @ 8:22 pm
Texan – I’m no theologian or constitutional scholar,
— Very true, SportsCup. You are neither.

nonetheless my summary though brief is accurate.
— Luckily for you, Sparticles, you do not need to be a theologian or constitutional scholar in order to be wrong.

To tell you truth the subject doesn’t interest me.
— Not enough to bother with the facts, eh, SpurtCircus?

But politicians who wear religion on their sleeve are a red flag.

— A “red flag” for what, Snark-at-us?

Icy Texan (bee204) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:43 pm

wearing religion on your sleeve is better if you’re just conning people

True, that would be bad and both sides do it to some extent. But Bachman really believes that stuff with an intensity that’s scary. And with Perry it’s more of a ginormous garland around his neck than something on his sleeve.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:44 pm

The Precepts spoke to him, not Jesus.

Maybe so. I hope not, because basically you’re saying he professes to be a Christian but doesn’t really believe in Christ. It’s also difficult (but not impossible) to square with Obama’s extended quote from the same link:

“I’m a Christian by choice,” the president said. “My family didn’t — frankly, they weren’t folks who went to church every week. And my mother was one of the most spiritual people I knew, but she didn’t raise me in the church.”

The president said he “came to my Christian faith later in life and it was because the precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life that I would want to lead — being my brothers’ and sisters’ keeper, treating others as they would treat me. And I think also understanding that Jesus Christ dying for my sins spoke to the humility we all have to have as human beings, that we’re sinful and we’re flawed and we make mistakes, and that we achieve salvation through the grace of God. But what we can do, as flawed as we are, is still see God in other people and do our best to help them find their own grace.”

The president said “that’s what I strive to do. That’s what I pray to do every day. I think my public service is part of that effort to express my Christian faith.”

DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:46 pm

DRJ – The Precepts spoke to him, not Jesus.

He doesn’t claim to have heard voices, that’s all I’m saying.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:50 pm

spvrticls is one of those advanced types that will now give us a complete psych evaluation of the candidates by observing a few 10-sec news clips.
He wrote his last term paper affirming the diagnosis of Goldwater in ’64 by the psych’s that watched his speeches.
A marvelous diagnosis that saved the Republic from his views….well, except for the additonal 20+ years he served in the Senate.
Who knew that they voters in AZ were nuts, as were his colleagues in the Senate who supported him.
Yep, absolutely nuts.
Why, they even coined a campaign slogan for LBJ about Barry:
In your guts you know he’s nuts!
Now, that’s civility.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:52 pm

DRJ–I’m sure Barack and Spurty discussed this in detail and at length in their most recent private one on one meeting in the oval. In other words, if spurty says it, you can take it to the bank.

elissa (986262) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:53 pm

the interview Mr. allah has of Perry is very impressive he’s gonna lock this up quick I think

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:54 pm

Happy, the first caucus isn’t until January, and the first primary in February.
It’s a long way to the convention next August.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:56 pm

right but the other Rs are such pygmies

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:56 pm

I proudly admit to being among the “fuddy duddiest”.
Yes, advances in science suggest that the universe…was suddenly created out of “who knows?” that wasn’t there an instant before. Of course, tomorrow’s science, limited by tomorrow’s technology, may proclaim something else, only to be replaced by something else. So, while I agree that faith, to be reflective of reality, needs to be reconciliable with “scientific truth”, “scientific truth” is not what scientists today say it is, but it is what it is, whether or not we have adequately observed and understood it.
I agree that politicians or any one else who makes it a point to show their “religiosity” in public raise a red flag. In fact, even Jesus agrees with you there.
On the other hand, for one to pretend to have no faith when one does is a mark of cowardice.
When one doesn’t believe in a God to ask that person to pray is illogical; for one to believe in God and not pray is perhaps even moreso. We live in a pluralistic society where one is allowed to believe and practice as they wish (without infringing on the rights of others). I guess when the majority believe that those who believe in God are idiots (if that ever happens), people who believe in God will no longer be elected into office.

MD in Philly (44383c) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:57 pm

Have you been taking “civility” lessons from the NYT?

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:57 pm

So, sporty is only afraid of Christians who profess their faith.

You really have to watch out for those gun-totin’ Presbyterians. You never know what they’ll do.

The thought of a Mormon as President must leave him waking in cold sweats.

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:58 pm

nonono I promise I am completely unschooled in this “civility”

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 8:58 pm

Nice link, feets.

Ya know, his hair doesn’t look bad or anything, but I think he just towel dried it and ran a brush through it for max five seconds.

This isn’t a John Edwards style guy. At least he doesn’t look like one in this interview, thank God.

He has a Texan accent. More of one than honestly any Texan I actually know, lol. But he doesn’t really sound like Bush to me. He’s got an entirely different cadence.

Darn Aggies are taking over the country.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:00 pm

he doesn’t wear religion on his sleeve to the extent Perry and his ilk do.
Comment by Spartacvs — 8/12/2011 @ 8:40 pm

— Oh no! A politician that actually lets you know what he believes in? Heaven forfend!!!

Cute, too, how SmartCard aggressively uses the word “ilk” as if Perry is a gang-banger.

Icy Texan (bee204) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:02 pm

Hey, sporty, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are coming to get you with their god-bothering angel Moroni and that pesky Pope.

I hope you’re prepared.

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:02 pm

Welcome back, Doc; or should we call you FD#1?

With people like our Brave Gladiator, I always like to reflect on the saying”
When You Believe In Nothing, You’ll Believe Anything.

Those that have no foundation will find themselves swept along by the changing winds of fashion, never really knowing what is the correct path, only that which “everyone does it”.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:04 pm

note to self- do not sip liquids whilst attempting to read anything Icy Texan posts…ever

ppk_pixie (1df0c8) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:04 pm

DRJ – The Precepts spoke to him, not Jesus.

He doesn’t claim to have heard voices, that’s all I’m saying.

So Obama is one of those articulate and bright and clean and nice-looking Christians who knows how to keep religion in its place, and Perry isn’t?

DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:04 pm

I like him and I think he’s up to the job and the stuff i like about him ultimately outweighs the stuff that bugs me plus we just have to get this prosperity suck out of our little white house in 2012 we just have to

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:05 pm

Cute, too, how SmartCard aggressively uses the word “ilk” as if Perry is a gang-banger.

Comment by Icy Texan — 8/12/2011 @ 9:02 pm

Yes, spartacus appears to be a bigot against the Christians who are sincere.

Though honestly I don’t recall Perry being much of a bible thumper.

He is talking about jobs. No doubt people will ask him about religious things, largely MSM douchebags hoping to paint him as speaking out about social issues, but I don’t think that’s what this campaign will be about.

Every single time a democrat talks about something other than jobs, I think they are trying to screw this country out of a discussion of what Obama did to us. Obamacare shut down this economy like a nailbat.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:05 pm

==The thought of a Mormon as President must leave him waking in cold sweats==

I kind of think that American citizens of the Mormon faith are not going to sit idly by and watch their religion be trashed and misrepresented for political purposes. It will also be interesting to watch how the rabid leftist Mormon haters maneuver around Harry Reid who is, himself, a Mormon and already in a very high office.

elissa (986262) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:08 pm

Seriously. In their screw up minds wearing religion on your sleeve is better if you’re just conning people.
Comment by Dustin

“True that” as an old friend used to say.

Yes, the Bachmans actually believe some of that stuff, which has caused them to do heinous things like foster parent more than 20 children. Really, avoiding that situation by insuring infanticide after failed abortion is a more civilized and preferable thing to do. [Sarcasm alert].

MD in Philly (44383c) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:09 pm

Darn Aggies are taking over the country

— And the problem with this is what?

Icy Texan (bee204) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:11 pm

Dustin, it is the Left that is obsessed with Social Issues – that’s all they can talk about as their positions on policy questions are so abhorrant to the average voter.
So, they attempt to demonize the Right by accusing us of all being clones of Torquemada, when in fact, most Americans of all religions just want to be left alone to practice their faith in the manner that faith prescribes.
It is the Left that must constantly evangelicize, as once people find out what a krock they’ve been sold, they bail; so the Left is constantly searching for New Converts.
Progressivism: It is the original Ponzi Scheme.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:13 pm

It will also be interesting to watch how the rabid leftist Mormon haters maneuver around Harry Reid

What will be even more interesting will be watching how the religious right, like many of the devotees at pastor Perry’s recent God bothering event, react to the Mormon

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:13 pm

Thanks, AD. Currently I have a little more time not devoted to other things so I can “come out and play”.

MD in Philly (44383c) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:14 pm

– And the problem with this is what?

Comment by Icy Texan —

How many Aggies does it take to change a light bulb?

1 but he used the incandescent kind and the oceans began to rise again.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:21 pm

You quite welcome, ~~Doc~~ FD#1.

But, right now my dander is getting into high gear over a remark about “God bothering”.

What a phuqueing arrogant, condescending, prick of a remark.
Now, I’m not the most observant person in the world, but even I acknowledge that when one reaches out to God, He (or She) is never bothered, but always will take the time for the least of us (even spartacvs – His/Her compassion is that deep).
But this ………
Unbelievable!

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:21 pm

What will be even more interesting will be watching how the religious right, like many of the devotees at pastor Perry’s recent God bothering event, react to the Mormon
Comment by Spartacvs

Well, that’s a reasonably thoughtful comment. Hugh Hewitt even wrote a book about it before the last election (which I didn’t read).

Re AD at 119-
The big divide in “being a Christian” is between those who find passages in the Bible to justify what they already believe, and those who are willing to look in the Bible and be confronted by what it says that one would find convenient to ignore.

MD in Philly (44383c) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:22 pm

Really, avoiding that situation by insuring infanticide after failed abortion is a more civilized and preferable thing to do. [Sarcasm alert].

Comment by MD in Philly

Yeah, it’s nothing short of sociopathy that Obama could be cool with that while attending a screaming extreme Christian church.

Mind blowing, if you take him seriously (which no one does). No wonder Spartcus is confident Obama is not a true Christian. It would be totally absurd.

That Obama is taken seriously by those sneering at Bachmann is pretty sad for them. It’s just everything from a ‘my team’ POV.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:25 pm

What will be even more interesting will be watching how the religious right, like many of the devotees at pastor Perry’s recent God bothering event, react to the Mormon
Comment by Spartacvs — 8/12/2011 @ 9:13 pm

— One may wonder how Sparklers distinguishes “the Mormon” from the religious right. Let’s see: the religious right is devout, family oriented, conservative on social issues, and reliably votes Republican. By contrast, the Mormon is . . . Hey!

Icy Texan (bee204) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:26 pm

Elizabeth Smart is a Mormon and people like her quite a bit. Steve Young and bunches of athletes are Mormon. There are several Mormon politicians in Washington. You seldom hear of a Mormon flash mob or a Mormon serial killler. Why is this issue even being discussed?

elissa (986262) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:27 pm

You see, Icy, in his eyes it is a difference without a distinction, since they’re both nutsos.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:29 pm

Yes, the only association of Mormons to serial-killers are as victims to same.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:30 pm

That Obama is taken seriously by those sneering at Bachmann is pretty sad for them. It’s just everything from a ‘my team’ POV.

Comment by Dustin — 8/12/2011 @ 9:25 pm

I believe its called “compartmentalization”? No..wait, I was wrong, the term is moonbat loon.

My bad.

And I am stealing your Aggie joke- my Dad is gonna love it.

ppk_pixie (1df0c8) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:30 pm

I thought the biggest Aggie joke was….
A&M!

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:31 pm

Why is this issue even being discussed?

Because it isn’t the issue of unemployment.

Anything that isn’t jobs is what the democrats would like to be talking about.

That’s the truth. In this case, I guess the idea is that the GOP is really evil and bigoted because they aren’t going to nominate Romney in favor of the more successful and experienced governor.

Frankly, I have not heard much talk of Romney’s religion since the execrable Huckabee dropped out. No one cares except for liberals like Newsweek.

Mormonism, like many cultural aspects, is humorous. Trey and Matt have that musical. They also lampoon everything else. If there were much anti-mormon bigotry, you’d think with Romney and that musical we’d be hearing a lot of it, but we aren’t. Everyone knows that a mormon will pull over and help you change your tire. They are good neighbors. They take care of their family.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:33 pm

Pardon my ignorance, I know what a “Longhorn” is, but what is an “Aggie” other than a girl named Agnes called by a nickname?

No one is successful in living consistently with their highest values and aspirations, but I think there is a difference in evaluating a person’s behavior when one asks if something is characteristic of a person or an unexpected occurence.

It’s like thinking of John Kerry as a proud decorated Vietnam Vet- that was inconsistent with his behavior for over 30 years. Not only were we asked to believe it, but some even did; not sure which is sadder.

Goodnight, all.

MD in Philly (44383c) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:34 pm

Ya know, that is actually a pretty funny joke. I’m a little pleased with myself.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:34 pm

Goodnight, Doc; and I think I’ll put this to bed also.

Out!

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (d5f13f) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:37 pm

Of course you are right Dustin. Talking about Mormons is being used as a distraction from Obama’s serious problems. I just hope this whole anti religion thing backfires as badly as I think it’s going to on the Dems. (And that a few fringy Republicans don’t embarrass themselves over it, either.)

elissa (986262) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:40 pm

I wonder if the right is gonna turn against “the Mormon” next year the same way the left turned against “the Woman” (HRC) last time out(?)

Icy Texan (bee204) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:54 pm

Pardon my ignorance, I know what a “Longhorn” is, but what is an “Aggie” other than a girl named Agnes called by a nickname?
Comment by MD in Philly — 8/12/2011 @ 9:34 pm

Common vernacular an “aggie” is short for Agriculture (farmer, rancher, etc)…or someone who attends an Agricultural college or university (Texas A&M, A&T University, etc)

And goodnight MD 🙂

ppk_pixie (1df0c8) — 8/12/2011 @ 9:57 pm

Hey, let’s watch the Aggie jokes. I suspect it will soon be a meme.

But, for MD, an Aggie is a proud student or former student of the greatest university in the land or sea, Texas A&M.

Farmers fight never dies.

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:07 pm

Sorry, about the obscure reference, A&M is a land- and sea-grant university.

Ag80 (9a213d) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:09 pm

All my ex’s live in Texeas.

AZ Bob (aa856e) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:34 pm

Actually, it might be a good idea to run a religious person (and it seems most of the Repub candidates are) and draw some fire. Then we can bring up the other guy’s religion–the world according to Jeremiah Wright!

I want to see those tapes gain, played over and over…

Patricia (1832e5) — 8/12/2011 @ 10:39 pm

All my ex’s live in Texeas.

Comment by AZ Bob — 8/12/2011 @ 10:34 pm

I’m in ear worm hell…

ppk_pixie (1df0c8) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:07 am

Texas exports cool, Republican politicians and cool, beautiful women.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:42 am

Let me rephrase that. Texas exports cool Republicans and hot women. 🙂

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:45 am

Miranda @ #20 – Clearly, you haven’t been paying attention.

Col. West has been voting with the Black Caucus on legislation, such as approving payments to those black scam artists in the Pigford II thingy, and other liberal-sponsored legislation, too.

But don’t take my word for it. Research his voting record and his lame, disingenuous excuses for same. He is not what he pretends to be. He is all hat, no cattle.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:55 am

#40 – Bingo! Ropelight gets it. Careful, though. Spurty will call you a racist.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:20 am

#58 it’s about time!!!

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:28 am

For MD in Philly –

Texas A&M is short form for Texas Agriculture and Mechanical school. It will have an enrollment this year of around 48,000, either the second or third largest university in America. The school has a rich military and agricultural heritage and has one of the best business and engineering colleges on the planet. Perry graduated and was a yell leader ( we don’t have cheer leaders).

But enough of that. The big news today is we’re moving to the SEC. Sweet!

Bro. Bill (fbba58) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:04 am

Oh yea –
Aggie is slang for a graduate of Texas A&M.
t-sip is slang for those folks who attend that lil’ school in Austin.

Probably TMI…

Bro. Bill (fbba58) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:07 am

Unions might not be an arm of the communist party but that doesn’t mean they are opponents which they are not.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:25 am

and Scott Walker and Rick Perry are worse than hitler?

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:25 am

Texan @126 – it’s perfectly simple.

One may wonder how Sparklers distinguishes “the Mormon” from the religious right. Let’s see: the religious right is devout, family oriented, conservative on social issues, and reliably votes Republican. By contrast, the Mormon is . . . Hey!

We are talking about an exclusively republican nomination fight. When it gets down to the wire, they will have to pick between an ‘authentic Christian’ and the Mormon. No contest. The potentially interesting part, is what happens if the Mormon is able to secure enough of the establishment vote & money to make it a tight two horse race. Then things could get very bloody. Religious wars are always the worst.

Spartacvs (4576a2) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:18 am

Perry graduated and was a yell leader ( we don’t have cheer leaders).

Yet another unfortunate similarity with the one who must not be named.

Spartacvs (4576a2) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:20 am

The LDS 13th Article of Faith:

“We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.”

our America
would be a much better place
with mindset like this

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:29 am

Spork,
The issues with Romney have nothing to do with religion. You are one off keg o’ brew
You still haven’t finished your homework assignment have you? I may start thinking you are a tad disingenuous.
🙁

Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:41 am

Eff off Spartac.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:43 am

It amuses me to see liberals, who are fanatical about their allegiance to paternalistic Big Government, which allegiance is downright religious in nature, scream about a conservative Christian praying in public as if that somehow breaks an ironclad pledge to separate church from state. As if any whiff of true religion would contaminate a pristine State. Really, they hold Christianity as some sort of contagion – they must keep it at bay with spells & rituals; i.e. ACLU lawsuits.

What does the First Amendment say about religion – it’s really simple: “Congress shall make no law respecting an ESTABLISHMENT of religion” but Leftists ignore the rest the relevant part of the sentence: “OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF”.

Now, if your religion both preaches and practices worship of the flying Spaghetti Monster (a al Pastafarianism), and is not engaged in subsersive activities to undermine the Constitution, and does not actively order its followers to slaughter those who would not convert, I could not care less. Jesus Christ of course preached mercy and forgiveness – but he called people to make choices as individuals – it was about free will – not compulsory conversion. Free will, freedom, liberty – antithetical to the monolithic government of the masses by indoctrination and massive regulation.

BTW, see the pic of the Obama fam at the communion rail at Easter:
http://www.religionnews.com/index.php?/polls/poll_americans_are_unsure_on_politicians_faith2/ Nice photo op. Religion News Service is a Leftist propaganda outlet.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:47 am

Thanks to Bro. Bill for the clearest explanation. I knew “Aggie” had to do with (Texas) A+M, but I thought it might have referred to something other than the school, such as “Sooner” has a meaning other than associated with the school, and a “Buckeye” is also a tree, and a “Longhorn” is a type of cattle as well as an alumnus of UT (correct?). “Aggie” as a reference to the “AGriculture school makes sense. I guessed the “A”, but wasn’t sure about the “M”- my only thought was “Mining” as in a school in Colorado.

If one was talking about theology and how people relate to God, there is a lot to be discussed between Mormons and those Christians who do not accept the book of Mormon. If, however, the discussion is how does one’s values impact their view of the world and the role of government, then Icy’s observation rules the day.

Just remember, it was really the Pope that made all of the important policy decisions for the US from 1961-63. [Sarcasm Alert]

MD in Philly (ff9465) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:48 am

Miranda I was wrong about you.

SpartacBS will try to justify Big Government.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:59 am

It’s raining in Dallas. The first since May. Not like I’m looking for a “sign” or anything when it comes to Perry, but the timing is just too yummy.

Em – A&M Class of ’93

Em (0a64a7) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:11 am

“We are talking about an exclusively republican nomination fight.”

Spvrty – That’s just what you wanted to limit the conversation to when you launched into your religious bigotry schtick this time. Sorry, you don’t make the rules.

Your fears about religion are your own problem.

I think it would be great after winning control of the Senate next year and booting out Zero if Republicans passed a law requiring every American attend weekly religious service of their choice, with the default option being an evangelical mega church. Failure to comply would result in a fine from the IRS. I’m sure I could come up with a commerce clause argument just as compelling as ObamaCare to defend the law.

What do you think Spvrty?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:16 am

I like how Rick Perry didn’t waste anytime establishing that he’s the most jesusy one and everyone else can suck it. This saves a lot of time and bickering.

Now we can all focus on making bumble go away.

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:23 am

Right the problem with Romney or Huntsman, isn’t their religion, it is their blanc mange policies.

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:27 am

Summit @ 146: Clearly, I do pay attention. And I did know of West’s votes before your post. I’m a politics junkie.

Is West perfect? Nope. Do I support his vote on Pigford? Nope.

Summit & Ropelight – Did you contact West’s office & urge him to vote to support Rep Pete King’s bill to defund Pigford II? Did you supply his office with research on the scandalous Pigford setttlement, from Breitbart’s Big Government? (if you’re not in his district you can’t use the email form at house.gov, but you can call & you can send info to his campaign site).

Something to keep in mind – the staff of a Congress-person is almost always significantly more liberal than s/he is. Your legislator really is very busy when Congress is in session – and must rely on staff to supply him/her with info. There was once someone in my state up for a U.S. Federal judge nomination – but I knew this person was a radical Leftist, even though s/he was on the state Board of Elections. The “social justice” non-profit s/he headed up had hired an associate of a well-known Communist. Long story – but I did my research & sent it to my Senator, whose staff member called a few days later & profusely thanked me. I really did get the impression that they had no idea of those ties.

Summit & Ropelight, would you please post your perfect candidates, without blemish, for President & Vice President in 2012?

I’m not being sarcastic – I seriously would like to see the candidates you pick who are much more qualified than West & who have a perfect record. BTW, for those of you who think West should be in Congress for a few more terms before running for national office – why do you think that? Obama is 7 months YOUNGER than West, who obviously led thousands of men & women in uniform over his career, has executive experience, had to supervise budgets, on & on & on. And no – it’s not Obama’s inexperience that’s gotten us in the precarious state we’re in – it’s his political ideology. If he were 20 yrs older, would it really make a difference? Soros at 80 is even worse than he was at 50.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:32 am

“blanc mange policies”

Comment by ian cormac — 8/13/2011 @ 7:27 am

Hahaha exactly

Blackburnsghost (2ffb0c) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:41 am

Right the problem with Romney or Huntsman, isn’t their religion, it is their blanc mange policies.

Huntsman is more Dimocrat than Republican, so I don’t support his candidacy. Unlike others, I don’t hold “RomneyCare” against Mitt, much like I won’t hold Perry being the Texas Chair for Al Gore’s ’88 presidential campaign.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:48 am

against Perry.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:49 am

DohBiden – no problem. At times I let my fingers fly off the keyboard before my brain is fully engaged. When I worked in a legal environment a few years ago, and I’d get so frustrated with government bureaucrats’ incompetence, I had a rule for work emails – I’d draft my first irate email, blasting someone for failure to do his/her job – then a minute or two later take out at least half – then go back & halve it again. That kept me out of trouble. But I’ve not been following my own rule here in commenting …. ;>)

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:51 am

Not my fears you have to worry about daley, if a religious war breaks out during the GOP nomination process.

Spartacvs (c55d04) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:56 am

Al Gore was different in 88 he wasn’t deranged

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 7:56 am

happy @163

I like how Rick Perry didn’t waste anytime establishing that he’s the most jesusy one and everyone else can suck it. This saves a lot of time and bickering.

You wish, Michele won’t lie down that easily.

Spartacvs (c55d04) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:03 am

“Not my fears you have to worry about daley”

Spvrty – It is your fears you have been talking about unless you will admit you have been shamelessly projecting.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:04 am

Miranda – West? Seriously?

Spartacvs (c55d04) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:06 am

nope plus Perry has a solid record of only being rabidly jesused up when he’s running for president most of the time he’s a normal person what balances budgets and is concerned about jobs

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:08 am

I beg to differ w/your assessment of the ’88 algore, happy. That guy was born batsh*t crazy and it’s only gotten worse.

ICHO, faithful, practicing Mormons are quintessential conservatives. They are staunchly pro-life… they believe in and promote self-reliance and are strong fiscal conservatives… Dirty Harry Reid is the exception, not the rule and he’s considered a black-sheep, of sorts, by every Mormon I know.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints’ moral code is not only traditional, but I challenge anyone to find credible holes in it. “By their fruits, ye shall know them.” Mormon family values are not only well known, but irreproachable. I don’t think you’ll find a better, more true conservative than a faithful, practicing Mormon.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:09 am

samey – again it’s not my fears or attitudes you have to worry about. It’s an easy enough dynamic to figure out if you think about it for a while.

Spartacvs (c55d04) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:09 am

There are exceptions, Bob Bennett, for one, but marinating yourself in WAshington for 30 years or so, probably does that to you (also Hatch, Orrin)

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:11 am

Comment by Miranda — 8/13/2011 @ 7:51 am

I was told that Lincoln, when faced with a critical editorial, would sit down and write a response, then put the letter in a drawer reserved for such missives.
Rarely were those letters retreived, revised, or posted – but Abe made his points, at least to himself.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:11 am

I don’t remember that… I remember Al being sold as a new democrat type person what would pull their party to the right

he even looked different then – not all bloated up with his own deranged self-righteousness he looked like someone you could have a conversation with

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:12 am

Colonel, why would religious wingers vote for a conservative Morman when they can vote for the real thing just like pastor Hagee tells them?

Spartacvs (c55d04) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:16 am

There is no such animal. Webb, Mancin, Zell (might have been the exception) they are all Reid’s poodles

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:18 am

in fact, Mormons are the anti-liberals. They oppose all of the of evil, destructive behaviors that liberalism promotes, fosters and facilitates. An example of what liberalism has wrought: the destruction of the black family unit; Nearly a half-century since LBJ’s Great Society was imposed on America… trillions of dollars virtually flushed down the toilet and all it has done is destroyed black families, encouraged dependency on federal and state government and kept black folks on the plantation. Democrats have arguably extended the life of Slavery.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:19 am

algore was born a liar and a talented con/BS artist.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:21 am

Colonel – Do you mean to suggest they lived better lives under the protection of Jim Crow? That’s a novel theory. Disgusting and racist but novel all the same.

Spartacvs (c55d04) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:26 am

Colonel, you should not take Hax/Sparticvs seriously. He insults, lies, misrepresents…and is that bad combination of arrogant and lazy.

Why not write a haiku about why this troll acts the way he does?

He is just a fool to be ridiculed.

Simon Jester (a00167) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:27 am

“nope plus Perry has a solid record of only being rabidly jesused up when he’s running for president”

Mr. Feets – Sounds like Rosary Joe Biden.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:29 am

“…if Republicans passed a law requiring every American attend weekly religious service of their choice…”

Jeez, the government is already telling me what kind of light bulbs I gotta buy, now they’re going to make me sit in church too?

Don’t give ’em any ideas.

Dave Surls (61b189) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:29 am

here is a speech Mr. governor Perry gave about his vision for growing the tech sector in Texas and fostering a climate of entrepreneurisms and unfettered creativity

how cool is that?

really effing cool I think

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:31 am

“samey – again it’s not my fears or attitudes you have to worry about.”

Spvrty – Buy a clue. I’m not worried about your fears and attitudes. You’re a demonstrated idiot.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:32 am

“Don’t give ‘em any ideas.”

Dave – Since Spvrty thinks the government has unlimited power, I just wanted to see his head explode over the idea.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:40 am

Sparty, your ridicule of Rep Allen West is high praise. We know you Leftists recognize him as a real threat – that’s why you have CAIR zealots bait him at his town hall meetings, and why you have lunatic Wasserman-Schultz (she looks like a Wiccan – wild-haired & wild-eyed) on the rabid attack.

I’m an evangelical Christian & I have no problem with Romney as President. I just think he’s too soft on conservative ideals, and that Perry would be a much more formidable opponent to Obama.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:45 am

There are people I like better than Rick Perry for president, but he’s infinitely superior to the Great Black Dope, so if he gets the nod from the GOP, I’m backing him all the way.

One cool thing about having Perry as POTUS, Ted Nugent would probably play at the Inaugural Ball…and, that would make lefty (pin)heads explode all across the nation.

Dave Surls (61b189) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:45 am

Just saw Allen West on FOX NEWS. I’ve changed my mind, I’m no longer a supporter. He’s better than a Democrat, but not enough to justify supporting him. I’ll tolerate West, but I can’t look at him without feeling revulsion well up. His double talk and failure to live up to the principles he says he supports pretty much cuts it with me.

West conveniently claimed he was a TEA Party patriot to get elected, but his vote on the debt limit proves he’s really just another establishment Republican who ran under false colors.

ropelight (d19b71) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:47 am

==it’s not Obama’s inexperience that’s gotten us in the precarious state we’re in – it’s his political ideology==

I don’t know how to separate the two when it comes to this president. His inexperience is absolutely central to our problems and only magnifies his flawed ideology. He was a cypher, a nothingburger, a non-factor in Illinois politics. Before politics (the state senate) he never managed or supervised anything or anyone or even had a real job himself that required results. His work as a community organizer had everything to do with establishing AA cred and getting grant money and donations– and nothing to do with finding real solutions to help improve the plight of the poor and disadvantaged. Barry’s life as a lawyer was in the lofty academic classroom not the courtroom where (as Patterico would attest) you learn a lot about people and reality and tragedy and justice.

So for all these reasons and many others I will look carefully at experience. I’ll never support as my first choice for an R presidential candidate anyone who has not both substantively proved themselves to be of the real world but also demonstrated their prowess to understand and function and succeed in broad aspects of the real world–not some fantasized view of the world or with narrow success as a one trick pony. I don’t just care what politicians say they believe, although articulating policy is very important for leadership. They have to prove it to me by their verifiable actions over a period of time.

Fortunately it appears there are several candidates in the R camp who meet that criteria.

elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:49 am

So ropelight – who’s your pick for Pres & VP candidates in 2012?

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:49 am

In crappyfeets world you can only use religion to bash the right with.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:50 am

“Rep Allen West”

Hey, it would be great to have a president that would beat Hugo Chavez’ ass, as opposed to running across the room to shake his hand…like the degenerate piece of scum currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania (or wherever he’s currently vacationing) did.

A president who puts America and Americans first. That would be something to see.

Dave Surls (61b189) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:50 am

That’s a curious thing, pikachu you are better off with Newsom,(a greater fool can’t be had)
Pelosi, Brown, they don’t have that icky Christian vibe to them, or you can go Magnificent Meg and
Mike “Iceberg’ Murphy, you can’t go wrong there.

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:57 am

Comment by Miranda — 8/13/2011 @ 8:49 am

ABO/B!

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:58 am

a poor substitute
for the emptiness within
but troll spurty must

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:04 am

Elissa, I think we agree – it’s just that our concept of experience as it applies to O is different.

As you alluded to, Obama’s had plenty of experience as a community organizer, a lecturer at the Univ of Chicago (he was NOT a professor), a do-nothing legislator, etc. He’s inexperienced at running a business, being promoted on his merits and not his identity, etc. But no amount of experience would change Obama – he’s fundamentally a progressive.

If, say, he were to lose in ’12 – what would he do? He’d be hired by Harvard or start his own foundation (like Clinton’s Gllobal Initiative) using Soros $$$ & government funds – he’d find some way to take taxpeyer money. He’d never establish a company that would make something of value and sell it at a profit. That’s not in his nature. So to me – it’s an issue of what is at someone’s core – what values do they hold dear. And of course we see values lived out by actions & behavior & accomplishments.

BTW I had drafted a response to you several threads back but lost it when my connection went down. I didn’t feel like starting from scratch & now here we are. I’ll just drop whatever concerns I had in that area for now.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:05 am

Miranda @ 8:49 am asked, “So ropelight – who’s your pick for Pres & VP candidates in 2012?

Miranda, (I read your comments) since the field isn’t yet set it’s a bit difficult to be specific, but since you asked politely, I’ll have a go, bearing in mind the campaign season is only just officially started, and that my opinions can, and likely will, change depending on how the candidates perform as the campaign unfolds.

As for the currently announced GOP candidates (Perry’s hat isn’t in the ring yet), I like Michelle Bachmann and Mitt Romney, in that order for the top spot. Pawlenty or Gingrich would make an excellent VP choice, but that call belongs exclusively to the nominee.

Of the field of potential candidates, I’m for Sarah Palin, hands down, 100%. She can pick her husband for VP, or go with Pawlenty, but again, it’s her call.

ropelight (d19b71) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:16 am

_______________________________________________

it is the Left that is obsessed with Social Issues – that’s all they can talk about as their positions on policy questions are so abhorrant to the average voter.

Such as the California state legislator that, in its infinite wisdom, recently voted into law a requirement that public schools carry history textbooks containing information on the role and contributions of “gays and lesbians.”

I remember Al being sold as a new democrat type person what would pull their party to the right

I will vote for ANYONE but the person now in the White House, referring to the guy who truly is an ultra-liberal with a good dose of “goddamn America” sentiment to boot.

However, I’ve noted that almost every bone-headed policy or decision of Republican presidents, going back to at least Herbert Hoover (a junior version of FDR) — and including Richard Nixon (natch), Gerald Ford (the type who rationalized away Bill Clinton’s scrounginess), Ronald Reagan (secret negotiations with Iran), Bush Sr (“read my lips…”) and Bush Jr (“compassionate conservatism!”) — has been when a glint of liberalism in the back of their mind got the better of them.

Perry was born in 1950 so it’s not like he was a naive, very youthful person in the 1980s. He was in his late 30s when he believed that Al Gore would make a reasonable replacement to the Reagan years.

Moreover, the Democrat Party that he was affiliated with certainly by the 1980s could not be placed against the backdrop of what things were like in, say, the 1920s or 1950s. IOW, the Democrat Party in the late 20th century has to be placed against a backdrop in which the middle point (or “centrism”) of the socio-political spectrum had tilted quite a bit to the left. So a liberal, moderate or conservative in the context of the early 1900s was one thing. A liberal, moderate or conservative in the context of 1988 takes on a whole different meaning or slant.

texastribune.org: Perry spent his first six years in politics as a Democrat, in a somewhat forgotten history that is sure to be revived and scrutinized by Republican opponents if he decides to run for president.

A raging liberal he was not. Elected to represent a slice of rural West Texas in the state House of Representatives in 1984, Perry, a young rancher and cotton farmer, gained an early reputation as a fiscal conservative.

But Perry cast some votes and took a few stands that seem to be at odds with the fiscal conservatism he champions today. The most vivid example is Perry’s support of the $5.7 billion tax hike in 1987, signed by Republican Gov. Bill Clements but opposed by most of the GOP members. The bill passed by a relatively close 78-70 in the Texas House.

Even without adjusting for inflation, the legislation triggered the largest tax increase ever passed in modern Texas, according to Dale Craymer, president of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association. Today, taking inflation into account, it would be worth more than $11 billion.

Almost a quarter century later, Perry, as governor, was faced with a similarly sized budget shortfall. But he took a markedly different tack in 2011: He opposed any new taxes, and signed a budget that made the first reduction in overall spending on public education since at least 1949.

Perry spokesman Mark Miner said votes taken decades ago don’t undermine the governor’s overall record, which he said includes the largest property tax cut in state history, enacted in 2006.

As a House Democrat, Perry also co-authored legislation aimed at tripling the amount of money state legislators are paid, House records show. In a 1989 interview with the Abilene Reporter-News, Perry cited the financial hardships Texas legislators faced trying to make a living back home while making a yearly salary of only $7,200 as part-time lawmakers. Voters rejected the proposal in a statewide referendum.

Another political move Perry made back then: He was a top Texas supporter and organizer in 1988 for Al Gore, who ran as a southern conservative rather than the populist reformer he eventually became as the 2000 Democratic presidential nominee.

“I came to my senses,” Perry likes to say when asked about his Gore days.

At the beginning of his six-year run in the state House, Perry shot down the notion that he might switch parties despite his conservative leanings that put him at odds with his party leaders. After former U.S. Rep. Kent Hance of Lubbock defected to the Republican Party in 1985, Perry told the Abilene paper he was “disappointed,” saying he planned to “change my party” rather than defect to the other side.

“I want the left hand side of the party to make the right hand side of the party comfortable,” Perry was quoted as saying.

^ That last quote of Perry’s indicates he was aware of the prevailing leftism in his party, which, again, must be placed in the context of the years during and after the Reagan White House. And yet Perry still wanted to give Democrats the benefit of the doubt? He actually believed he could somehow make the Democrat Party less liberal?

Most people have left-leaning qualities embedded in their brain. So the question is when and how that facet of their mind will come to the surface and get the better of them.

Mark (411533) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:18 am

it was acceptable in the 80s

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:20 am

____________________________________________

he’s fundamentally a progressive.

That’s putting it mildly. After all, anyone who sat for 20 years listening to and approving of the ravings and rantings of Jeremiah Wright is the epitome of a “progressive.” Or an ultra-“progressive.” Actually, an ultra-liberal, if not an ultra-ultra-liberal.

Mark (411533) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:23 am

Mark, quit pussyfootin’ around, Obama is a Socialist, plain as the nose on your face.

ropelight (d19b71) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:28 am

==Most people have left-leaning qualities embedded in their brain. So the question is when and how that facet of their mind will come to the surface and get the better of them==

Or not. Never forget that Ronald Reagan was a Democrat before he “came to his senses” to become a Republican. I consider him to be by far the best president in my lifetime and one of the best ever. His conversion to conservatism was complete by the early 1960s, yet his ability to fully understand Dem thinking and their policy motivations (because he had been one of them and had associations and friendships with them) made him effective and formidable in working with congress and connecting with the American people as a whole.

elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:45 am

Ropelight, I like Bachmann too. I am surprised by your pick of Romney – I don’t like his justification of a mandated health care plan etc. – but I’m especially troubled by his flip-flops on abortion. I can understand being “pro-choice”, then having a fundamental conversion, but to go back & forth – I don’t like it. Doesn’t he favor abortion in the case of rape/incest?

There’s something fundamentally wrong about how “pro-choice” folks think about abortion – that it’s treated as a minor medical condition. I believe that human life has intrinsic value – not dependent on someone else’s judgment as to whether it is valuable or not – convenient or not.

I love Palin – I do get irritated when she has her long run-on sentences, etc. She can do better than that. She has the gut-level love of country that we need. I’ve felt that she has purposely put herself out there (as she is in Iowa right now) to draw fire. Reminds me of the example of John the Baptist. I just don’t think she can overcome the massive Obama BS machine. She has such high negatives.

Pawlenty has quite a mean streak – it’s been directed at Palin & Bachmann – I don’t like that kind of pettiness. Gingrich – when he’s good, he’s very very good. Just feel like he’s had his time. He just doesn’t exhibit very good judgment – ref. his affairs, the Tiffany’s account (I know – none of our business, but still), the bashing of Paul Ryan – he seems more driven by ego than anything else.

Re abortion & “traditional values” – Rick Santorum had an excellent take on the current fad of conservatives to “let the states decide” about gay marriage etc. It’s the same tactic the Left used to get abortion legal – start with the states. What do you do in child custody issues etc – it would give rise to lawsuits – which would then be resolved under the equal protection clause provision. He brought up polygamous marriage too – people laugh as if it’s impossible – it’s not. There are groups trying to get polygamous marriage legalized. And Hollywood has been softening us up (just like they did for gay marriage) by producing such gems as Big Love, TLC’s Sister Wives, MTV’s shows on “polyamorous relationships”, etc. It is coming folks.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:56 am

Happyfeet,
Earth in the Balance was copyrighted in 1992. I don’t think he changed that much from 1988. I welcome correction but I don’t think anyone goes that nuts or that dishonest in a couple of years unless there is biological damage. Any medical folks reading?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:58 am

Meant to link an article on Romney’s abortion views here:

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/05/mitts-greatest-hits/

Interesting article re Perry’s campaign strategy in ’10 – I love the way he bypassed stale conventional wisdom:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/08/11/inside-rick-perrys-campaign-strategy-how-it-worked-in-his-race-for-governor-and/

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:59 am

–Comment by elissa — 8/13/2011 @ 9:45 am–

He also was honest, honorable, and genuinely put the good of the American people first so it was easy for people of good will from any party to support him.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:01 am

Mr. Machinist it says right there… Gore “ran as a southern conservative” …

this accords with reality as I remember it

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:10 am

Perry gets it. He just gets it. I’m watching his speech now at Redstate & he’s talking about the evils of socialism & against centralized gvt & equalization of outcomes.

No other GOP candidate is addressing O’s real motives & strategy.

He’s addressing high unemployment among black & Hispanic populations too.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:15 am

SparkPlugs read the latest Larry O’Donnell newsletter. This is why he so firmly believes that Romney will lose the nomination due to anti-Mormon prejudice on the part of the Christian right.

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:32 am

________________________________________________

Never forget that Ronald Reagan was a Democrat before he “came to his senses” to become a Republican.

But unlike with Rick Perry and his ongoing connection to the Democrat Party as recently as the 1980s — when it and society overall were generally more liberal than ever before — Reagan and his estrangement from the left can be traced back to a time no later than the early 1960s, or before the mid-point of the socio-political spectrum had started shifting noticeably to the left—and the left side of that spectrum therefore really would start going off the deep end.

However, Reagan was born in 1911, so his epiphany did come rather late in his life (by his late 40s, early 50s—he became a registered Republican around 1962) compared with what apparently can be applied to Perry.

To give Perry even a bit more slack, if the following well-known phrase is a reliable indicator of whether people wise up, or not, during their lifetime, than he perhaps at least met the deadline of one’s 40th birthday:

“If you’re not a liberal at 20, you have no heart, and if you’re not a conservative at 40, you have no head.”

Mark (411533) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:34 am

Miranda, I would remind you that Romney’s problem is not the mandate per se, but that a State can mandate something under its police powers, a power that heretofore has been denied to the Federal Government – that is the conflict that Romney struggles with, and has been unable to overcome and explain in a politically acceptable manner.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:42 am

Reagan was born in 1911

Does anyone make an RR commemorative Mdl-1911?
Now that would be a good reason to go buy another one.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:45 am

FWIW-
– I believe Gore ran pro-life when he was first elected to the Senate, and his wife was active in the movement to clean-up popular culture at the time. Now, perhaps he didn’t believe those things then and just took the stand publically for the election so that Washington didn’t really change him but just allowed him to reveal his “true colors”. By 2000 he was a megalomanic pathological liar, like every other Dem presidential candidate since then.
– Since the objection to West based on his voting for the raise in the debt ceiling was brought up again, I will respectfully repeat that I think a successful fight to maintain the debt ceiling as it was would have been a won battle and a lost war. I’m happy that Bachman and others stuck to the hard line to make the point, but had they swayed enough opinion to prevent anything from passing the House I think they would have handed the presidency and the Senate to the Dems again in 2012. the issue being that perception, not truth, wins elections, and we need to work to get the perception as close to reality as possible.
– Somewhere I read a comment about ignoring comments by one poster to avoid unproductive interchange. That has seemed to have worked times before, but I would not tell someone they must desist from troll wars.

MD in Philly (ff9465) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:48 am

______________________________________________

Mark, quit pussyfootin’ around, Obama is a Socialist,

Yea, that he is. But because the root of the word “socialist” is “social,” which generally evokes something good or positive (ie, “social” sounds happy and friendly, whereas “anti-social” is seen by most people as a bad thing), that word doesn’t strike a chord in me the way “liberal” does.

“Liberal” or “leftist” conveys — certainly given my gut reaction — that which is lazy, sloppy, flaky, naive, foolish, irresponsible and even idiotic. However, based on a strict, actual definition, a person who’s a socialist can be perceived as being quite pathetic and extreme. But he or she can also be defined as an ultra-liberal, or ultra-ultra-liberal (eg, the guy now in the White House).

Mark (411533) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:48 am

“I will work every day to make Washington, D.C. as inconsequential in your lives as I can.”

From Perry’s announcement speech.

I’m in. If this is his premise, his goal, his overall political philosophy and view of government, his pre-supposition, and his bottom line, then we’ll be in good shape. He’s got the horse before the cart and the order of things is correct.

The problem comes when government is determined to fix our lives, be as consequential as possible and be seen as the ultimate answer to any woes. Hence, President Obama.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:52 am

If Perry succeeds in that goal, he will have relegated his Veep to “Jake Garn” status,
and there’s nothing wrong with that (another welcome change).

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:57 am

Example of getting it backwards:

President Obama, 2009: “The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end.”

Response from American Spectator: He [Obama] forgets, never knew, or doesn’t care that effectiveness has never been the first measure of a federal action. It is an important secondary measure once the constitutionality or appropriateness of an action has been determined. But as James Madison asked in Federalist 41:

“Is the aggregate power of the general government greater than ought to have been vested in it? This is the first question.” (Emphasis in original.)

When thinking of our federal government, the first question is and always has been whether that government has too much power — that is, whether it is too big. Yesterday, Obama tossed that question aside in favor of building a government that “works.” The Founding Fathers would be aghast. The people should be, too.

When the effectiveness of a federal action becomes the first and only question, trouble is not far behind. Just ask Barack Obama.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:59 am

Mark, I judge effectiveness by how the left reacts. When I call Obama a Socialist they scream bloody murder. So I know it hits them in the gut, which pleases me no end.

But, if you don’t like socialist, there’s always Stalinist, which would seem to fit your criteria.

ropelight (d19b71) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:02 am

Pawlenty has quite a mean streak – it’s been directed at Palin & Bachmann – I don’t like that kind of pettiness.

I think this is more that he’s so uncomfortable being on the warpath that he screws it up. Not that you’re wrong. It comes across as mean and petty when he errs on that side. It also comes across as weak or even above the fray if he’s on the other side. He just isn’t a political fighter.

He’d probably make a good president, but he has no hope of becoming one because Obama’s campaign would crush him in a fight. He would surely err on the side of caution with Obama to avoid racism accusations from all the clowns out there.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:04 am

Comment by Dana — 8/13/2011 @ 10:59 am

He is bound and determined that the HighSpeedRail trains will run on time.

Will he shave his head?

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:06 am

The Colonel that writes three-line poems quoted
The LDS 13th Article of Faith:

“We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.”

— Now follows the other LDS (Leftist Democrat Socialist) article of principles (they don’t say “faith”) …..

“We believe in saying whatever the f*** we want, moral relativism, if it feels good do it, charity thru government, living for the moment, and ducking personal responsibility; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of John (Lennon)—Imagine there’s no heaven, Imagine there’s no countries, Imagine no possessions. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek to denigrate, denounce and defile these things.”

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:15 am

ropelight @203

I’m for Sarah Palin, hands down, 100%.

crazification factor
Crazification factor

John: Hey, Bush is now at 37% approval. I feel much less like Kevin McCarthy screaming in traffic. But I wonder what his base is —

Tyrone: 27%.

John: … you said that immmediately, and with some authority.

Tyrone: Obama vs. Alan Keyes. Keyes was from out of state, so you can eliminate any established political base; both candidates were black, so you can factor out racism; and Keyes was plainly, obviously, completely crazy. Batshit crazy. Head-trauma crazy. But 27% of the population of Illinois voted for him. They put party identification, personal prejudice, whatever ahead of rational judgement. Hell, even like 5% of Democrats voted for him. That’s crazy behaviour. I think you have to assume a 27% Crazification Factor in any population.

John: Objectively crazy or crazy vis-a-vis my own inertial reference frame for rational behaviour? I mean, are you creating the Theory of Special Crazification or General Crazification?

Tyrone: Hadn’t thought about it. Let’s split the difference. Half just have worldviews which lead them to disagree with what you consider rationality even though they arrive at their positions through rational means, and the other half are the core of the Crazification — either genuinely crazy; or so woefully misinformed about how the world works, the bases for their decision making is so flawed they may as well be crazy.

John: You realize this leads to there being over 30 million crazy people in the US?

Tyrone: Does that seem wrong?

John: … a bit low, actually.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:15 am

What is Perry’s Foreign Policy???

Here’s a good read on what the options seem to be…
http://townhall.com/columnists/carolineglick/2011/08/12/the_jacksonian_foreign_policy_option

Ms. Glick cites Walter Russell Meade’s treatise on Jacksonianism written in 1999. It was an excellent article and has had me reading him ever since. If you can find it, is well worthwhile.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:22 am

Foreign Policy is one of my major concerns about Perry, or any boarder state politician. The last Texan we had in the White House looked the other way on illegal aliens crossing the Mexican boarder.

Perry needs to be crystal clear on that issue or he can forgetaboutit. For me, it’s a deal breaker, Perry comes out strongly against illegal immigration, and for a fence, or he get nothing but the criticism he deserves from me.

ropelight (d19b71) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:35 am

#226… well said, iceman!

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:38 am

miranda, ropelight, Texan. Could any of you vote for an atheist, an otherwise solid conservative republican who happened to be a declared atheist?

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:55 am

I know of no faithful, practicing Mormon who does not vehemently oppose abortion-on-demand, Romney included.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:57 am

Spart – No.

An agnostic – maybe. Someone Jewish – sure. And as I said before – Romney’s Mormon faith doesn’t bother me. Islam is a whole different ballgame – it is intrinsically a political ideology wrapped up in a cult-like religion. Democracy is incompatible with Islam. For an observant Muslim, manmade government is an affront to Allah. After all, Allah already made all the laws.

I have never known a single avowed atheist who wasn’t an elitist, condescending, pseudo-intellectual who had a certain contempt for Christians and Jews especially.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:01 pm

For me, it’s a deal breaker, Perry comes out strongly against illegal immigration, and for a fence, or he get nothing but the criticism he deserves from me.

Against Obama, even?

What if we do get a candidate who is 100% right on immigration, but not acceptable to me on foreign policy. Or we get a candidate who is great on foreign policy and immigration, but sucks on social issues?

Seems like we’re going to have four more years of Obama, then, which is not much of a solution for any of us.

I admit I want to hear Perry say he intends to strongly enforce immigration laws and Arizona style reforms, shut down sanctuary city policies, and of course the physical fence.

Though all those are futile until we face Mexico head on and demand they reform their screwed up society. Don’t tell me that’s inappropriate. Even a hard isolationist should see we have a direct interest in Mexican affairs. That country should be prosperous. They need to be a nation of laws first.

Might also help if we stop sending their criminals guns.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:04 pm

–Comment by Miranda — 8/13/2011 @ 12:01 pm–
“I have never known a single avowed atheist who wasn’t an elitist, condescending, pseudo-intellectual who had a certain contempt for Christians and Jews especially.”

Wow, what did I say??

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:11 pm

My Christian and Jewish friends and family never complained about this.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:13 pm

immigration must be like the seventh leg of the conservative stool or something

possibly eighth

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:17 pm

Sparseness asked: Could any of you vote for an atheist, an otherwise solid conservative republican who happened to be a declared atheist?

— Conservative Repiblicans, believe it or not, actually believe in freedom of religion, so NO. As your question acknowledges (with the use of the word “otherwise”) the ‘true conservative’ litmus test would not be met.

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:20 pm

Colonel honors me
Must give credit where it’s due
I learned from the best

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:26 pm

_____________________________________________

The last Texan we had in the White House looked the other way on illegal aliens crossing the Mexican boarder.

And that was due in part to the “compassionate” part of Bush’s conservatism. IOW, feelings — nothing but f-e-elings (as the cheesy song from several years ago goes) — over common sense.

Associated Press, August 13, 2011:

“Gov. Perry is very eager to appear tough on illegal immigration, but upon closer inspection he’s part of the problem,” complained William Gheen, who runs the North Carolina-based political action committee Americans for Legal Immigration. The group intends to educate conservative groups about candidates’ positions on that issue.

Texas remains welcoming to immigrants in ways some other states are not. Illegal immigrants can get in-state tuition at Texas universities. Neither employers nor state agencies are required to run job applicants through a federal database to determine their legal status. Illegal immigrants have access to services for drug treatment, mental health and children with special health care needs.

Bryan Eppstein, a Republican political consultant in Texas, said Perry is strong on the issue. He noted that Texas requires proof of legal status to get a driver’s license and every county jail checks its inmates’ immigration status with a federal database. But when the Legislature convened its 2011 session, Perry’s name was already being circulated as a possible presidential contender. For the first time in his decade-long tenure, Perry pushed a bill that would have prohibited Texas cities from acting as “sanctuaries” for illegal immigrants and would allow local law enforcement to become more involved in immigration enforcement. It failed in spite of Republican majorities in both chambers and drew opposition from some large employers.

That failure, combined with Perry’s comments that the U.S.-Mexico border fence was “idiocy” and that efforts to deny citizenship to U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants are “divisive,” have rung in the ears of anti-illegal immigration conservatives.

If Perry becomes president, Texas illegal immigration opponents say, conservative voters shouldn’t expect tough leadership on the issue.

JoAnn Fleming, chairwoman of the Tea Party Caucus advisory committee to the Texas Legislature, said, “We have a little bit of trouble imagining that our governor could do that on the national level.”

^ If George W Bush was a sap or squish on the issue of illegal immigration — in spite of his at least not being an out-and-out registered Democrat as recently as the 1980s — then it would be naive to expect Perry to be any better. If anything, he’s more likely to be influenced by his own do-gooder, left-leaning sentiments. After all, he did buy into the notion only about 20 years ago that he could re-make the Democrat Party into something less leftwing. So call his type of behavior a facet (and a foolish, naive one at that) of human nature.

Still, I remember Sean Hannity interviewing Ann Coulter a few months ago about who she was going to vote for in 2012, and whether there was any doubt in her mind about selecting the listed Republican on the ballot. She looked astonished at the question and blurted something like, “Hell, I’d vote for Charlie Sheen over Obama!”

Mark (411533) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:30 pm

“Could any of you vote for an atheist, an otherwise solid conservative republican who happened to be a declared atheist?”

As Icy almost explained, atheists don’t believe in freedom of religion, they want freedom from religion. They are not happy unless they are taking rights away from others to worship as they please.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:33 pm

_______________________________________________

Seems like we’re going to have four more years of Obama, then, which is not much of a solution for any of us.

That’s why even though I’m very willing to point out the foibles of a Republican or someone who’s generally of the right, I will be far more pissed off at anyone who isn’t liberal — or who certainly is conservative — thereby becoming disillusioned and choosing to sit out the election of 2012. Or the folks who believe that when it comes ideology and issues, perfection in a candidate is possible. Or who pout: “my way or the highway!”

The real world (political or otherwise) isn’t full of rainbows and butterflies.

Mark (411533) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:39 pm

“I have never known a single avowed atheist who wasn’t an elitist, condescending, pseudo-intellectual who had a certain contempt for Christians and Jews especially.”
Comment by Miranda — 8/13/2011 @ 12:01 pm

You mean, like sparkles?

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:43 pm

“…That country should be prosperous…”

But, Dustin, their UE rate is one-half of ours;
they must be prosperous!

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:45 pm

hf

illegal immigration is an important subject in the national debate.

There are some right leaning nuts out there for sure, but the two Rep. Sanchez sisters and that Grijalva clown more than hold their own.

SteveG (cc5dc9) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:48 pm

Why yes Drew – the thought just hadn’t occurred to me (wink wink) …. the startling resemblance of the avowed atheist prototype to Sparkyliciousness.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:51 pm

Thanks daley. I try to leave certain things unsaid in order to stimulate thinking in those with opposing views.

Plus, I was trying to avoid the circular argument of whether or not an atheist actually has a belief system. We could be here all year if one of those starts!

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:52 pm

It must be in the water, or something, but Texans of the Perry variety, seem to be very comfortable in relying on the Rio Grande as a natural barrier without (seemingly) realizing that it doesn’t do much for the states to the West of El Paso;
and it didn’t seem to help keep Santa Ana’s army out, or the current invasion, nor that of Viva Max – another great performance by Peter Ustinov, and Jonathan Winters.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:53 pm

–Comment by daleyrocks — 8/13/2011 @ 12:33 pm–
“As Icy almost explained, atheists don’t believe in freedom of religion, they want freedom from religion. They are not happy unless they are taking rights away from others to worship as they please.”

I must respectfully but strongly disagree, Sir. That remark is just as wrong and overly broad as saying all Christians want to force people to go to church or worship God. How does my not believing in God in any way impede your own freedom of religion. The people complaining about Christmas displays and crosses on memorials are not atheists but anti-Christian or anti-religious. If you are not Jewish does that make you anti-Semitic? I have less reason to be anti-Christian than you or any other Christian has to be against Jews.

Please watch the bigotry.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:54 pm

Look Perry’s ok, as long as you don’t retroactively
expect him to be what you knew he wasn’t in the first place. W was a ‘compassionate conservative’ averse to significant budget reforms, or aggressive
immigration inforcement, that was known, from the outset.

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:55 pm

Comment by Icy Texan — 8/13/2011 @ 12:52 pm

It seems that they do BELIEVE that there is no God, or otherwise they would have to be considered agnostic, would they not?

And, they seem to be quite irritating in their devotion to that belief.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:55 pm

AD,

I think some Texans believe it’s better to focus on helping Hispanics assimilate than to try to stop the flow of illegals with a fence. I want to do both, but my desire to build a fence is primarily to hinder access to criminals and terrorists more than everyday illegals.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 12:59 pm

“It seems that they do BELIEVE that there is no God, or otherwise they would have to be considered agnostic, would they not?”

No.

An agnostic does not accept your beliefs but does not say there is no God.

An atheist does not believe there is a god or spirit in the universe, or an undying part of a human.

I am not against your practice of your religion any more than I am against any other belief system. Now if you want to establish a National church and force my practice or support, that is another matter.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:02 pm

Makes you wonder. How many atheists out there are nice, cool folks like Machinist?

I guess most of the atheists I actually learn are atheists are the ones who are trying to meddle with something on that basis. I can’t notice the ones who aren’t doing that, so the stereotype forms.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:04 pm

I like walls better than fences… walls with machine gun ramparts and a monorail on top with mobile machine guns sliding all about and a road in front with machine-gun mounted humvees and also giant robots.

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:05 pm

If I may offer a parallel, many of the believers in manmade global warming accept it with a religious zeal that defies facts or explanations and justifies any deceit or terrorist action because the cause is so right. If you don’t share this belief does that have to mean you have an equally extreme belief in the other view? Or just that you are not convinced by their passion?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:06 pm

Would it be fair to judge all black Americans by the ones that make the news headlines?

Would it be fair to judge American Christians by the ones that mainly make the news headlines?

Would it be fair to judge Priests by the ones that make the new headlines?

Would it be fair to judge gun owners by the ones that make the news headlines?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:10 pm

DRJ, I don’t mind assimilation, particularly when we’re talking about LEGAL immigration.
But, Texans have this natural barrier that is an impediment to the free-flow of bodies across the border that doesn’t exist further West.
But, we have, and have had for the twenty-five years since the amnesty in Simpson-Mazzoli, a problem that is of a level of magnitude beyond what we as a nation have ever had to deal with before. At least prior to the crackdown in the Twenties, all immigrants had to pass through well-defined checkpoints such as Ellis Island where they could be checked to see if there was a minimal level of compliance to whatever immigration standards were being inforced.
That is completely lacking today.
It is totally out of control.

Oh, BTW, you can find on the LAT website today a note of three Mexican nationals being arrested on the beach south of the San Onofre Nuclear Plant in the act of landing 741-lbs of MJ from a “panga”.
That’s a long way in an open boat.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:13 pm

Michael Newdow no more represents atheists than Fred Phelps represents Christians, and most find him just as contemptible.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:15 pm

Comment by Machinist — 8/13/2011 @ 1:10 pm

Would it be fair?
Of course not, but we’re talking about Life here, and a lot of it just isn’t fair.

“When you lie down with dogs, don’t complain about the fleas.”

One needs to be careful who one associates with, and to distance oneself from those who would reflect poorly upon them.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:18 pm

Well, I’ll start:

I denounce Fred Phelps, and all the bigotry he represents.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:19 pm

AD,

I think Texas is very polarized on the topic of illegal immigration. Some feel like the front-line “keep them out” battle is lost — either in fact and/or politically — so it’s time to move on to other ways to deal with illegal immigration. Others want to deport every illegal and arm the border to keep them out. My guess is most fall somewhere in between the two points. I view Perry as somewhere in between, although much closer to the former than the latter. I guess we’ll learn in the next year whether I’m right.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:24 pm

How does my not believing in God in any way impede your own freedom of religion. The people complaining about Christmas displays and crosses on memorials are not atheists but anti-Christian or anti-religious. If you are not Jewish does that make you anti-Semitic? I have less reason to be anti-Christian than you or any other Christian has to be against Jews.

Please watch the bigotry.

I think the point is, Machinist, that you are an honest atheist rather than a dishonest anti-religionist. That’s the distinction. Unfortunately, you are in the minority as most claiming to be atheist – and the ones we hear most from in the news – are of the dishonest variety. They are much more interested in restricting my freedom to practice religion rather their than preserving their freedoms to not practice religion.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:26 pm

I denounce Fred Phelps, and all the bigotry he represents.

Well, who doesn’t?

At the same time, Phelps does not represent Christ nor Christianity. That’s a mistaken assumption about him that people like to make. Especially those who are anti-Christianity: they like to tout him as representative of the group, and he’s not.

However, his very professions and behaviors are entirely antithetical to Christianity…but hey, he conveniently provides some great sensationalism by those wishing to denigrate Christianity.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:29 pm

So by not being a Christian I am lying down with the likes of Michael Newdow ? That is an interesting standard. We have gone from personal responsibility for what we do to judgement and guilt by association of our beliefs.

I guess this forum is more crowded than I thought.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:30 pm

“I must respectfully but strongly disagree, Sir. That remark is just as wrong and overly broad as saying all Christians want to force people to go to church or worship God.”

Machinist – The statement is not wrong, but I can agree that it might be overly broad in terms of applying to all atheists.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:32 pm

“The people complaining about Christmas displays and crosses on memorials are not atheists but anti-Christian or anti-religious.”

Machinist – So you claim. If some are indeed atheists, does that make my statement less wrong. Do the atheists protesting voluntary state and national days of prayer believe in freedom of religion?

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:35 pm

–Comment by Dana — 8/13/2011 @ 1:26 pm–

Dana, would you want Christians judged by the ones you see in the headlines? An atheist has no reason normally to announce his beliefs. There is no missionary calling so why would I try to make anyone question or doubt their faith. You only hear from the activists looking for attention. I respectfully suggest you may not recognize most “honest atheists” when you see them.

I wish you well.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:35 pm

Problems multiply with fuzzy concepts: not all Christians are bible thumping fundamentalists and not all atheists go apoplectic as the sight of a cross. Extremists have extremism in common, they’re sisters under the skin.

The use of non-theist to differentiate civilized non-believers from their self-righteous brethren helps. Just sayin’

ropelight (d19b71) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:39 pm

Machinist,

Perhaps I did not explain my view clearly: The people that have met and claimed to be atheists were more concerned with denigrating and mocking Christians for being so weak as to need ~~faith~~ a crutch. The more they talked, the more clear it became that they were offended not by my faith but the fact that I had the freedom to practice my faith. There was a dishonesty about their claims of atheism being their concern. It wasn’t. It was a convenient cover to be able to knock and mock those of faith.

My compliments to being an honest atheist. That’s all.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:40 pm

“Machinist – The statement is not wrong, but I can agree that it might be overly broad in terms of applying to all atheists.”

And can’t the exact same thing be said about Christians forcing their beliefs on others? Not all do it but some do or would?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:40 pm

if you find an atheist in your garden the last thing you should do is corner it

just leave a gate open and keep the dogs inside until he shuffles off

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:40 pm

Machinist @256 – The question I have regarding your headline analogies is whether atheists not making headlines agree with the ones making the headlines.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:42 pm

Comment by ropelight — 8/13/2011 @ 1:39 pm–

This would be like saying we need a new word to describe Christians who are not religious bigots trying to launch a new inquisition or con men shooting to be the next Jim Baker. How about we call the lowlifes on both sides what they are instead.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:44 pm

I like God-fearing presidents, ’cause there’s always someone looking over their shoulder.

Keeps ’em in line.

Dave Surls (dbeb9b) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:44 pm

“if you find an atheist in your garden the last thing you should do is corner it

just leave a gate open and keep the dogs inside until he shuffles off”

Mr. Feets – Living in a very liberal town, I don’t have the shuffling off kind of atheist here. I have the intrudey, grabby, grabby, takey kind.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:44 pm

ok but just remember he’s as scared of you as you are of him

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:45 pm

In other news, it would seem the left is going to shamefully make noise about Rick Perry’s college transcripts. Of course, this multi-layered delicious cake of irony is not lost on us.

While he later became a student leader, he had to get out of academic probation to do so. He rarely earned anything above a C in his courses — earning a C in U.S. History, a D in Shakespeare, and a D in the principles of economics. Perry got a C in gym.

Perry also did poorly on classes within his animal science major. In fall semester 1970, he received a D in veterinary anatomy, a F in a second course on organic chemistry and a C in animal breeding. He did get an A in world military systems and “Improv. of Learning” — his only two As while at A&M.

To their credit, TPM notes that Kerry and Gore were also academically on a par with Perry and Bush.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:47 pm

poor bumble will have to release his transcripts now out of simple fairness

happyfeet (3c92a1) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:49 pm

–Comment by daleyrocks — 8/13/2011 @ 1:42 pm–

I mostly associate with people of faith but the atheists I know are just as repulsed by people like Newdow as Christians are by Phelps or pro-life people are by clinic bombers.

Atheists don’t share your faith and don’t want to be forced to accept it. They are strongly in favor of freedom to worship, they were the ones being burned. They favor freedom of religion just as so many white Jews marched for civil rights in the South. They knew the price of bigotry.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:49 pm

“And can’t the exact same thing be said about Christians forcing their beliefs on others? Not all do it but some do or would?”

Machinist – Yes, but I would like to understand examples of what you consider Christians forcing their beliefs on others. I keep hearing that fear from secular progressives but it is never explained. To me, the trend has been moving in a more secular direction.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:51 pm

poor bumble will have to release his transcripts now out of simple fairness

Heh. To the left, fairness remains in a state of flux and taking on a definition when it suits their purpose.

Clearly, releasing his transcripts will not benefit them, therefore it is unfair to expect them to be released. Please keep that in mind.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:53 pm

“They are strongly in favor of freedom to worship, they were the ones being burned. They favor freedom of religion just as so many white Jews marched for civil rights in the South. They knew the price of bigotry.”

Machinist – What you say makes no sense given the various national atheist societies’ protests of various state and nation voluntary days of prayer earlier this year. Sorry.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:53 pm

I would suggest that what you are calling atheists are secular humanists. Their beliefs are not religious but political. They are our left’s version of the Taliban and want all heretics (Christians) banned and they are just as aggressive and active. An atheist just has no reason to be public.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:54 pm

or con men shooting to be the next Jim Baker

Ya probably meant Jim Bakker – not Gentleman James Baker of the GHWB administration…

I remember my brother telling me about he and his wife eating lunch in Palm Springs several years ago while sitting at a table next to post-Jim Bakker Tammy and her friend. Bro & wife listened to the two of them talking rather loudly about their latest fleeced male victim and the large amount of money said victim had just “invested” with them.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:54 pm

Comment by Machinist @ 1:44 pm

Nothing you wrote is inconsistent with my thinking on the topic, in fact, I got the ball rolling with a suggestion for making a basic differentiation between tolerant and intolerant non-believers.

Please offer your suggestion for an appropriate term to do the same for Christians.

ropelight (d19b71) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:54 pm

“To me, the trend has been moving in a more secular direction.”

With this I agree, and it does NOT make me happy.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 1:55 pm

“Machinist – What you say makes no sense given the various national atheist societies’ protests of various state and nation voluntary days of prayer earlier this year. Sorry.”

These are just as representative of atheists as Phelps is of Christians. He claims to be a Babtist church.

Sharpton claims to represent black Americans.

Obama claims to represent working Americans.

Again, their activism is political, not religious, and atheist describes only ones view on religion.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:00 pm

Colonel, you are right of course. My apologies.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:00 pm

Believing there is no Supreme Being is their (atheists’) religion.

I have a few atheist friends, some have been my friends since our teen years. I love them and only feel a sadness that they are not blessed with a belief in God.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:01 pm

Dana,

This is going to sound strange but it’s the way some Texans (including me) think: I suspect Perry and his advisers will welcome questions about Perry’s college grades. It gives Perry a chance to do two things …

1. Pound on Obama to release his grades while reminding voters that Obama hasn’t released his grades. Maybe Obama has nothing to hide, just like with the birth certificate, and he’s just withholding information out of arrogance or to be controlling. Or maybe he has something to hide. Either way, talking about how Obama won’t release his grades seems like a win for Perry because it calls into question whether Obama is really all that smart. Those suggestions didn’t work in 2007-2008 but they might now after 3 years of Obama’s woeful leadership.

2. Point out how people may not do well in school but can do well in life, which I think would appeal to working class Americans, anyone who didn’t go to college, and everyone who didn’t make great grades. A lot of us fall into one of those categories and many are independents, so it’s an important group to reach.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:06 pm

–Comment by ropelight — 8/13/2011 @ 1:54 pm–

I call a person who does not believe there is a god or supreme being in a spiritual sense an atheist.

A call a person who believes that Jesus was the son of God a Christian.

I call people who hide their political agendas behind these names frauds, fakes, posers, or Democrats.

Is that what you were asking, Sir? I do not mean to be dismissive or flippant. I am just so tired of having the left smear me as a Nazi, a religious bigot, and a racist because I am a conservative and then being attacked by Christians because I do not share their particular beliefs, even though I support their rights to believe and worship. I wish that I would see the kind of tolerance from Christians they claim to hold and want. I am encountering more of this lately from people I considered friendly.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:07 pm

–Comment by DRJ — 8/13/2011 @ 2:06 pm–

Also, I think grades become much less important when you have a successful record to look at, and pointing to Perry’s record compared to Obama’s is a big win for Perry.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:11 pm

DRJ,

Of course. That would be part of the multi-layered irony cake:

Obama’s refusal to release his grades has not been in his best interest. When there is a refusal for transparency, the immediate go-to is indeed suspicion that there is something worth hiding. If he has nothing to fear, why not go for transparency?

However, to the elite left, intellect and academia are everything: if his grades are abysmal, he would be taking a great risk in releasing them. To most reasonable people, it would be as you point out, a good example of anyone being able to make a great success of their lives, even landing in the WH, but because of the misplaced value the left places on academics, etc., the potential for losing followers might well be drastically increased if the Lightworker is revealed to not have been an academic heavyweight.

I assume it’s a risk they are not willing to take.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:15 pm

–Comment by ColonelHaiku — 8/13/2011 @ 2:01 pm–

Do you consider any belief then, such as evolution or relativity, a religion?

I was raised a Christian and had very strong faith at one time. I looked deeply at the issue and the evidence I saw led me to reject my faith and become an atheist. If that is religion than isn’t every belief, scientific or otherwise, a religion? The word becomes meaningless. Why does not sharing your particular belief make mine a religion rather than an opinion?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:16 pm

Machinist– thanks for your thoughtful posts. I think the attention whores using any religion or non religion for personal aggrandizement and gain are sometimes sort of unfairly seen as a pace car when they should only be viewed as off the reservation crackpots. They are not representative of anything and reasonable people need to keep reminding themselves of that. There is a particularly venomous so-called “atheist” family in northern Illinois who has made a career of suing people, companies, and municipalities. They are forever in the news and are often sought out by the press for the “atheist” POV on issues. It is disgusting. I’m sure daley knows who I refer to, but I am not going to mention their name here. When many of us hear the word “atheist” unfortunately that is the first image that comes to mind. Obviously, it has less to do with the belief system itself than it has to do with reaction to a few specific flawed personalities who associate themselves with that belief system to exploit it.

elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:16 pm

Been out, but, I fail to see where anyone was demanding a conversion to Christianity from anyone else.
The point is, that we (I) would just like there to be some recognition of the “Free Exercise” clause that everyone seemingly in the athiest campt wants to skip past.
As a libertarian-Conservative, I really don’t give a rat’s a$$ what you believe, as long as your beliefs do not infringe upon mine; because, I can assure you, I do not wish to impose my religious beliefs upon anyone (as if they’d want them).
Now, politically speaking:
Anyone voting Dem gets shot!

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:23 pm

Thank you Elissa, I do understand this but it does not mean that because they claim the mantel of atheists fighting for freedom that I pick up “their fleas”. If I said I did not want to work with black people because they were all thieves and welfare cheats I would be condemned as a racist bigot. I say that smearing me as the same as those hustlers is also religious bigotry and I denounce it and object to it. I have not earned that slander.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:26 pm

“we (I) would just like there to be some recognition of the “Free Exercise” clause that everyone seemingly in the athiest campt wants to skip past.”

And that again is a smear I would like you to support. “everyone in the atheist camp”? Based on what? How many atheists are in this country and how many of these hustlers are there you claim represent all atheists?
-Are all Christians the same?
-Are all Jews the same?
-Are all blacks the same?
-Are all Hispanics the same?

How many atheists do you know?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:31 pm

Machinist, the “racist” analogy really doesn’t work. Skin color/tint/hue and/or race has no bearing on religious persuasion.

What bothers people about a particular religion or belief system is the values of that religion, which translate into behavior of course.

Racism is a whole different ballgame. Not fair to commingle the two.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:35 pm

Fine Miranda. Would Antisemitism be more appropriate?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:36 pm

Do all Jews act the same?
Do all Christians act the same?
Do all Buddhists act the same?
Do all Muslims act the same?

Can we really generalize that much about people based on their claim of religious belief?

Was Clinton really more moral because he acted like and claimed he was a Christian?

What behavior does an atheist’s beliefs translate to?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:42 pm

What don’t you get? Unless you’re purposely confusing the issue.

“Racism” is about hating/pre-judging someone based on their race – a state of being – something they’re born with. It has nothing to do w/ values etc.

Having a prejudice against someone who believes in the Spaghetti Monster (or whatever they’re calling it), who they think is calling for cat sacrifice, is another story. That is about beliefs > values > actions > behavior. Totally different.

If you want to make the case that Americans are prejudiced against atheists or whatever, go right ahead. But don’t place yourself & other atheists in the same category as victims of racism. No way.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:42 pm

Cross-posted there, Machinist. Sorry. I had been responding to your anti-Semitism remark.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:44 pm

That remark accepted your premise and I offered new examples. I did not disagree with you, Ma’am.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:46 pm

Until you refine your concepts you will continue to talk at cross purposes. It’s unproductive and potentially quite unnecessarily divisive.

ropelight (d19b71) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:48 pm

That last question is rather important. I have had earnest young Christians ask me, “If you are not Christian then why don’t you steal?”

Isn’t this bigotry? Did Christians invent the concept of honesty?

I would really like to know what behavior you think atheism translates to.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:49 pm

Do you consider any belief then, such as evolution or relativity, a religion?

A belief in that sense only becomes a religion if it’s a belief that informs the way one lives (or is used to guide) one’s life. No offense was intended, my brother.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:50 pm

–Comment by ropelight — 8/13/2011 @ 2:48 pm–

What concepts haven’t been addressed, Sir. Will you share your definitions? Perhaps we can all use them for this discussion or find the point of confusion.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:51 pm

==Comment by Machinist — 8/13/2011 @ 2:26 pm ==

I agree with every word in your comment. I was trying to say something similar in my post–that guilt by association is wrong and we (reasonable people) must consciously be on guard to not fall into that trap. I’m sorry if my writing and examples were flawed so that my meaning did not come across and I further offended you when I only meant to offer agreement and support!

elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:52 pm

Machinist, let me revise that to the “publically avowed and politically active athiest camp”;
For these are the “athiests” that America knows, the “Madalyn Murray O’Hare’s” that we see on the nightly news – and Yes, the “Newdow’s” too, who are nothing if not attention whores.

Now, if you still have heartburn over my position, so be it.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:53 pm

Not feeling especially eloquent today, so I apologize for an inability to explain this better.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:53 pm

Do all Buddhists act the same? Of course not. But you can take the basic values & tenets of Buddhism, look at the behaviors & actions of practicing Buddhists over a period of years, and then, yes – “judge” them.

Sure. Just like with Christians, though, you’ll have some claiming Buddhism, when they really mean they were born to a certain cultural group. IOW, some Christians are more “cultural Christians” than practicing. “By their fruit you will recognize them” … Matt. 7:16

And now I know we’ll devolve into an argument about the Crusades, etc. No resolution on that one.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:53 pm

Hey… Rick Perry is running… YAY!!!

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:54 pm

–Comment by ColonelHaiku — 8/13/2011 @ 2:50 pm–

Thank you, Sir. But atheism does not provide guidance. There is no moral component and by definition no universal rules, laws, or values. My ethics and code of honor come from other sources. Atheism by definition can not meet your definition of religion.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:55 pm

Oh, and I don’t know how many “athiests” I know, for it is not something I ask of people; just as I don’t ask them if they are a Southern Baptist, or a Lutheran, or whatever – it is none of my business unless their practice of their religion infringes upon my Freedom & Liberty.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:55 pm

“religion” aka: belief system.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 2:56 pm

Machinist, Wikipedia, in spite of all its faults, is a good place to start. It pretty much covers the basics, explains the origins and the evolution of the concept (like why Christians were once called atheists), and outlines the major philosophical developments. There’s a good bit more the subject than one might imagine.

ropelight (d19b71) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:03 pm

==How many atheists do you know==

That’s an excellent question since it does not “show” or necessarily come up in casual conversation. I’m not sure how many lesbians or Yankees fans or celiac disease sufferers I know either, unless they have specifically decided to tell me.

elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:03 pm

“I would suggest that what you are calling atheists are secular humanists.”

Machinists – You can persist in calling people who call themselves atheists other things as you wish, but that does not alter what they call themselves. Up in #248 you claimed “The people complaining about Christmas displays and crosses on memorials are not atheists but anti-Christian or anti-religious,” and not really atheists. All you are really doing is redefining terms which is a more typical leftist argument.

I think most here agree that caution is needed against too broadly applying an argument. You and I both agreed on that. But I think caution is also need about relabeling people who call themselves something just because they use that label to achieve a political end.

I am still waiting for a response from you why national atheists protested this years’ various national days of prayer and some examples of what you describe as Christians forcing their beliefs on others.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:04 pm

–Comment by Miranda — 8/13/2011 @ 2:53 pm–

Again Ma’am, you are confusing an atheist with someone that is anti-Christian. I have no reason to mention the Crusades, why would you? I am nor against Christianity or religion. We both want the freedom of religion the Constitution gave us. You are the one who claimed I did not. I am trying to explain that you are confusing your friends and enemies. I not only don’t want Christianity removed from our life and government, I want it replaced to a large degree.
-I want prayer restored to school and public functions. I just don’t want it mandatory or a particular faith pressed on us. Military chaplains have handled this well for a long time.
-I don’t believe that our Republic as we know it can survive without religious values. I agree with our founders in this.
-I regularly read the Bible and have a copy in my truck right now. I think it should be taught and studied in school, not as revealed word but as the foundation of our culture and nation.

Is that the behavior you expect?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:06 pm

Can one live a moral life without believing in God – without an external moral code – without a system of ethics?

Yes. You sound like a moral person, Machinist.

One problem is that Jesus was a person – and fully divine of course. Belief in Him is a requirement of the Christian faith. That belief requires invitation & acceptance. I can’t “make” you believe – and I can’t make up a list of reasons (oh, you’ll be more morally upright) to believe.

It seems like you’re looking for the reason why people believe in a deity. I mean that you think we need a reason – we’ve got to have a motive – like we get something out of it. I believe in God because I know God is real. And there’s no explanation I can give to you that will be sufficient.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:07 pm

A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate’s rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.

“Atheism is [the inmate’s] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being,” the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said.

Read more: Court rules atheism a religion http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=31895#ixzz1UwvFPGAk

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:08 pm

Machinist, I was responding to the question from Spartacvs about voting for a conservative Republican declared atheist. While it may be stereotyping to imply that an atheist politician will more than likely be an activist on so-called ‘separation of church & state’ issues, I stand by what I wrote.

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:09 pm

-Comment by elissa — 8/13/2011 @ 3:03 pm-

This is why I am suspicious of claims that all atheists seem to be against religion.

In regard to your earlier comment, Ma’am. You were not offensive and we seemed to me to be having a reasonable discussion. Thank you and I did not mean to sound hostile to you.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:10 pm

#165 – Summit & Ropelight, would you please post your perfect candidates, without blemish, for President & Vice President in 2012?

Your caveat of “without blemish” tends to make your question somewhat fanciful, but ……

Someone who would best represent my positions on issues would be Alabama’s Senator Jeff Sessions.

Of the candidates who are now being offered to us, however, my first pick for POTUS would be Rick Perry, tentatively, with too many good options for VP to make a choice at this time. Although tentatively, also, I would be inclined to defer to Governor Perry’s judgment on that issue.

I like Newt Gingrich a lot, too, for reasons too numerous to list here for the sake of brevity.

BTW, I continue to question your judgment about Col. West. But that is your prerogative.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:15 pm

Dailyrocks,
“I am still waiting for a response from you why national atheists protested this years’ various national days of prayer and some examples of what you describe as Christians forcing their beliefs on others.”

I do not think these people are acting as atheists but as anti-religion activists. Why would an atheist care?

I do not feel that Christians are forcing their beliefs on anyone. I am not anti-Christian. That is the secular left that wants to portray religion that way and force Christians underground. You are being just as wrong in portraying all atheists as anti-Christian as the left is in their misportrayal of Christians as paternalistic fanatics forcing their view on others.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:16 pm

Machinist, you were the one asking if one could generalize behavior based on religion in 302. Of course I brought up the Crusades, as anti-religious people very often bring up the wrong actions of adherents to a religion in order to delegitimize that religion.

In 321, it sounds like you want a “cleansed” version of historical/cultural Christian values taught. Of course God isn’t real – that’s just silly talk – but we can read this old dusty book just for fun. We can pretend to respect the values taught in the book, even though smart people know the event described in the dusty book never happened.

Quite an effective strategy to rid society of true Christianity. Reminds me of the Jim Wallis & Richard Spong types.

And unlike others here, I do know some atheists – two in my family. It is funny – they claim to have no interest in religion yet wish to endlessly debate it during family get-togethers.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:17 pm

Can one live a moral life without believing in God – without an external moral code – without a system of ethics?
Yes. You sound like a moral person, Machinist.

— Miranda, two points: 1) an internal moral code IS a system of ethics; 2) don’t be surprised if the moral code that Machinist lives by strongly resembles a particular code that was set down in writing 2,000 years ago.

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:18 pm

-Comment by ColonelHaiku — 8/13/2011 @ 3:08 pm-

Your definition called for something that shaped a persons actions or life and I pointed out that by definition an athiest’s belief does not give that guidance and so it does not meet YOUR definition of religion. Now you cite this silly court decision. OK, if any belief is religion then I agree my belief about God, or about nuclear fission, or about gun control can all be called religion. What would not be religion under that standard? Really?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:21 pm

Machinist, are not many — if not most — “anti-religion activists” ALSO atheists? They certainly are not mutually exclusive.

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:22 pm

“I do not think these people are acting as atheists but as anti-religion activists. Why would an atheist care?”

Machinist – There you go again redefining terms. Theoretically I don’t think atheists should care, but their actions support my original “broad” statement to which you objected.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:22 pm

Machinist – I prefer the term militant atheist to the various other labels you have thrown out on this thread.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:25 pm

-Comment by Miranda — 8/13/2011 @ 3:17 pm-

My point is that being an atheist is not being anti-Christian or anti religious.

I am not anti-religion.

Not being a religious Jew does not make a Christian antisemitic.

A Christian may well be antisemitic but that is not Christian, is it?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:27 pm

-Comment by Icy Texan — 8/13/2011 @ 3:18 pm-

You are correct, Sir. My values were largely shaped by my Christian upbringing and I have no reason to change most of them as I consider them essential for our civilization.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:30 pm

But an atheist’s belief can shape a person’s life… look, morality is derived from Judeo/Christian principles – doctrine, if you will – so… would it not stand to reason that with no moral compass (remember… even the “Golden Rule” is based on Judeo/Christain values), an atheist would theoretically be free to live his/her life as a sociopath, devoid of a conscience and without regard to any adverse impact on other persons.

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:33 pm

–Comment by Miranda — 8/13/2011 @ 3:17 pm–

Why would you think I would denigrate the Bible? I am dead set against any teacher pushing any religion or belief about or against any religion. I think the students should learn what the Bible says and teaches. Parents can help children decide if it is true. Why does that require any criticism or mocking of the Bible? I would actually prefer that a minister be brought in to teach this as I think was once common.

If one believes in the Bible as revealed word or not it is still the foundation for our culture and value system. This is why I am against purging it from or schools and public offices. It is ridiculous to swear on a Bible and not allow the Ten Commandments to be displayed outside.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:37 pm

Summit @ 326 – thanks. Would you tell me a few of the reasons you are not a West fan – beside the debt ceiling & Pigford votes?

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:40 pm

-Comment by ColonelHaiku — 8/13/2011 @ 3:33 pm-

As are Christians. My values may come from my parents, my school, or my culture. If I develop antisocial values and behavior it is not because I am an atheist. Were all people sociopaths before Christianity?

Is Obama a better person for claiming to be Christian? Has he upheld Christian rights to freedom of religion better than an atheist would have done?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:42 pm

Icy Texan @ 329 – Nice!

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:43 pm

-Comment by ColonelHaiku — 8/13/2011 @ 3:33 pm-

The last person before George Washington to have absolute power in his hands and give it back to the people or their elected representatives was Cincinnatus. This was a moral act of the highest order but he was not Christian. Christianity did not invent the idea.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:45 pm

–Comment by Icy Texan — 8/13/2011 @ 3:22 pm–

Yes, they claim to be.

Most serial killers are white males. This does not make it right or accurate to characterize white males as serial killers.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:48 pm

#337 – I would rather not. I’m not in a mood to argue, and besides, I believe that I made my point on that issue more than sufficiently already. 🙂

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:49 pm

Machinist – did I say you would be “denigrating” the Bible? No, I did not.

But it’s just a little disingenuous to claim that you have a Bible and want a cleaned-up version of Christian values taught – yet you are an atheist, and obviously you do not believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – that Jesus Christ was crucified yet rose again, in human form, and in the Holy Spirit which dwells within the heart of the believer.

You want the blueprint of the spaceship taught, yet you deny the very existence of the spaceship, and deny the remotest possibility that the spaceship could exist. Not very good analogy but supper needs to be made here on the East coast.

Now surely you can’t be prejudiced against other religions. Do you want a Qur’an in schools too? Do you want those verses taught? You do know that Muslims are supposed to learn Arabic, in order to read the Qur’an, Hadiths, etc.

What about Pastafarianism?

You see, when you don’t believe that any particular religion is uniquely valid – anything goes.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:49 pm

–Comment by daleyrocks — 8/13/2011 @ 3:22 pm–

Ok, then I guess if you are going to define “atheist” as being anti-religious than I am not an atheist.

What do you call a person who does not believe in any god or supreme being?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:51 pm

Those that believe in nothing, will believe in anything(sic).

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:52 pm

If you get your lefty talking points on
Gorebull Warming from a talking sponge than you need to be thrown in a mental facility.

That means you SpartacBS.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:55 pm

My point is, does it not tend to be militant atheists that sue to have In God We Trust removed from money, or to have “under God” removed from the Pledge of Allegiance?

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:56 pm

My values were largely shaped by my Christian upbringing and I have no reason to change most of them as I consider them essential for our civilization.

Machinist, do you not see a big disconnect in assuming and living your life according to the values laid down by Christianity, and yet denying an existence of God?

If there were no God, the values you live by would not exist.

How do you square this?

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:56 pm

That would be closer to an agnostic, would it not?

It is my understanding that an athiest denies the existence of God, whereas an agnostic is “…a person who holds that the ultimate cause (God) and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable…”
Random House College Dictionary, 1975/1979.

YMMV!

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 3:57 pm

Miranda @233

Spart – No.

An agnostic – maybe.

And that’s the whole problem with the social conservatives, they lack the tolerance gene that is an integral part of their christian bretheren outside the conservative movement.

It’s also why the R nomination process will turn into a bloodbath, if both Romney & Perry capture enough of the establishment votes & money to make it a tight race, leaving the social conservatives to be kingmaker.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:03 pm

–Comment by Miranda — 8/13/2011 @ 3:49 pm–

Where did “cleaned-up version of Christian values” come from. I said that we should teach the Bible, what it says and what values it teaches. If you feel we can not teach what the Bible says without teaching that it is revealed word, then I guess we would not agree, but I don’t see how I am being disingenuous. I do not support this to cave souls but to give an understanding of the foundation of our culture.

As to the Koran I do have an English translation and have read some of it. I do think there is some justification for teaching what the religion believes as it is the prime motivator of almost two billion people in the world and is certainly something we should understand. I do think that should come later and I don’t think it needs to be taught the same way unless our society changes a lot. It does not help us deal with the large part of the world that is Muslim if we have people believing Muslims are moon worshipers. If the other sect you mentions ever becomes a major player guiding a billion or more people that are important to our nation then we should probably teach that too.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:04 pm

No, it IS wrong to define atheism as being opposed to the free practice of religion; however, it would be wishful thinking to pretend that a significant number of those that are actively pursuing church-state issues — ACLU, I’m talking ’bout you — are not atheists pushing an agenda in the political arena based on their personal beliefs … or, if you will, non-belief.

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:05 pm

Tex @238 So you can’t be a true conservative if you aren’t religious?

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:05 pm

You are an intolerant prlck, and call others intolerant? Your bigotry is legion.

JD (318f81) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:05 pm

Show of hands … Has spurty ever had a not-mendoucheous comment? Ever? Even just one?

He enjoys making stuff up, blowtorching strawmen, and arguing with caricatures that exist only in his fevered imagination.

JD (318f81) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:09 pm

Yeah, Jesus wasn’t too impressed with those who were religious… it’s about something far more earth-shattering, life-changing, and a transformation all the way down to the bone and beyond.

Jesus says, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you.'”

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:12 pm

-Comment by Dana — 8/13/2011 @ 3:56 pm-

Dana, I try to live by those values. I think those values are important for our society to function properly. I do not consider those values a universal truth that I can impose on others. I leave well enough alone unless something is too bad like a man beating a woman. Then I will step in. This may be hypocritical of me but it is my code.

I might point out that most of the values you probably call Christian actually predate Christianity so if there is no God I would still be familiar with many of the Commandments. Look at Hammurabi’s Code. These are Christan values but Christians did not invent them.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:13 pm

Anybody want to take a short break? Check out Mark Steyn here on nanny states, Britain in flames, and Dutch prostitutes. An excellent, excellent article. And humorous too.

While the British Treasury is busy writing checks to Amsterdam prostitutes, one-fifth of children are raised in homes in which no adult works – in which the weekday ritual of rising, dressing and leaving for gainful employment is entirely unknown. One-tenth of the adult population has done not a day’s work since Tony Blair took office on May 1, 1997.

The London rioters are the children of dependency, the progeny of Big Government: they have been marinated in “stimulus” their entire lives

“The evil of such a system is not the waste of money but the waste of people.”

Big Government means small citizens: it corrodes the integrity of a people, catastrophically. Within living memory, the city in flames on our TV screens every night governed a fifth of the Earth’s surface and a quarter of its population. When you’re imperialists on that scale, there are bound to be a few mishaps along the way. But nothing the British Empire did to its subject peoples has been as total and catastrophic as what a post-great Britain did to its own.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/london-311857-want-book.html

elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:15 pm

Comment by Spartacvs — 8/13/2011 @ 4:03 pm

You have been nominated for membership in IATSE, which bargains collectively for 95% of the Projectionists in America.

Keep that arc struck.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:17 pm

Either way, talking about how Obama won’t release his grades seems like a win for Perry

Yep, big win. Just like the birth certificate thing… Ooops.

“Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me… and won’t get fooled again. “

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:19 pm

-Comment by Another Drew – Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! — 8/13/2011 @ 3:57 pm-

I agree with that definition. I am an atheist as I do not believe any god or supreme being exists, not just that we don’t know him yet.

That does not make me anti-religious. I don’t care if there are Christian, Masonic, or whatever symbols on money or the Great Seal. They mean nothing to me. Only someone who is religious believes in blasphemy and only someone like that or someone with a political agenda would care. I would just as soon not have a cross on my grave but if you want one there, fine.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:20 pm

Spurty thinks it is okay to release Perry’s, but racist to ask for the President’s. SHOCKA

JD (318f81) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:23 pm

@ Dana (#220), re “I’ll work every day to make Washington, D.C. as inconsequential in your life as I can”:

That is indeed the very best line of Perry’s speech! He needs to keep that one, word for word — and in fact, it should become his campaign tag-line, the line he begins and ends EVERY speech with.

Someone else may have linked it, but if not, here’s the full-text of his “as prepared for delivery” remarks.

Beldar (485693) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:25 pm

-Comment by Icy Texan — 8/13/2011 @ 4:05 pm-

Fine. Stipulated. But how many activists are out there doing that compared with how many people don’t believe in God?

It would be wishful thinking to pretend that a significant number of those that are clinic bombers are self proclaimed Christians? Does that justify characterizing all Christians as bombers? Of course not.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:27 pm

#338… Machinist, not looking to pick a fight with you and also not saying (obviously) that it’s an absolute that an atheist would be immoral… just saying that other than the law of the land, in theory, an atheist would be free to live a life as dissolute or immoral (as defined by Judeo/Christian code) as said atheist chose to live.

Just my opinion…

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:28 pm

==If there were no God, the values you live by would not exist@ Dana==

Not sure this is the case. I’m not going to comment further on this thread because I have to run. But I just want to quickly say that it seems to me that the last 5 of the 10 commandments express normative values and work really quite well as a guide for civilized living whether or not God exists or whether one believes in a religion or not.

elissa (32a457) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:38 pm

FWIW, new thread up on the IA Straw Poll.

Karl (37b303) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:41 pm

Comment by elissa — 8/13/2011 @ 4:38 pm–

I agree.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:41 pm

-Comment by ColonelHaiku — 8/13/2011 @ 4:28 pm-

True enough, but I think most people obey secular laws rather than living by their religious convictions. I do know people who live by their faith and I highly respect them. My partner was one and I trusted him with everything I had.

I don’t think you can claim that people who claim to be Christian are necessarily more law abiding than atheists, at least not those in politics.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:46 pm

I do not consider those values a universal truth that I can impose on others. I leave well enough alone unless something is too bad like a man beating a woman. Then I will step in. This may be hypocritical of me but it is my code.

Machinist, if these Christian values are not universal truths that can be imposed others, if you intervene on behalf of a woman being beaten, are you not imposing your Christian values on the man doing the beating?

My greater question to you is, if there is no God, where do moral values originate? Because Christians and Jews both believed that man was formed in the image of God, Hammurabi’s and his Code, although pre-dating Christianity, certainly was derived from the same source – God. Otherwise, where did Hammurabi get his code from?

The point for me is, morality, values and ethics do not and cannot originate in a vacuum.

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:47 pm

@ Beldar,

That is indeed the very best line of Perry’s speech! He needs to keep that one, word for word — and in fact, it should become his campaign tag-line, the line he begins and ends EVERY speech with.

I agree, Beldar. He should not let up. However, I am reminded (and still in disbelief) that there are those that sincerely believe that making government inconsequential to the citizenry is akin to abandoning ship. The other side believes with everything in them that government – and more of it – is the answer. How mind-boggling is that!

Dana (4eca6e) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:51 pm

#352 – Icy Texan, with your permission, I would like to repost one of your comments, which was a classic and a saver, and which somehow seems to be appropriate here.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:51 pm

You know, yesterday at Instapundit there was a link to Ann Althouse with a video of a protest on the grounds(?) of the State House in Madison, where someone tried to grab Ann’s camera from her, and her son inserted himself between her attacker and his Mother.
Later, the cop arrived saying that the action of the son could be cited for Disturbing the Peace(sic) since he was joining a dispute that he was not a party to.
I thought that officer would make a valued member of the London Constabulary.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:52 pm

Dana,
The difference is that they are only my beliefs. I do not have a right to claim they are higher values. In answer to your question, yes I am imposing my values on him and I do not claim to have the right to do so. I’m just outlaw I guess. I do not believe there are universal values or a universal code of right and wrong. If I did believe this I would be an agnostic.

I think early codes of conduct grew out of a need to govern social interaction rather than regulate sin. When people are living in close proximity they need rules to prevent conflict or chaos. The larger the population the more the rules, generally. It is like tort law, it comes from social need rather than moral imperative.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:57 pm

And that’s the whole problem with the social conservatives, they lack the tolerance gene that is an integral part of their christian bretheren outside the conservative movement.

I think this reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of what social conservatives, especially evangelicals, believe. They are obligated to share their beliefs with others as part of a religious duty to reach out to others — as opposed to viewing religion as personal or spiritual ritual. Most evangelicals think it is as wrong to judge the worth of their fellow men as it is to remain silent about their Christian beliefs.

DRJ (a83b8b) — 8/13/2011 @ 4:58 pm

I think this is why you see similar laws or rules in different societies with different religious beliefs and little or no contact. They have the needs of social interaction in common.

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:00 pm

The point for me is, morality, values and ethics do not and cannot originate in a vacuum.

Human experience. The idea that we all need to get along to get along, is a universal truth and not the property of any religion.

Spartacvs (2d9449) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:01 pm

#376 < LOL. Did he really say that??? Of all people. What is wrong with that picture? Unreal. Can't make this stuff up, folks.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:05 pm

Civilization is that stage of man’s development where social conduct has been codified to such a degree that groups must join together and hire individuals to monitor and enforce those rules of conduct….

…or something like that.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:05 pm

Tex @238 So you can’t be a true conservative if you aren’t religious?
Comment by Spartacvs — 8/13/2011 @ 4:05 pm

— You cannot be a true conservative unless you have a tolerance for peaceful religious practices . . . something that SOME militant, politically active atheists do not have.

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:16 pm

SpartacBS is one to talk about intolerance.

That is like Michael Moore telling someone to lose weight.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:17 pm

Permission granted, Summit

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:19 pm

Not islam you sadistic buttlicker.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:22 pm

It would be wishful thinking to pretend that a significant number of those that are clinic bombers are self proclaimed Christians? Does that justify characterizing all Christians as bombers? Of course not.
Comment by Machinist — 8/13/2011 @ 4:27 pm

— By that logic, are self-proclaimed atheists that spout anti-religious rhetoric or take anti-religious actions not “true” atheists?

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:24 pm

That is like tarring all atheists as maoists.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:25 pm

Only if they refuse to drop those “Little Red Books”.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:28 pm

#381 – Thanks

569.would you consider regulations to ban lead paint on kids toys overbearing?Comment by Spartacvs — 8/12/2011 @ 8:36 pm

– No. But in your case we consider it to be too little too late.

Comment by Icy Texan — 8/13/2011 @ 3:38 am

LOL!!!

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:28 pm

Very Good, Summit (and Icy), you may have a cookie!

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:29 pm

Human experience. The idea that we all need to get along to get along, is a universal truth and not the property of any religion.
Comment by Spartacvs — 8/13/2011 @ 5:01 pm

— Not exclusively the provenance of any religion, but certainly a shared ethos.

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:32 pm

Indirect word from the White House on next year’s election….

Why No Democrat Will Challenge Obama….
Should Obama be primaried? Liberals are fed up with the president, but no Democrat is threatening to challenge him.
And one reason, reports Eleanor Clift, is race.

Well, I’m glad they settled that.
H/T- Hot Air

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:42 pm

Summit, I was probably one of the biggest Newt fans, back in the usenet era, I didn’t know what
usenet was back then, but I gradually came to believe, you can’t believe a word he says, not only
his personal situation, but AGW, Freddie Mac, et al.

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:44 pm

#391 – ian cormac, you’re entitled to your opinion.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 5:56 pm

Hmmmm, could Spartacus be a closet conservative, a conservative trapped in loony liberal’s body about to bust out and to become a fanatical right-winger, if only he can break his umbilical cord?

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:01 pm

The Spartaccubus
all bombast and bluster but
no significance

Colonelhaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:08 pm

colonel throw peanuts
he want to feed the monkey
but spurty fling poo

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:10 pm

Christian right wingers are fair game to the Obama media[but I repeat myself] because they are not fanatic muslims.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:11 pm

spurty nothin’ but
red-assed liberal monkey
regarding his tail

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:13 pm

Oops, #393 was for #392, not #391

#391, I’m shocked …, shocked, I tell you.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:16 pm

he’s been with the world
colonel tired of soup du jour
spurty just spud boy

ColonelHaiku (d1f5ff) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:18 pm

clazy amelicans

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:23 pm

391-392-whatever

I’ll remember this, Summit.
It’s going down on my list as we speak.
…scibbles……

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:24 pm

see, I got so upset, I dropped my ‘r’.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:25 pm

-Comment by Icy Texan — 8/13/2011 @ 5:24 pm-
“By that logic, are self-proclaimed atheists that spout anti-religious rhetoric or take anti-religious actions not “true” atheists?”

They probably are atheists but that does not mean all or most atheists are anti-religious activists and it would be wrong and possibly bigoted to say they are based on a relatively small number of creeps. I ask that you apply the same standards to those activists that you do to Christians that do bad things in the name of Christianity, and the same standards to me that you do to most Christians who do not do bad things. This seems fair unless you have reason to believe that most or a significant portion of atheists are out there making trouble. Do you?

Machinist (b6f7da) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:26 pm

🙂

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:28 pm

😎

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:28 pm

Recent story on atheists protesting 9/11 Museum contents:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/atheists-sue-cross-world-trade-center-museum/story?id=14169830

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:38 pm

The original question was muddled by referring to a “declared atheist”, whatever that conjures up in one’s mind.

I think “religion” is belief about “ultimate realities”, the “big picture”, one’s “world view”. It is hard for me to imagine a more fundamental question than whether or not a spiritual or divine reality exists in addition to the more obvious physical reality. One who believes there is no divine being is an atheist. That alone says very little about other aspects of an individual. An individual can be an atheist without promoting a public policy of repression of theistic belief as well as have a moral code more or less consistent with a historical “Judeo-Christian” moral code.

Hence, I think it would be possible for an atheist to be a very acceptable candidate.

Now, it may be an interesting philosophical question as to what is the source of moral belief and behavior if not from divine revelation, and many have asserted that if divine standards are rejected then people can replace them with whatever standards they like, but one does not by necessity need to reject a Judeo-Christian ethic simply because one is an atheist.

MD in Philly (ff9465) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:41 pm

I reject bourbon, but that doesn’t make me a teetotaler.

Another Drew - Restore the Republic / Obama Sucks! (eeb8e7) — 8/13/2011 @ 6:50 pm

#227 Another Drew

Thank you for that link, Drew. I find Ms. Glick persuasive, especially in the following two paragraphs.

For all the deficiencies of the neoconservative worldview, at least the neoconservatives act out of a deep-seated belief that the US as a force for good in the world and out of concern for maintaining America’s role as the leader of the free world. In stark contrast, Obama’s foreign policy is based on a fundamental anti-American view of the US and a desire to end the US’s role as the leading world power. And the impact of Obama’s foreign policy on US and global security has been devastating.

From Europe to Asia to Russia to Latin America to the Middle East and Africa, Obama has weakened the US and turned on its allies. He has purposely strengthened US adversaries worldwide as part of an overall strategy of divesting an unworthy America from its role as world leader. He has empowered the anti-American UN to replace the US as the arbiter of US foreign policy. And so, absent the American sheriff, US adversaries from the Taliban to Vladimir Putin to Hugo Chavez to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are empowered to attack America and its allies.

I believe I will start reading Meade, too.

felipe (2ec14c) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:00 pm

Oops! I mean #229!

felipe (2ec14c) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:02 pm

I have never known a single avowed atheist who wasn’t an elitist, condescending, pseudo-intellectual who had a certain contempt for Christians and Jews especially – Miranda

This had been my experience as well.

felipe (2ec14c) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:07 pm

Iowa social conservative?

Good one Bachmann you should be a comedian………….oh wait she was serious right?

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:09 pm

. I am encountering more of this lately from people I considered friendly.

Comment by Machinist — 8/13/2011 @ 2:07 pm

I love you, Machinist. Not sarcasm, but the real, “I will die in this man’s place” kind of love.

If you would like to represent atheists,
If you would fight to preserve the rights of others,
If you would persue the honest search for truth, wherever it may lead, and be honest to yourself,
then I, for one, would be proud to know you.

felipe (2ec14c) — 8/13/2011 @ 8:56 pm

Machinist, please feel free to: 1) stop making false assertions about what I have said; 2) stop making false assertions about what I believe to be true; 3) stop falsely accusing me of suffering from the liberal disease of absolutism.

Icy Texan (793407) — 8/13/2011 @ 9:05 pm

I think Penn Jillette is an atheist who appreciates the fact that religious people can honestly care enough about others in a way that they must try to save the other.

SteveG (cc5dc9) — 8/13/2011 @ 10:28 pm

You should know Kevin Drum, doesn’t think Perry has much of chance, you can laugh now, it saves time.

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:00 pm

“What about Pastafarianism?”

That’s a good religion, but all that lasagna and ravioli can be fattening.

Dave Surls (e7175c) — 8/13/2011 @ 11:34 pm

When I think Texas A&M, I think football. Odd, nobody mentioned it.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/14/2011 @ 4:50 am

Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster …. i.e. Pastafarianism.

http://www.venganza.org/ See esp. propaganda & sightings tabs. Their FB page has 65K + “likes”. It’s a lot more organized than I thought – they even published a book, The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

It is pretty amusing. “Try us for 30 days – your old church will probably take you back” … Not so amusing, though, because they are literally trying to undermine traditionally recognized religions. One soldier brought his Gospel of the FSM to boot camp as his “holy book”, they tried to get on the census on Australia, etc. All the benefits of a recognized religion – tax-free status too.

Miranda (4104db) — 8/14/2011 @ 7:12 am

What about the religion of gorebull warming.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/14/2011 @ 8:59 am

What about the religion of gorebull warming?

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/14/2011 @ 8:59 am

“One who believes there is no divine being is an atheist. That alone says very little about other aspects of an individual. An individual can be an atheist without promoting a public policy of repression of theistic belief as well as have a moral code more or less consistent with a historical “Judeo-Christian” moral code.”

MD in Philly – I agree with your statements above. I also agree with Miranda’s statement:

“I have never known a single avowed atheist who wasn’t an elitist, condescending, pseudo-intellectual who had a certain contempt for Christians and Jews especially;”

because that has been my experience. I am glad Machinist came forward to discuss his beliefs on this thread, reaffirming my belief that he is a man of great honor and integrity, but also to educate me that not all atheists are like the ones I have experienced to date. For the past 30 years I have lived close to a large university, which has likely colored the type and activism of atheists of whom I have come in contact.

daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 8/14/2011 @ 9:17 am

Yeah well the anti-religion except islam atheists can drink a drano coffee.

DohBiden (d54602) — 8/14/2011 @ 8:14 pm

Are Axelrod’s vicious lies and mudslinging the hope and change that they promised?

More like they’re chanting, when it comes to being slimy, yes, we can, yes, we can.

But what else would you expect from that gutter trash, the same kind of trash that ran the Gore campaign.

Like Bush, Perry will rub their faces in their own filth.

Summit, NJ (75c9eb) — 8/15/2011 @ 4:32 am

before you make up your mind about the RINO Perry, read this…
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/perrys_problematic_pals.html

kay2the2nd (9c73fc) — 8/15/2011 @ 6:18 am

He is a friend of the Aga Khan, the multimillionaire head of the Ismailis, a Shi’ite sect of Islam that today proclaims its nonviolence but in ages past was the sect that gave rise to the Assassins

So we’re supposed to oppose Muslims proclaiming violence is not the way, because some other Muslims were assassins 700 years ago?

Perry let on that this was all about whitewashing Islam’s bloody historical and modern-day record:

No he didn’t.

I love the idea George W Bush and all associated with him are in the back pocket of radical Islamofascism. Oh wait, love is perhaps the wrong word. Disgusted is probably a better word.

There are no secrets here, even if the stealth jihad is covert and sneaky.

There is no secret that there are horrible Muslims who want to kill us, enslave women, eliminate Jews. It shouldn’t be a secret that some Muslims think violence and oppression are wrong. They preach submission to their religion, but have worked out a way in their minds that this doesn’t mean being a monster.

This is not difficult to understand. We all have a soul, can pray, and are responsible for interpreting our religions. Judaism and Christianity have evolved over time, and it’s important that Islam do the same.

The last thing the Islamofascist wants is to recognize theirs is not the ‘One True Islam’. They have that in common with Pam Gellar (whom I usually like, when she’s taking on someone who really deserves it).

Grover Norquist didn’t hijack those planes or bomb those troops. We should recognize that it’s not Islam we hate, it’s the hate we hate. If someone out there wants to try to practice Islam without the hate, what’s the problem?

the world is more complex than that.

Dustin (b7410e) — 8/15/2011 @ 6:27 am

No, granted, but Norquist did have some poor judgement regarding the Marayati and the Alamoudis,
curiously something he seems to share with the Obama administration, who wants to release the man who tried to kill King Abdullah, early,

ian cormac (81c5c2) — 8/15/2011 @ 6:40 am

daley-

I hear you. Madison is the home of the “Freedom from Religion” Foundation (italics mine).

I agree that I’ve never known some one who went out of their way to let you know they were an atheist who didn’t believe they were intellectually superior, at least, if not superior in other ways.
Now, those who claim to be Christians can often be interpreted as thinking/acting like they are superior, but that is a perversion of Christianity. Christianity is NOT being “holier than thou” because of a set of morals and adherence to them, but belief in the fact that one can not live up to God’s moral standards and that we all need forgiveness. In one sense it as “simply one beggar telling another where to find bread”. The perversion comes when one thinks they can please God by first following His commandments adequately, or when one lets the desire to obey out of gratitude of forgiveness overshadow the primary reality of forgiveness. At least I think that is one way of putting it.

MD in Philly (cd9679) — 8/15/2011 @ 7:08 am

8/12/2011

The “Rick Perry Is Running” Thread

430 Responses to “The “Rick Perry Is Running” Thread”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out