"Obama general counsel Bob Bauer today sent a second, sharper letter to the Justice Department, directly attacking the Dallas billionaire funding a harsh attack ad, Harold Simmons."

Heres the ad:
START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Heres the link to the rest of the story(click More at the bottom)
START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

YOU be the judge!  ;)

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Has anyone else found it strange that Obama has fallen 2 points in the polls since the DNC convention has started?

It seems the more his camp disrespects Hillary, the more he falls!
If this continues the race will be over before it starts.

When McCain runs ads with Hillary and Biden telling it like it is. What chance does Obama have after that humility?

Rolo… [smiley=bash.gif]

Wouldn't it be totally insane if Hillary crossed party lines and became McCain's running mate??

*evil snicker*

I just want all of the press/reporters to get the heck outta Delaware.  They are running the most ridiculous stories in the newspapers here about Biden's every move.   Did you know that he actually takes his own tree clippings to the dump?  Sheesh!!

Melissa wrote on Aug 26^th, 2008 at 9:38pm:

Wouldn't it be totally insane if Hillary crossed party lines and became McCain's running mate?? *evil snicker*

That would make me sooo hard, but I guess thats TMI......LOL  ;D

Heres an everyday Joe, well.......even he knows whats going on!

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Better yet, McCain should get Bob Dole to share the ticket and then maybe Bob will share the Viagra with those broke dick senators and congressmen.

Maybe that will get those pricks working again? It’s not like they could F it up any worse than it already is!

Rolo ;D

cynjeep89 wrote on Aug 26^th, 2008 at 9:49pm:

Did you know that he actually takes his own tree clippings to the dump?  Sheesh!!

Well, that certainly qualifies him to be one heartbeat away from runnin' the joint.

Now they are even writing articles on the local gas station where Biden stopped to get his gasoline.  Welcome to Small Town, U.S.A.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I do have to admit that Tony, the man mentioned in this article, is a very cool guy and a great mechanic.

They also have a frozen M & M vending machine at his gas station......yummo!

Mmmm M&M's. ;) I cant wait till November.  :P
Policitians gone wild. [smiley=argue.gif]
all the best
thebb

I haven't seen the video of course but I read something interesting:  Among the first five speakers soon to be heard at the Republican convention are: Joe Leiberman, Tom Ridge, Rudy Guilani and Arnold Scharzenegger. What do these men have in common?

Charlie

;D

Father - Daughter Talk
 
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like
so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal
Democrat, and among other liberal ideals, was very much in
favor of higher taxes to support more government programs, in other
words, redistribution of wealth.
 
She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch
Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures
that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a
professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil,
selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.
 
One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher
taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs. The
self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be
the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by
asking how she was doing in school.
 
Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0
GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she
was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying,
which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew.
She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have
many college friends because she spent all her time studying.
 
Her father listened then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?"
She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy
classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is
so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always
invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show
up for classes because she's too hung over."
 
Her father asked her, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and
ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend
Audrey, who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA
and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."
 
The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily
fired back, "That's a crazy idea. How would that be fair? I've
worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and
a lot of hard work. Audrey has done next to nothing toward her
degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"
 
The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently "Welcome to the
Republican Party."

Charlie wrote on Aug 27^th, 2008 at 4:47pm:

I haven't seen the video of course but I read something interesting:  Among the first five speakers soon to be heard at the Republican convention are: Joe Leiberman, Tom Ridge, Rudy Guilani and Arnold Scharzenegger. What do these men have in common? Charlie

Uh, they all have male sex organs?

How about they're all from states that went democrat in the last presidential election?

That's interesting. I hadn't seen that one. Still, these men have one one other political thing in common.

Charlie

Whaddya mean, Charlie?

Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New York, and California. All blue states.

Edit to add: Great, Charlie. Change your response so mine doesn't make any sense.

All blue states - that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

They used to be Democrats, but saw the light?

Not that it will make any difference to the platform but they are all pro-choice.

The Democrats didn't do something similar.

Charlie

Has there ever been anyone running for President that had so many close friends that hated America?

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Lets see....No experience and most of the people he knows hate America. Yep, thats the guy to vote for......LMMFAO  ;D

SUCKERS!!!

All I know is that George Bush loves America but hates Americans. His administration has shown this every day. There is no way that I could support a party that ran him in 2004. Too bad really.

Charlie

wrote on Aug 27^th, 2008 at 6:41pm:

Has there ever been anyone running for President that had so many close friends that hated America? START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE Lets see....No experience and most of the people he knows hate America. Yep, thats the guy to vote for......LMMFAO  ;D SUCKERS!!!

Silly, George Bush Jr cant run again.  2 term limit.

I hate term limits. Rudy would have been Mayor forever.

Charlie

Charlie, you have your head screwed on politically better than most folks I know. Please tell me that you dont think Obama is the best choice in this race? :o

Actually, I was for Biden when it all started but Obama picked Biden as a running mate which shows that he ain't stupid. Obama is a populist. We've not had one that had a real chance....perhaps ever. He doesn't scare me. It would be impossible for anyone to do worse than Dubya. It's very sad that McCain has been kidnapped by the far right of the GOP. Someone said that the McCain of 2000 would never vote for the McCain of 2008.

One or two items are usually enough for me.  For me it's health care. If there was ever a time that it had a chance, it's now and I won't vote against my own self interest.

Finally, unlike the junta we have now, Obama will obey the law.

Charlie

So, tonight I see that the DNC convention did not even have a paper vote. In lieu of a real vote, Nancy Pelosi calls for the applause-O-meter for the binding count. What a joke!

That’s the DNC showing their version of you can’t ask (how I would have voted) and I won’t tell. They are really doing their constituents justice with this farce of a vote!

Rolo. >:(

Charlie wrote on Aug 27^th, 2008 at 7:59pm:

Obama will obey the law.

I will chaulk up that answer to the fact that you can not watch the videos of Obamas friends I have been posting!.....Sad!

Charlie wrote on Aug 27^th, 2008 at 7:03pm:

All I know is that George Bush loves America but hates Americans. His administration has shown this every day. There is no way that I could support a party that ran him in 2004. Too bad really. Charlie

Bush has had terrorist killed the world over....Obama parties and works with them.........you support a party that does that? Wow............

Two things:  

By obeying the law, I mean not treating the Constitution as some kind of arcane document to not take seriously.

It's the Bush family that has spent decades partying with Saudis. The Saudis visiting here on 9/11 for that matter. George 1st spent a lot of time over there not paying attention to what was going on.

Charlie

Looks like you got that vice-reversa, Matt:

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Ah, yes, and don't forget about the investment partnership with the Bush's and the Bin Ladens:
START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

You support a party that does that?  

Ok, im going to bed, but I want to put this question out.

You all have seen my "Father-daughter" talk post (even you Charlie)

Are you willing to give what you worked for to someone that has no intention of even working for anything themselves?

Ok, lets forget you Charlie, because you dont pay taxes and will say anything!

How about the rest of you on this site?.....are you ready to have your hard earned money given through higher taxes to people that refuse to work?

Dont all rush to answer in fear of somebody saying something agaisnt what you think!

ITS YOUR MONEY!!!!....GET IT?

Goodnight  :-*

You know something? If there was a party that supported truly conservative principles, I might consider becoming a member.

Sadly, a political party that supports those principles seems to be a thing of the past. Which is why I belong to no party. My vote always goes to the one who'll do the least damage and who has the shallowest reach into my pocket.

[quote]How about the rest of you on this site?.....are you ready to have your hard earned money given through higher taxes to people that refuse to work [/quote]

I can't forget that the period with the highest tax rates was the most prosperous for Americans as a whole, not just the top 3%.


Quote:

You know something? If there was a party that supported truly conservative principles, I might consider becoming a member.

Sensible. Too bad Republicans no longer allow a libertarian wing in the party. Not sure about Democrats for that matter.

Charlie

Quote:

I was for Biden when it all started but Obama picked Biden as a running mate which shows that he ain't stupid.

Obama didn't pick Biden, Putin did.  He wasn't on the short list until Russia invaded Georgia.  Thtat's when Obama decided he better find someone with some foreign policy experience, cause he doesn't have any.

Bob P wrote on Aug 28^th, 2008 at 7:00am:

Quote: I was for Biden when it all started but Obama picked Biden as a running mate which shows that he ain't stupid. Obama didn't pick Biden, Putin did.  He wasn't on the short list until Russia invaded Georgia.  Thtat's when Obama decided he better find someone with some foreign policy experience, cause he doesn't have any.

Why does he need any foreign policy experience?  Bush Jr has shown the only experience you need in foreign policy is to take money from terrorists.  It worked out well for Bush Jr.
Obama's 2 years in the Senate gives him shitloads more experience than what Bush Jr had.  Funny, I don't remember you bashing Bush for having no experience, and what experience he did have was just failing at stuff and asking Daddy and terrorists for more money.  

Partisan politics at its best. ::)

Oh, my God - Brian's in love.

wrote on Aug 28^th, 2008 at 12:18pm:

Oh, my God - Brian's in love.

Huh?  What are you talking about?
All I did was state facts about partisan politics.  

I did, however, find out that Carly Fiorina is working with McCain's campaign.  I always had a crush on her, even if she has 30 years on me.

No, you stated your opinions about partisan politics.

Bush ain't runnin' this time. Just once I'd like to see somebody enumerate BO's good points and how he'll help this country return to glory. "Change" don't do it for me. You can be shit, and "change" will flush you down the toilet.

Don't ask me to do the same for McCain. If you read the whole thread, you know that I vote only for the lesser of two evils - the one that has the shallowest reach into my pocket.

In preparation for tonight's $$$million dollar DNC egostravaganza, I give you the rock star himself. Does anyone know why Obama's speech is being given at Invesco Field? The Pepsi Center wasn't big enough for his ego.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Why is it outside? Easy. Today is the 45th anniversary of MLK's I have a dream speech.

Charlie

wrote on Aug 28^th, 2008 at 3:30pm:

The Pepsi Center wasn't big enough for his ego.

Obama's Head Is To Big For The Convention Center

Apparently the Pepsi Center, where the Democrat National Convention will be held, is not big enough for Barack Obama's (Barack America's) big fat head. Therefore he will be giving his acceptance speech at the Invesco Field Mile High Stadium. Believe it or not, there will be over 75,000 Obama Zombies there to take a look at, and see in person Obama's big fat head as he gleefully accepts the nomination of his party.

We can only hope that the Mile High Stadium will be big enough for his Mile High ego.

Barack America 2008, Yes we can!!! Less..

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

So much for global warming!....LMMFAO!  ;D

You have to say one thing: The guy can yak his way around anything. Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton could talk but Obama is different. He has almost a FDR abiltiy to woo Democrats. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Kennedy had his acceptance speech at the Los Angeles Coliseum in 1960.

Tis' historic no matter your politics. Fun. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

But will he woo the spineless undecideds in the middle?

Every election comes down to this.

Charlie wrote on Aug 28^th, 2008 at 7:53pm:

Tis' historic no matter your politics. Fun.

Oh yeah, tons of fun! ::)

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie, take the money that you dont have to pay in any taxes and get broadband. You need to see this video.....LOL  ;D

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

But will he woo the spineless undecideds in the middle?

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I certainly hope so.

Charlie

Brew, I was not talking about BO or JM.  I was referring to the striking similarities between what republicans are saying now vs what the democrats were saying 8 years ago.  the lack of experience, the radicalism, the skeletons in the closet, the priviledged life and blah blah blah.  Its the same damn thing, but it's switched sides.

And I dont think being undecided at this point is spineless.  McCain hasnt even announced his VP yet, ffs.  
I like McCain's experience and I think he would remain strong under pressure, however, he has been in politics for how long now?  After 30 years in politics, I think he is part of the problem, not the solution.
Which is why I am not sure I want to vote for Ron Paul.  I love what he says.....but he has been in politics since forever and is a part of what I feel is the problem.  His speeches seem to be the most common sense approach to me though.
That leaves Obama.  I actually like the inexperience because I think the shock of Washington should make anyone talk like Ross Perrot.  Unfortunately, I'm not sure if I feel as if Obama would do much besides be empathetic.  
I think that's the 'change'.  We are going to be empathetic and fucked instead of just fucked.


So what's a voter to do?  

I was just checking out this website.  START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I'm pretty sure I have a nosebleed now.

Charlie wrote on Aug 27^th, 2008 at 9:31pm:

Two things:   By obeying the law, I mean not treating the Constitution as some kind of arcane document to not take seriously. It's the Bush family that has spent decades partying with Saudis. The Saudis visiting here on 9/11 for that matter. George 1st spent a lot of time over there not paying attention to what was going on. Charlie

And Obama will treat it like a living document to be inturpreted to suit the liberal needs......

This does what to the constitution?   In my mind it becomes just another worthless piece of paper.

-P.

McCains vice president pick is a woman Gov Sarah Palin..........LMAO just how many disgruntled Hillary voters is he going to steal. Brilliant LMFAO!!!! Obama doesn't have a chance.

Mat wrote on Aug 29^th, 2008 at 12:25pm:

McCains vice president pick is a woman Gov Sarah Palin..........LMAO just how many disgruntled Hillary voters is he going to steal. Brilliant LMFAO!!!! Obama doesn't have a chance.

And shes HOT!!!! ...LMAO!!!  ;D

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I was just listening to NPR this morning on how in the world McCain was going to top the 80,000 mile high stadium thing and someone suggested a woman VP would do it.

Holy shit!  This is FUN!!  LMAO

Sarah Palin is one tough cookie and she can shot a gun too.You have to be stouter than the average bear to live in Alaska. Those bush planes can be pretty rough.

She will also have Biden stuttering in no time at the vice presidential debate!

[smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Quote:

And Obama will treat it like a living document to be inturpreted to suit the liberal needs...... This does what to the constitution?   In my mind it becomes just another worthless piece of paper

So the constitution means nothing to you.

Every adminstration tries to imterpret the thing but unlike the horror that occupies the White House, they don't defy the Congress and courts when told to knock off treating the place like a 3rd world country. What we have now is new unless you count Nixon

Charlie

She's very pretty and looks like Tina Fey

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Aug 29^th, 2008 at 8:52pm:

She's very pretty and looks like Tina Fey Charlie

[smiley=ohjez.gif]  Charlie, have you not read anything about her before making this first comment??  LMAO!!

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE'mhardsign.gif

Charlie

wrote on Aug 29^th, 2008 at 4:37pm:

She will also have Biden stuttering in no time at the vice presidential debate!

Why is it that Biden has to go into his momma talking to him about his stuttering?

Sarah in her speech never said a word about having been told that she was carrying a down syndrome baby, and said "I dont care, its my child"

This chick has more excutive experience than both of them together, a governer makes more desicions in one week than a sentor does in a year!

Bye bye, Odrama!  ;D

Time. It takes some time. You may be right but I have serious doubts that enough Hillary supporters will vote against their own self interest to put her over. Women that satsify today's Republicans are not exactly what women's lib was all about. Not at all, in fact.

Charlie

Charlie.....Hilary supporters are all ready there.....LMAO ;D

Well, to go back to Sen. Bentsen's famous quote to Dan Quayle (slightly misused)  We KNOW Hillary, we've worked with Hillary and son, SHE ain't HILLARY!

I'm with Charlie - I CARE about my health care and want to see it reformed not a bandaid placed on it.

I want to see my retirement PROTECTED - not given away to "undocumented workers!"

I want to see the budget balanced AGAIN (like the last democratic regime) and a surplus back in THIS country - and I don't care what happens to third world countries. I care about THIS country.

Terriorism IS a threat and THIS country should be protected IN THIS COUNTRY - NOT over there! Clean UP our immigration (other countries have a lot better immigration safeguards in place than we do) and we just might not have the problems with terrorism that we are being told that we do.

Get our Education system back on track. Dubba and his band of "friends" has cut our education system to the point that we're turning out a bunch of imbeciles and calling them educated. We're way behind in the world and need to catch up.

And I'd like to be drawing a little more than 1.5% interest on my savings account.

We'll see what the Repubs come up with at their convention. Personally, I think the dems did a hell of a job with theirs. I'm a great fan of the "American President" and thought Obama did a great take off of Andy Shepherd's speach... it worked in the movie and I think it worked for him...

Hugs BD

BarbaraD wrote on Aug 30^th, 2008 at 6:41am:

I'm a great fan of the "American President" and thought Obama did a great take off of Andy Shepherd's speach... it worked in the movie and I think it worked for him... Hugs BD

I'm not a movie buff at all.  American President is a movie?

Obama took his speech from a movie?

Quote:

Well, to go back to Sen. Bentsen's famous quote to Dan Quayle (slightly misused)  We KNOW Hillary, we've worked with Hillary and son, SHE ain't HILLARY!

That's a positive in my world.



Quote:

I'm with Charlie - I CARE about my health care and want to see it reformed not a bandaid placed on it.

If reform means a governmental take over, I'll pass on reform.



Quote:

I want to see my retirement PROTECTED - not given away to "undocumented workers!"

I'd advise that you not hand out your bank account numbers then. THAT is your retirement. Social Security isn't a retirement.



Quote:

I want to see the budget balanced AGAIN (like the last democratic regime) and a surplus back in THIS country - and I don't care what happens to third world countries. I care about THIS country. Terriorism IS a threat and THIS country should be protected IN THIS COUNTRY - NOT over there! Clean UP our immigration (other countries have a lot better immigration safeguards in place than we do) and we just might not have the problems with terrorism that we are being told that we do.

"regime" is a good word for that era, but I agree...the budget should be balanced.

Isolationism didn't work in the past, it won't work now. One can't wait until the fire is at property line before breaking out the water hose.



Quote:

Get our Education system back on track. Dubba and his band of "friends" has cut our education system to the point that we're turning out a bunch of imbeciles and calling them educated. We're way behind in the world and need to catch up.

Our education system was a disaster long before the current administration came in.......and no matter who wins this contest, I'm afraid that situation will continue for a number of reasons.



Quote:

And I'd like to be drawing a little more than 1.5% interest on my savings account.

Why in God's name do you have money in a savings account?



Quote:

We'll see what the Repubs come up with at their convention. Personally, I think the dems did a hell of a job with theirs. I'm a great fan of the "American President" and thought Obama did a great take off of Andy Shepherd's speach... it worked in the movie and I think it worked for him...

An American Idol version of politics will be our downfall.

Looks like Charlie and me will just have to follow E. Roosevelt's example and "vote early and vote often!" :-*

Hugs BD

BarbaraD wrote on Aug 30^th, 2008 at 1:28pm:

Looks like Charlie and me will just have to follow E. Roosevelt's example and "vote early and vote often!" :-* Hugs BD

Worked for Richard J. Daley.......  ;D

Quote:

Charlie.....Hilary supporters are all ready there.....LMAO

Nope

Wonderful right wing blog stuff here. It's amazing how fast it shows up.

Bush had a better deal when it comes to voting. Lose the popluar vote by 500,000 and have Katherine Harris and Bush's brother Jeb, count only white Republican votes in the recounts, then have the Clarence Thomas wing and the supremes create the nightmare that he is.

All Obama has to do is bring up heath care as a part of every answered question during a debate. He can't lose if he does.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Aug 30^th, 2008 at 3:11pm:

Quote: Charlie.....Hilary supporters are all ready there.....LMAO Nope Wonderful right wing blog stuff here. It's amazing how fast it shows up. Bush had a better deal when it comes to voting. Lose the popluar vote by 500,000 and have Katherine Harris and Bush's brother Jeb, count only white Republican votes in the recounts, then have the Clarence Thomas wing and the supremes create the nightmare that he is. All Obama has to do is bring up heath care as a part of every answered question during a debate. He can't lose if he does. Charlie

Excuse me, but Bush aint running....is he, Charlie?....Sorry...LOL  ;D

He he. That's what the GOP is having a hard time convincing the rest of the country to little effect.  8-)

Bush is scheduled to attend the convention but I'd put money on the notion of the delegates that they would like him to go to Crawford for a week or so.  :D

Democrats love it.   START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie

Im not sure I like the pick of Palin here.

1st of all, the Clintons will eventually FULLY back Obama and her "supporters" will not vote Mccain in the end.  Neither Clinton has a shot at the White House now but they could gain power in a Democratic White house if they repair the relationship and help Obama get elected.

2nd, 2 years ago Palin was the Mayor of a small town.  Her lack of experience wouldn't be an issue if Mccain wasn't very old.

3rd, in my eyes, Palin has actually lowered McCains chances to win.  Before he picked her, I thought Mccain was the clear favorite to win..... how its 50/50 in my eyes.

With all this said, I think it needs to be said that this country has survived a ton of horrible Presidents.  In fact, it would be nice to vote for the better candidate sometime, not the lesser of two evils.

This year I find it difficult to imagine that anyone thinks Obama is a better choice than McCain for President.  Biden/Obama would be an easier sell to me than Obama/Biden.  Isn't it smarter to let the experienced person take the reigns with the inexperienced one learning on the job to succeed when the older one is done?

Anyway..... I said I thought the VP selection would matter more this year than most Pres elections.  I hope I am wrong and McCain overcomes an obviously weak choice.

Let the real fun begin..... anyone else wish Obama and Palin would debate and McCain and Biden would debate?  Those would be interesting.

I really wish Leiberman had been McCain's choice.  I hate partisan politics and that ticket would make the far right cringe but probably would win easy.

All things said.......... Michael buffer take it away!!!!!!!!

Do you really think the Clintons will fully support Obama? When have they fully supported anyone but themselves. I think they look at their loss of the nomination as the democrats look at the 2000 loss, and so do their supporters.. Do you think she really wants Obama to win? McCain is old, he probably will serve one term, and I bet money that she wants to run in 2012. They will give enough lip service to keep the party on their side, but thats about it.

Bill Clinton will never fully support Obama as long as his bank statement is down $20 million, so I’m sure Bill and Hill will find a way to torpedo Obama in some fashion.

Hillary and Biden are secretly working for the RNC, and wouldn’t it be something if the GOP paid off the Clinton’s primary debt for their back alley sabotage eforts.

The DNC and their constituents are doing all the work and providing the gaffs for McCane’s commercials.

Rolo……….. :D

It dont get no funnier than this....LMMFAO!!!!!~!

I just about pissed myself......ROTFFLMMFAO!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Holy shit.....LMAO!!!  [smiley=crackup.gif] [smiley=crackup.gif] [smiley=crackup.gif]

wrote on Aug 29^th, 2008 at 10:24pm:

[quote author=744542545E515E5253370 link=1219796802/50#50 date=1220042221] This chick has more excutive experience than both of them together, a governer makes more desicions in one week than a sentor does in a year!

Why are so many people under the impression that 'executive experience' makes a good president ?  Clinton, Carter, and GW Bush all had plenty of it as governors, yet they are not widely seen as great presidents.  JFK, FDR and Lincoln? - not a lot of executive experience before moving to the White House.  

monty wrote on Aug 31^st, 2008 at 3:48pm:

wrote on Aug 29th, 2008 at 10:24pm: [quote author=744542545E515E5253370 link=1219796802/50#50 date=1220042221] This chick has more excutive experience than both of them together, a governer makes more desicions in one week than a sentor does in a year! Why are so many people under the impression that 'executive experience' makes a good president ?  Clinton, Carter, and GW Bush all had plenty of it as governors, yet they are not widely seen as great presidents.  JFK, FDR and Lincoln? - not a lot of executive experience before moving to the White House.

Well ... Obama has maybe 143 DAYS experience as a senator before he decided to run for president (count his days actually working and ignore his near total lack of votes) and Biden? All he has ever been and will ever be is a socialist politician.

Palin is a true woman with EXECUTIVE office experience ... 10 years as a mayor, and the past two years as the Governor of Alaska taking on the sucmbag lawyers from both parties.

Obama has run NOTHING!, but his mouth!  ;)    

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

monty wrote on Aug 31^st, 2008 at 3:48pm:

[quote author=67424343542D0 link=1219796802/50#55 date=1220063091][quote author=744542545E515E5253370 link=1219796802/50#50 date=1220042221] This chick has more excutive experience than both of them together, a governer makes more desicions in one week than a sentor does in a year!

Monty misquoted because I did not write that! :-?

Edit to add; but I do agree with it. ;)

I wrote that, thats why I answered.  ;)

Palins' hard line "NO" to abortion in any way, shape or form is not going to win many Female votes the way I see it.

The Dems. will exploit this to the 10th degree, you can bet the farm on that one. If they don't, it would be a bad move on their part.

Scenario: Some scumbag rapes a Woman, she gets pregnant and has a bad time with it and her life is in danger, she still would have to have this child even if it meant she was going to die? WTF kind of thinking is that?

I personally believe abortion should NOT to be used as an everyday form of birth control, but there needs to be SOME logical thinking about this and her viewpoint is way to hard line for me to fathom.

Jimmers

For those making comments on what Sarah Palin "thinks" about abortion, please direct me to a reliable source which states what she has said about it?  I have yet to see anywhere that she is anti-abortion when it comes to rape, incest or threat of a womans health. :-/

Melissa wrote on Sep 1^st, 2008 at 12:12pm:

For those making comments on what Sarah Palin "thinks" about abortion, please direct me to a reliable source which states what she has said about it?  I have yet to see anywhere that she is anti-abortion when it comes to rape, incest or threat of a womans health. :-/

Brvo Melissa!

This subject already got beat worse than a horse on the right to life thread.......... ::)

Mel,
Got this from the Huffington Post, "In November 2006, then gubernatorial candidate Sarah Palin declared that she would not support an abortion for her own daughter even if she had been raped.  Granting exceptions only if the mother's life was in danger, Palin said that when it came to her daughter, "I would choose life.".

Palin also stated that she would fund Abstinance Only programs in schools,  She stated, "The explicit sex-ed programs," she added, "will not find my support.".

Look here to see her positions on other issues

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Palins 17 year old is carrying a child right now. :o

Carolyn, do you have the link to the Huffington Post quote?

Ok, um, Carolyn?  I checked out HuffingtonPost.com and when I clicked on the "Sarah Palin" link, I could not BELIEVE the the front page!  It was like reading the Star or Globe. :-?

Quote:

Scenario: Some scumbag rapes a Woman, she gets pregnant and has a bad time with it and her life is in danger, she still would have to have this child even if it meant she was going to die? WTF kind of thinking is that?

Pat Roberston & Co. and some Catholics would say that it's God's will and make her go through the thing.

Mel. Her very stong opposition to abortion is on a lot of columns and even here in The Buffalo News yesterday:

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

She lost me with her saying that she supports teaching creationism in public schools and the moronic notion of abstinance only. She probably believes that unless your organization forbids the use of condoms, you don't get your aids medicine or care packages.

Bleaugh.

Charlie

Charlie, nice cartoon page, lol


at ontheissues.org, it says this:

Praised by pro-life groups for keeping Down syndrome baby. (Aug 2008)
Every baby is created with a future and potential. (Aug 2008)
Pro-life. (Nov 2006)
Pro-contraception, pro-woman, pro-life. (Aug 2006)



So...which is it??

I don't understand your question Mel.

On this link.... it's new to me today. I was interested in this guy's cartoons because The Buffalo News usually has good stuff and is left of center. Warren Buffet owns the thing.... Anyway, I rarely surf; even politics. I didn't look very deep at first because dialup is so damned slow. Any place that links me to Leonard Pitts, gets my attention. He's one of my favorite columnists.

If you don't know her abortion position, watch PBS or CSPAN. I have to now that I have only very basic cable which doesn't have stuff like CNN......anyway, all the PBS and CSPAN yakkers discuss it.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Sep 1^st, 2008 at 2:54pm:

Quote: Scenario: Some scumbag rapes a Woman, she gets pregnant and has a bad time with it and her life is in danger, she still would have to have this child even if it meant she was going to die? WTF kind of thinking is that? Pat Roberston & Co. and some Catholics would say that it's God's will and make her go through the thing. Mel. Her very stong opposition to abortion is on a lot of columns and even here in The Buffalo News yesterday: START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE She lost me with her saying that she supports teaching creationism in public schools and the moronic notion of abstinance only. She probably believes that unless your organization forbids the use of condoms, you don't get your aids medicine or care packages. Bleaugh. Charlie

Evangelicals and catholics wouldn't use "God's will" since rape is not within God's will.  Their point would be that life begins at conception and that no human is less than another no matter how conceived or who the parents are.  Thus the way a child was conceived, the potential for handicap, or hardship on the mother because of the fact it was not her fault she got pregnant would not be a reason to kill a baby. This is a common misconception.  

Wouldn't it be hypocritical to say life begins at conception but be OK with abortion in cases of rape?

Just want to clarify that point.  I am not debating the merits of the argument but clarifying the actual rationale behind their beliefs.

Here you go mel.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

Evangelicals and catholics wouldn't use "God's will" since rape is not within God's will.

You're no doubt right about Catholics anyway. Sorry about that.

Charlie

Melissa wrote on Sep 1^st, 2008 at 3:12pm:

at ontheissues.org, it says this: Praised by pro-life groups for keeping Down syndrome baby. (Aug 2008) Every baby is created with a future and potential. (Aug 2008) Pro-life. (Nov 2006) Pro-contraception, pro-woman, pro-life. (Aug 2006) So...which is it??

Mel,

Aren't those all very consistent?  Pro-life does not rule out pro-contraception.  She sounds like she has a long record of being 'on the record' and being consistent.  At least with her, you know who you're voting for (or against).

I like consistency.  If I had to choose between Obama and, say... Charlie  :)  I'd have to go with Charlie.  I haven't seen Charlie ever waver from his views.

FramCire wrote on Sep 1^st, 2008 at 6:34pm:

[quote author=745F56455B5E52370 link=1219796802/75#81 date=1220295272] Wouldn't it be hypocritical to say life begins at conception but be OK with abortion in cases of rape?

Wouldn't it be hypocritical to say life begins at conception and then say ' Kill them all and let god sort them out" ?

That seems a little inconsistent to me, but I'm just a loony west coaster.

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 12:38am:

FramCire wrote on Sep 1st, 2008 at 6:34pm: [quote author=745F56455B5E52370 link=1219796802/75#81 date=1220295272] Wouldn't it be hypocritical to say life begins at conception but be OK with abortion in cases of rape? Wouldn't it be hypocritical to say life begins at conception and then say ' Kill them all and let god sort them out" ? That seems a little inconsistent to me, but I'm just a loony west coaster.

I honestly don't know a truly religious christian who says your quote about innocent children.  Are there pro-life people saying to kill all children and let God sort them out??  That would be very inconsistent.

I havent heard it said about children.  I hear it frequently regarding people who live in the middle east.  

Quote:

Wouldn't it be hypocritical to say life begins at conception but be OK with abortion in cases of rape?

I give up. I never wrote this.......unless it's part of a quote that I can't find.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 1:37am:

Quote: Wouldn't it be hypocritical to say life begins at conception but be OK with abortion in cases of rape? I give up. I never wrote this.......unless it's part of a quote that I can't find. Charlie

In your post there was a quote about the rape scenario.  My comment was replying to that.  

It can be extremely difficult within this new forum to edit a post that has multiple quotations from other posters and get the proper things credited to the proper people.

When a quote is attributed to the wrong poster, I'd bet a dollar that the person doing the quoting isn't doing it maliciously.

For the first time in my life since I started voting, I think I'm going to have to sit this one out.  There is not one candidate who I feel reflects my values and viewpoint.

And yes, Sarah Palin's 17 year old daughter is pregnant.  According to the news this morning, she is marrying her 18 year old boyfriend and they are going to live happily ever after (please note the sarcasm here).

deltadarlin wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 8:32am:

For the first time in my life since I started voting, I think I'm going to have to sit this one out.  There is not one candidate who I feel reflects my values and viewpoint. And yes, Sarah Palin's 17 year old daughter is pregnant.  According to the news this morning, she is marrying her 18 year old boyfriend and they are going to live happily ever after (please note the sarcasm here).

I don't know if I have ever found a candidate (especially in a National election) who reflects my values and viewpoints.  I have always voted based on who I thought would do a better job or in many cases who would do a less horrible job.

At least her daughter's pregnancy lays rest to the rumors that the Palin's youngest child was actually her daughter's kid.  had that rumor been true, it would have been one heck of a hollywood type moment.

Melissa wrote on Sep 1^st, 2008 at 12:12pm:

For those making comments on what Sarah Palin "thinks" about abortion, please direct me to a reliable source which states what she has said about it?  I have yet to see anywhere that she is anti-abortion when it comes to rape, incest or threat of a womans health. :-/

[quote]"She would not seek out this issue. She feels like there are several other issues that are paramount to the future of the state," said Curtis Smith, spokesman for the Palin campaign.

Smith said Palin is opposed to abortion, but believes an exception should be made if the health of the mother is in danger.

That's the only exception Palin would make, though, Smith said.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE


wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 7:29am:

It can be extremely difficult within this new forum to edit a post that has multiple quotations from other posters and get the proper things credited to the proper people. When a quote is attributed to the wrong poster, I'd bet a dollar that the person doing the quoting isn't doing it maliciously.

Yes, I've recently messed up a quote - the author now appears only as a hash string of random numbers, and when there are nested quotes, it is easy to mess up the quoting if trying to remove some stuff seen as irrelevant.

I don't like choosing between crappy politicians but I can always find something one of them did, does, or plans to do to make me mad enough to vote against....especially in local elections.

Charlie

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 12:57am:

I havent heard it said about children.  I hear it frequently regarding people who live in the middle east.

The phrase is a bastardization of an old order given by a Cistercian commander when the town of Beziers was put to the torch by the Catholic church for harboring Cathars.  One soldier was asked how to tell the Cathars from the townsfolk, he was told "Kill them all, God will know his own."

deltadarlin wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 8:32am:

According to the news this morning, she is marrying her 18 year old boyfriend and they are going to live happily ever after (please note the sarcasm here).

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that this is impossible?

Carolyn- thanks for the link, it answered my question.

Charlie wrote on Sep 1^st, 2008 at 2:54pm:

She lost me with her saying that she supports teaching creationism in public schools...

Difficult to swallow.  Court cases within Kansas in 2000 and in Delaware 2004 both lost pushing this.  Despite, a local antievolutionary majority took back the Kansas board in the 2004 elections and once again rewrote the science standards to their liking.  In a democracy, popular education can reflect popular opinion being education a local responsibility, guided along with influence on state and national levels.  
 
 Antievolution movements have been able to introduce their own lesson plans, reword curriculum standards, and even redefine science.  Influence on a national scale would not further accomplishments attained here in America.  In the decade ending 2004, Americans won 71% of the Nobel Prizes in physics, 61% in medicine and physiology, 58% in chemistry.*  None reflective of any revolutionary intelligent design ideas.  
 In this century of biology, ID's (intelligent design), which includes unevolvable "irreducible complexity", "complex specified information" (CSI), and that natural causes are incapable of generating CSI to explain blood clotting, flagellum, macroevolution, and mechanisms of DNA as well at its information content, fall gradually by the wayside as once the sun shining was thought to be a violation of the laws of nature, until nuclear fusion was discovered.

In the 70's and '80's, "scientific" creationism required attesting to the literal, historical truth of Scripture, defending the biblical accounts of creation.  The Grand Canyon a product of a single world-wide flood roughly 6000 years ago, not geological ages.  A rejection of science to accomodate biblical beliefs.  The public relations of creationism circumvents quickly to evolve to an ID now that's more flexible, lighter, for survival, setting the heavy book aside for Eden's second draft and a smaller target, with the denying of beyond the popular ability they teach.





*many of course foreign born, coming and staying here to pursue scientific careers and research.

Most info referenced from the debates within "Only A Theory", "Evolution", and "Where Darwin Meets the Bible".
 

I have a fundamentalist preacher neighbor who is a great guy and he and I get along fine. On the other hand, he of course, would like to require creationism.......now called ID because they get nowhere calling it creationism, taught as a science. They seem to think that calling it "Intelligent Design" works better and perhaps it does. He and the rest of them try to convince educators that they just want it presented along side Darwin so students can decide for themselves. A lot of people fall for this for some reason. What they are doing is trying to weaken evolution by elevating ID. Of course their goal is to eliminate evolution entirely by including biblical teaching in public schools. Fortunately this isn't doing well.....so far.... as is denying Darwin in most of the western world. It's a slippery slope and so far they have had a hard time. Good. It's incredibly embarrassing for the country that we have groups here that want us to believe that "The Flintstones" is history.

Ah me.... START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Charlie

Seems to me only those who feel threatened would want to eliminate any given point of view from being taught.

By definition, a strong idea will stand up to any of its competitors.

wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 7:44pm:

Seems to me only those who feel threatened would want to eliminate any given point of view from being taught. By definition, a strong idea will stand up to any of its competitors.

I don't have a problem with Intelligent design being taught in school, IF the following criteria need to be met, (1) It is taught in a stand alone class or as part of a religion class,  (2) it is not taught as part of the science curriculum and (3) it is not a requirement (students may opt out).

Charlie wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 5:40pm:

I have a fundamentalist preacher neighbor who is a great guy and he and I get along fine. On the other hand, he of course, would like to require creationism.......now called ID because they get nowhere calling it creationism, taught as a science. They seem to think that calling it "Intelligent Design" works better and perhaps it does. He and the rest of them try to convince educators that they just want it presented along side Darwin so students can decide for themselves. A lot of people fall for this for some reason. What they are doing is trying to weaken evolution by elevating ID. Of course their goal is to eliminate evolution entirely by including biblical teaching in public schools. Fortunately this isn't doing well.....so far.... as is denying Darwin in most of the western world. It's a slippery slope and so far they have had a hard time. Good. It's incredibly embarrassing for the country that we have groups here that want us to believe that "The Flintstones" is history. Ah me.... START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE Charlie

I agree with you Charlie.  Teaching of religion in pulic schools should not be done.  Leave that to the houses of worship.  I have nothing against the teaching about religions in school as a social studies class but to teach religion or to only teach about one or two specific religions is wrong.

The wordsmithing of creationism into intelligen design is a joke and a poor attempt to hide what it really is.  Kind of like taking that impending 10% tax hike and lowering it to 7% and selling it as a tax cut ;)

-P.

Nope. This thing was settled in the Scopes trial in many ways too. Yes....I know the differences.....I also have no trouble with prayer in schools and God Bless America and all that. Kids don't have to join in if they want to go that far. It probably does more good than harm.

This thing is about teaching something that is not a scientifc theory....scientific theories actually invite scrutiny and beg to be challenged....Scientifically. Intelligent design is faith and it is being used to dumb down the curricula in favor of some evangelical Christians mostly since the 1970s or so. For nearly 80 years the country has gotten along fine with our current arrangement. It's politics now and dangerous to our kids. Skeptics are not welcome among this group. They are often viewed as evil by them. Scientific skepticism is definitely welcomed by science.

Evolutionary theory is that. A scientific theory subject to scientific debate, not wishful thinking by people wishing to kill science. Have fun in church sponsored venues, not public school.

This is very dangerous stuff. In my lifetime, I never thought that I'd witness Republican Presidential primary candidates raising their hands in favor of saying that "The jury is still out on evolution." It's stunning.

Earlier this year I saw the speech by John F. Kennedy answering religious questions that were a big part of his campaign. What difference......

Charlie

Just to add a different theory into the mix - why SHOULD'NT religion be taught in schools? At one end of the scale it should be taught so everyone, regardless of home environment has the CHOICE (there's that word again) and the INFORMATION to make up their own minds on the subject with the benefit of actually knowing the fact's of what each religion believes.

If for no other reason than to root out prejudice it should be taught, we only fear what we don't understand. understanding other cultures is the only way we can ever have either peace - or understand them enough to stop them threatening OUR peace.

Choosing to teach religion's as a subject or not is as stupid as choosing whether or not to teach sex education. There's another subject that many believe 'should be taught in the home" - and how many kids would know nothing or have information that's bigoted and downright wrong if that were the case?

Being educated is about being informed.

Witholding information is witholding education. Being threatened by religious education is extremely narrow minded. As a case in point, try and pack a Bible and go on holiday to Saudi Arabia. Is that how you want to be perceived?

deltadarlin wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 8:22pm:

wrote on Sep 2nd, 2008 at 7:44pm: Seems to me only those who feel threatened would want to eliminate any given point of view from being taught. By definition, a strong idea will stand up to any of its competitors. I don't have a problem with Intelligent design being taught in school, IF the following criteria need to be met, (1) It is taught in a stand alone class or as part of a religion class,  (2) it is not taught as part of the science curriculum and (3) it is not a requirement (students may opt out).

Quite frankly, I'm with Paul on this one. It should be taught at church as it falls under the umbrella of religious philosophy.

I just find it intriguing when people think it should be banned from schools because they obviously are threatened by it. Maybe that's just me.

Charlie wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 9:12pm:

In my lifetime, I never thought that I'd witness Republican Presidential primary candidates raising their hands in favor of saying that "The jury is still out on evolution." It's stunning. Charlie

It's right up there with Jimmy Carters appalling comment about McCains prisoner of war years being "An unfortunate incident early on in his military career" - God bless our soldiers but only if they don't have the temerity to think they can serve the country outside the army?

As long as the "kids" are being brought up.....LOL  ;D

VP Nominee Sen. Biden's Son Charged With Multi-Million Dollar Fraud

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Biden's Daughter Arrested in Drunken Craze After Throwing Bottle at Police

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Let the good times roll!  8-)

Be sure to click MORE at the bottom of each story.

I'm with all the candidates: Kids should be off limits in campaigns.

Charlie

Helen: The United States is one of the most religious western countries in the world. One of the major reasons that it is, is that it's safe to do your own thing in your own church here. Keeping it out of and away from public schools works fine. The rest of the western world laughs at us over our paying a lot of attention to noisy pulpit pounder attempts to dumb us down and some of the success that they have in politics. It's embarrassing  

Religious teaching by zealots does not have a pretty history.

Charlie

I would follow Mike anywhere!   START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Would you follow Obama into war?

Something to think about when you talk about freedom and the price that is paid for it!!!

wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2008 at 9:18pm:

deltadarlin wrote on Sep 2nd, 2008 at 8:22pm: wrote on Sep 2nd, 2008 at 7:44pm: Seems to me only those who feel threatened would want to eliminate any given point of view from being taught. By definition, a strong idea will stand up to any of its competitors. I don't have a problem with Intelligent design being taught in school, IF the following criteria need to be met, (1) It is taught in a stand alone class or as part of a religion class,  (2) it is not taught as part of the science curriculum and (3) it is not a requirement (students may opt out). Quite frankly, I'm with Paul on this one. It should be taught at church as it falls under the umbrella of religious philosophy. I just find it intriguing when people think it should be banned from schools because they obviously are threatened by it. Maybe that's just me.

I think it's funny how the left tries to portray any talk of creationism in schools as being some kind of fundamentalist attempt to ban the teaching of Darwinism or evolution.  What a crock.  At best, I think the 'extremists' are saying that the possibility of intelligent design playing a role in this has to be acknowledged instead of forbidden, as the liberals would have it.  I'm in the camp that believes this is something to be taught in church, but I also don't want my kids forced to have a public education where they are told they are stupid if they have faith in God and a creator.

-Shawn

Well said Shawn.

ID advocates focus on influencing school boards and textbook publishers

Judge Overton's ruling on a bill passed mandating equal time, McLean vs Arkansas, 1982:

The law "left no doubt that the major effect of the Act is the advancement of particular religious beliefs."  The law that required balanced treatment "lacks legitimate educational value because 'creation science' as defined in that section is simply not science."

1985, Federal judge Adrian Duplantier ruled it unconstitutional in a Louisiana summary judgment.

1987, Edwards vs Aguillard.  U. S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 to uphold lower courts, states cannot require public schools to balance evolution lessons by teaching creationism.

2000, lost in Kansas.

2004-05, lost in Georgia

2005, lost in Pennsylvania

In a 139-page written ruling, the judge said: "Our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom."

"We find that the secular purposes claimed by the board amount to a pretext for the board’s real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom."

The disclaimer, he said, "singles out the theory of evolution for special treatment, misrepresents its status in the scientific community, causes students to doubt its validity without scientific justification, presents students with a religious alternative masquerading as a scientific theory, directs them to consult a creationist text as though it were a science resource and instructs students to forgo scientific inquiry in the public school classroom and instead to seek out religious instruction elsewhere."

In his ruling, Jones said that while intelligent design, or ID, arguments "may be true, a proposition on which the court takes no position, ID is not science." Among other things, he said intelligent design "violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation"; it relies on "flawed and illogical" arguments; and its attacks on evolution "have been refuted by the scientific community."

going on...

"The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources," he wrote.

"It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy."

Kevin,

I am thankful that I have the choice to send my kids to a school that doesn't forbid the mention of God for fear of insulting 'scientists' (which is a red herring any way, no scientist is insulted by the mere mention of God, in fact many happen to believe in a higher power).  My kids will not be attending public schools, for many reasons.  I hope they can get a balanced education in the sciences without being told that all religious people are crazy fools for believing that God exists because science can't prove it.

-Shawn

Since ID has been deemed a religious belief and not a science, the problem has been the creation of a national religion, establishing a particular belief over others negating full and equal rights.  Behind the spirit of the first amendment, equal treatment of religious beliefs should be kept and the national government not favor one over another.



Quote:

According to The Congressional Register Madison, on June 8, moved that "the civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext infringed." START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I believe this has been perhaps where it crosses the line.  It may be that you are making reference to the underlined portion of the paragraph while ID can be seen as violating the emboldened portion.

The final version reverses the two thoughts:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;


The sequence of thought seemed to go like this:

James Madison, 1789-JUN-7 "The Civil Rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, nor on any pretext infringed. No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases."

House Select Committee, JUL-28 "No religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed,"

Samuel Livermore, AUG-15 "Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or infringing the rights of conscience."

House version, AUG-20 "Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or to prevent the free exercise thereof, or to infringe the rights of conscience." (Moved by Fisher Ames)

Initial Senate version, SEP-3 "Congress shall make no law establishing religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Final Senate version, SEP-9 "Congress shall make no law establishing articles of faith or a mode of worship, or prohibiting the free exercise of religion."

Conference Committee "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Well, if you want your kids to be taught Intelligent Design, just bring them to Louisiana.  Our dear Governor, Bobby Jindal, signed a bill into law that will allow ID to be taught in our public school system.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

And it seems like Ms. Palin might be a bit of a zealot too.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

A careful wording applies I see:


Quote:

It also says that it "shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion."

Here is the disclaimer they got the board in Dover, PA to require teachers to read:


Quote:

On November 19, 2004, the Dover Area School District issued a press release stating that, commencing in January 2005, teachers would be required to read the following statement to students in the ninth-grade biology class at Dover High School: The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin's theory of evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part. Because Darwin's Theory is a theory, it is still being tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations. Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People is available for students to see if they would like to explore this view in an effort to gain an understanding of what intelligent design actually involves. As is true with any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the origins of life to individual students and their families. As a standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on standards-based assessments.

Hidden among the objective looking words is a book they would like on similar equal footing as Darwin's.  If only it could stand the test of time before the ink dries though.


Be prepared if contested and lost like in Dover, the good tax payers of Dover ended up with a merciful million dollar bill that could have been two million.


Quote:

On February 21, 2006, the newly elected Dover Area School Board voted, unanimously with one abstention, to pay $1,000,011 in legal fees and damages due to the parents and their lawyers as a result of the verdict in the case, a large sum of money for a small district. The previous school board had been offered the opportunity to rescind its policy, and avoid paying legal fees, immediately after the lawsuit was filed in 2004, but it declined. The parents' attorneys Pepper Hamilton stated that court records would show that they were entitled to more than $2 million, but were going to accept less than half that amount in recognition of the small size of the school district, and because the school board that voted for the policy had been voted out of office, leaving the new school board "having the bill placed in their laps." The previous school board had been defended without charge by the Thomas More Law Center.  Richard Katskee, assistant legal director for Americans United, said of the trial's cost, "Any board thinking of trying to do what the Dover board did is going to have to look for a bill in excess of $2 million," and "I think $2 million is a lot to explain to taxpayers for a lawsuit that should never be fought."

ID is still evolving to survive I see.

Scientific theories such as Darwin's theory of evolution is not something you find presented by lunatics trying to get attention by bizarre propositions that George Bush and others created 9-11 to get our attention. You will often find IDers among among this group. Scientific theories are different from Bigfoot. They are always open to scientific study and welcome it. ID has nothing to do with scientific theory and the very purpose of ID is to mislead vulnerable people of Kansas and elsewhere into calling evolution "just a theory." Scientific theories beg to be challenged by free inquiry. IDers brand any attempt to question its tenants as heretic or worse. To them, the worst thing you can do is to try to learn about it. You must accept it as the only truth and as such, there is no room for nuance as it is faith, not science.

Trying to get it into public schools as just more information to be considered, is akin to presenting tarot cards and Uri Geller as information we need to function in the real world. None of these things have any basis in scientific theory. ID doesn't have much to with what most of us call religion anyway. It's an attempt to completely discredit Charles Darwin for political reasons by a few noisy people that are livid that the country treats its citizens as free thinkers.

So far as I know, God and religion are mentioned in schools. It was when I was there as part of history and further explained in church or Catholic schools. By the way, I seem to remember Catholic schools as fairly liberal in their curricula. Do they insist on ID as what it is?  I seem to remember Catholic schooling as just about as good as you can get.  

I'm very skeptical about the idea that God isn't mentioned in most classrooms. This sounds like one of the many iffy claims used by IDers to get attention by making it sound schools are sources of only liberal indoctrination; where it isn't.

There is nothing wrong with being exposed to religious ideas as a faith. It's fine in church teachings or if you want to visit the several theme parks that present our planet as 6,000 years old and that dinosaurs were around as big game.

Paying attention to free thought and going to church on our own is why we have been so successful. Don't make faith mandatory. It's un-American.

Charlie

Sorry Charlie, but its video.  ;D

Its easy, its either a no expirenced tax you to hell pol.

Or, an American hero that wants nothing but to cut your taxes and porkbarrel spending. (Earmarks)

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Like always, you be the judge!  ;)

The majority of people who believe in a higher power also believe in evolution.  Intelligent people can deal with the possibility of both being fact.

Seeing the lefties get all frothy at the mouth whenever God is mentioned cracks me up.  It truly sheds light on their agenda.  I posted one simple comment on why I didn't want my kid to be called stupid for believing in God, and out comes lengthy posts about fanatics trying to force children to learn religion in school.  I didn't say anything about wanting that, but boy did those well-researched canned responses come in handy.

And to make an instant association between IDers and 9-11 conspiracy theorists... all I can say is WOW!  Charlie, sometimes you stun me.  That was one of your best.

Just to clarify, I didn't mean teach religion as teaching purely about Christianity. I meant teaching it as a subject about all religions, their belif, practices, festivals etc. I would like to see it taught as a cultural thing so that people - all of us - understand other's beliefs.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Just for the record: I don't get all frothy when God is mentioned. That should be fine with anyone really.  

You inspire me though

Charlie

wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2008 at 10:29pm:

The majority of people who believe in a higher power also believe in evolution.

 

Agreeable statement, Shawn.  :)  I'd be of that, both have their place.




wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2008 at 10:29pm:

...posts about fanatics trying to force children to learn religion in school.

An alternative eight grade science, on the subject of Ms. Palin.

OK... just finished reading this thread. My head is spinning but no Cluster yet thank God. Keep up the good PEACEFUL debate.

PFDAN