Recent Trackback: Right Truth

Barrack Obama on Abortion, Capital Punishment, Healthcare and Gun Control

March 31st, 2008 Urban Conservative

This is why he won’t win the election.

When Obama was seeking state office a dozen years ago, he took extreme liberal positions in a questionnaire he filled out: flatly opposing the death penalty, in support of a federal single-payer health plan, against any restrictions on abortion, and in support of state laws to ban the manufacture, sale and even possession of handguns.

And while his campaign denied that he filled out the survey, it turns out that he was more involved that originally thought. 

My take?

I’ll be frank. Yes, he is a great communicator; he has charisma and he seems to be very sincere in his communication delivery.  But the more I read about him, and the more information that surfaces about his past, the more I dislike this punk. And, his extreme liberal views scare me to death. NO RESTRICTIONS ON ABORTION AND HE CLAIMS HE IS A CHRISTIAN? I really don’t see how anyone in their right mind can vote for this clown. McCain is not perfect either – don’t get me wrong but he would make a far better President than Obama … and Hillary for that matter.  Don’t agree? Well step up and voice your opinion! Dont be scurred.

Tags: barack obama, liberal voting record, abortion, gun control, capital punishment, healthcare, death penalty

Posted in Obama

186 Responses to Barrack Obama on Abortion, Capital Punishment, Healthcare and Gun Control

  1. UC....
    Good chance you'll get your wish, republicans have been so good these last 30 years running on abortion & gun issues.......who knows how long they can continue?

    April 1st, 2008 4:23 am davidwwalters
  2. A couple of things....spell check, my man. It takes like two seconds.

    Secondly, why the name calling? Punk, clown? Not necessary. You can legitimately attack and/or criticize Barack without going there. Make your arguments clear and you won't need name-calling, which by the way, says more about you than anyone or anything you're trying to criticize. Call him liberal or inexperienced or soft on this or that. Then back up your argument up with facts. That's political discourse. I know you are better than this and I know your standard retort is that this is your blog and you will conduct it how you like. Fine. I'm asking you to raise that low bar. Refrain from the easiest, least effective, least intelligent manner of going after someone with whom you disagree politically. I assume your goal is to illuminate Barack in a way that will turn voters off from him. When you take this tact it actually has the opposite effect. Also, it is insincere. If you met Barack face to face would you call him such names? No. Would you advise McCain to use such tactics in a debate situation? I think not.

    April 1st, 2008 8:00 am simonesdad2008
  3. @simonesdad2008

    Where is the spelling error? Scurred? This was done purposely. ; )
    Definition here: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=scurred

    I name call because it provides those with a sense of humor – some entertainment value; and it’s fun. I don’t hate the guy at all. I don’t hate anyone; but as mentioned in the post, his liberal ideologies scare me.

    I am not a political analyst, pundit, journalist or writer. This isn’t the Wall Street Journal or New York Times. I am a simple man with a blog, opinion and sometimes an attitude.

    April 1st, 2008 8:13 am Urban Conservative
  4. "McCain is not perfect either – don’t get me wring — but...." Since you asked..

    And, as predicted, you have replied by saying this is your blog and you will do what you want. We all know what you are not (political analyst, pundit, journalist or writer) because you remind us every time someone takes you task about your manner of delivery. I happen to like what you do here. I agree with about 1% of what you say but I support your right to say it. I just want to see you exhibit some of that humor and attitude in a way that furthers the debate and supports your viewpoint. When you name call it's like a comedian who is not that funny but uses foul language as a replacement for humor. I know you can do better and I look forward to seeing it here.

    April 1st, 2008 8:50 am simonesdad2008
  5. Simon, Simon,
    Obama is a scary liberal...a Marxist,a punk, a swindler, a snake oil salesman....whatever

    I SO agree with you UC... a "christian" haha
    "In 2002, as an Illinois legislator, Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act, which would have protected babies that survived late-term abortions. That same year a similar federal law, the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, was signed by President Bush. Only 15 members of the U.S. House opposed it, and it passed the Senate unanimously on a voice vote". Even our beloved liberal Kennedy didn't vote with Obama....that's how far left this guy is.

    I don't really have a political blog but I wrote about this on February 12 on my own blog....

    He scares me. He has no problem looking into people's eyes and lying (i know, a real politician). He is anti- too many things for me....and Marxist----re distribute the wealth! Arg.... I'm sorry, I work hard for my money, I shouldn't be punished to pay more in taxes because I have more...

    April 1st, 2008 9:06 am petunia
  6. UC.....i saw it also(typo)
    "don’t get me wring " --i suppose you meant wrong.
    Petunia,
    paying taxes isn't a punishment, unless you are poor.
    Some one has to pay taxes so i can get my VA check every month; Remember, freedom isn't free.

    April 1st, 2008 9:47 am davidwwalters
  7. I appreciate the service you gave David....but it doesn't mean as much when you down grade the US .... you could live somewhere else.... then write and tell us how terrible the US is.

    I didn't say people shouldn't pay taxes (sorry, double negative - but you get it), I think everyone should pay EQUAL taxes. The punishment is when the rich (or even middle income) are made to may a higher % because they have money. %30 of $10,000 a year is $3000 and %30 of $100,000 is $30,000, so....why should people that make more pay even more??? Ask Obama and Clinton if they pay a lot more taxes.....they have a lot of money....they don't.

    April 1st, 2008 10:06 am petunia
  8. Pat,

    You are saying what I know to be true and what appears to be the case all across America. You had the Reps and Senators and President. You accomplished exactly zero unless you want to count record deficits as an accomplishment. Nobody wants anything to do with the last 8 years including McCain.

    There is a bright shinning light on the horizon people. Get with him or get out of the way. Barack Obama, despite your "fears", is this country's best chance to regain our rightful place in the world. Remember how some people in this country "feared" being ruled by the Pope if JFK were elected? Fear has been the conservative tool of choice lately. Many of you in this very string are saying how scared you are of Obama. There is a saying in Vegas, "Scared money never wins." Nobody on here is saying how great McCain is. Nobody on here is supporting your candidate. It's just attack Barack. It's weak. It's sad but I have to admit I love it. Keep doing what you do "conservatives". Fear and loathing are all you have. Good luck with that....

    April 1st, 2008 6:44 pm simonesdad2008
  9. @Everyone. I had to delete a few comments because there was an issue with the database. Rest assured (David), I did not delete them because you disagree with what i have to say. Feel free to repost the comments.

    Sorry.

    April 1st, 2008 6:51 pm Urban Conservative
  10. haha! Okay, I fixed the spelling error. However, Microsoft Word did not pick it up since "wring" is also a word.

    I was in a rush. Give me a break.

    April 1st, 2008 6:55 pm Urban Conservative
  11. David, you are a communist as I expected, and you must not have any money. I guarantee if you worked hard and had a lot of money you would NOT want the government to take more away from you to give to someone who doesn't have much. Democracy lets people make money the good old fashion way and keep it (most of it anyway. I'm sorry, you take more money away from corporations because they are doing well they will not do as well, not be able to make as many items or hire as many people and then the economy is worse. Take a few economic classes and STOP LISTENING to the hippy, free love, don't work and live off the government channel....

    Oh, and by the way...your love, Obama, only gave %1 of his earnings in 2000 to charity (great christian and liberal that he is), and his excuse was he didn't earn that much ($240,000). In 2001 it was % .5, 2002 was % .4, 2003 was %1.4, 2004 was %1.2, 2005 was %4.7 (of over 1.5 million) and 2006 was %6 (of about $980,000).

    Turns out that conservatives give more on average for charity than the liberals. Why aren't the rich liberals leading by example?....shoot, I give %10 and my earnings are meager.
    I guess it's easy to free wheelin' with other people money.....

    April 2nd, 2008 11:22 am petunia
  12. petunia,
    oh, shit......i had econ class, but that was so long ago. No, the real class is life, and i don't think there are many here who have labored(physically) has hard as i,and i understand a few things about indoctrination as well, having gone through Ranger school, so you can forget demonizing me as a communist.
    Statistics is the first argument.....hell, i don't give any money to any charity.......i just give of myself(and all the women are happy for it!)
    So if you have to crow about your philanthropic ways, just remember what ol JC had to say bout all that.......and oh this gem too from my communist edition of the Gospel of Matthew:".....as you know, what you treasure is your heart's true measure."Ch6:21

    April 2nd, 2008 11:57 am davidwwalters
  13. I am sickened and confused by the fact that we live in a society that even contemplates electing an official who believes in abortion. Pro-life is short for pro-abortion. I have lied to myself in the past to excuse my behavior. I think that everybody does. I have told myself that an ex-boyfriend really loved me, although he cheated on me. I just can't imagine lying to convince myself that abortion is not murder. If the abortion were not performed, would a child not result.
    So, the process of abortion stops life from continuing. If the abortion were not performed, a baby would be born. I guess if society can convince itself that murdering an unborn child is fine, then voting for Obama, or Clinton, for that matter, is fine as well.
    I have read that if an unborn child is killed in an automobile accident, or in a homicide, the killer can serve time for the death of the unborn. This is an ironic contradiction to the policy of killing the unborn for the sake of convenience. Ultimately, I believe that what goes around comes around. If so many women who have abortions deeply regret their decisions, then a message should be received by the world. We all suffer the consequences for our actions. I just don't want the people of the United States to pay for the amorality of electing a leader who is so heartless as to be capable of perpetuating and supporting the murder of the innocents of its own people. Most people fear pointing out the obvious. I simply wonder why that is.

    April 2nd, 2008 5:40 pm Sheena Raven
  14. sorry, missed a question mark at the end of the first paragraph.

    April 2nd, 2008 5:47 pm Sheena Raven
  15. @Sheena Raven

    Well said Raven! Don't worry about grammar. I make grammatical and spelling errors all the time; and the crowd here is quick to point that out!

    Thanks for coming by!

    - Ucon

    April 2nd, 2008 6:53 pm Urban Conservative
  16. First, a nitpicking point.

    I'd not call Obama a "clown." Very few of the current political stars deserve that epithet. In fact, I don't recall a genuinely entertaining politico, capable of inserting humor into politics, since former Governor Ventura of my home state, Minnesota.

    I miss him, and the bumper stickers: like "Our Governor Can Beat Your Governor."

    However, Obama is having an increasingly hard time keeping a lid on his remarkably liberal voting record. The most creative excuse (or reason) I've run into for this is that he's a very junior congressman, and so has been toeing the line for the far-left end of the Democratic Party.

    As to "sincere" in his delivery, I'll quote the old gag: "Sincerity is important: once you learn to fake that, the rest is easy." Honestly, I don't know if Obama is "sincere," or really believes everything he says. But, yes: part of his charisma is that aura of sincerity.

    One of the things I really appreciate is that he doesn't speak with a 'cry in his voice:' that break in tone that a former president was apt to make, when making a 'sincere' and 'caring' statement.

    At any rate, Obama's not a candidate I'm likely to vote for. Too bad. I had hopes, when he first came on the scene.

    April 2nd, 2008 9:03 pm Norski
  17. I see I made a few mistakes. I also meant to type that pro-choice is short for pro-abortion. I was tired. Next time, I will proofread better.

    April 3rd, 2008 2:56 am Sheena Raven
  18. Matthew 2:21 "For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also"....
    I guess being a democrat you are used to using biblical passages out of context. This passage refers to people keeping their money and NOT giving it away....exactly the opposite of what you are talking about. This is all about why you should give...your money, your time etc.
    My point is - democrats love to talk about giving money to the poor, helping the people who really "need" it.....then they don't lead by example. Think about that next time the left is chastising the right for not being all for "helping people".

    April 3rd, 2008 6:17 am petunia
  19. I presume that this blog is here to extol the virtues of "conservatism" as you see it. What is conservatism? Can anyone tell me what conservatives stand for beyond small government, no abortions, guns, the death penalty and big business? Is there anything else? And again I'll ask the question...if you had to send your daughter off to one of these two countries for a year, which would it be, Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. Two non-democratic repressive regimes. One is our "ally" and the other is not. Which one?

    April 3rd, 2008 6:34 am simonesdad2008
  20. petunia,
    '..out of context...." No, i think not(again, MattCh6:19-21)
    Jesus is talking about spiritual riches as opposed to earthly riches. And all of this comes after he chastises pharisees for being hypocrites in Ch6:16...."When you fast, don't make a spectacle like pretenders do. As you know, they make their faces unrecognizable so their fasting is publicly recognizable."
    So,i am not even a democrat(Believe it or not- republican) but i am an atheist(against ALL theism), but i do like Jesus' views on hypocrites.
    Point is.....if

    April 3rd, 2008 9:13 am davidwwalters
  21. Point is if you have to crow about it........well What Would Jesus Say?

    April 3rd, 2008 9:14 am davidwwalters
  22. A Republican who likes Obama? - I don't think so.....and thank you, I know the Matthew passage well. I won't argue about it's meaning, you can put your own twist on it if you wish. But as a good Republican knows, nothing runs without money.....

    April 3rd, 2008 11:21 am petunia
  23. petunia,
    lol.....i never said i was a"good republican"(is there such thing?)
    i'm just registered that way.
    Twist? It's pretty straight forward........i had the opportunity to read the entire NT 3 times (.....while i spent 56 days in jail for kicking a cops teeth out for bein' a jerk......it WAS so worth it! i was never convicted of assault on an l.e.o. though)
    No, i doubt JC would be a republican...in fact if you read the fourth chapter of Acts vs32 .....it's a description of the 1st church in Jerusalem.....it sounds like a hippie commune to me!

    April 3rd, 2008 12:00 pm davidwwalters
  24. About simonesdad2008's comment:

    "I presume that this blog is here to extol the virtues of "conservatism" as you see it. What is conservatism? Can anyone tell me what conservatives stand for beyond small government, no abortions, guns, the death penalty and big business? Is there anything else? And again I'll ask the question...if you had to send your daughter off to one of these two countries for a year, which would it be, Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. Two non-democratic repressive regimes. One is our "ally" and the other is not. Which one?"

    Taking the questions at face value, and in reverse order:

    Saudi Arabia is on relatively good terms with America, and in that sense is an "ally," although I would not call the house of Saud a strong ally: more of a grudging partner.

    Venezuela, under the current regime, is not an ally of America. Obviously, since anti-Americanism seems to be a central part of its policy.

    Which would I send my daughter to? All things considered, I would pick Saudi Arabia for one of my daughters to visit. Partly because of the diplomatic relations between America and Saudi Arabia, but mostly because I believe that they would be better able to accommodate the peculiar customs of that very "Islamic" country.

    Does conservatism stand for anything beyond the anathema-in-Berkeley list you gave? I suggest a few: small business; opportunity to succeed or fail based on ability, not ancestry; acceptance of personal choice in dietary preferences, and many other non-sexual aspects of life.

    What is conservatism? I submit Princeton's WordNet definition, "a political or theological orientation advocating the preservation of the best in society and opposing radical changes."

    April 3rd, 2008 12:51 pm Norski
  25. Norski,
    "........advocating the preservation of the best in society...."
    Which part of society will John McCain work hardest to preserve?
    If his tour of military installations is any indication, i would guess he(McCain) is working hard to make sure plenty of money continues into more&new weapons systems, while a new GI bill for the Vets languishes.

    April 3rd, 2008 6:48 pm davidwwalters
  26. Norski,

    Your daughter could not drive a car or go unescorted by a male (even a 5 yr. old boy will do), would be forced to wear a head scarf (even military women have to) in the land of Bin Laden and 9 of the 11 9/11 hijackers. Your daughter could be jailed for any number "offenses" Saudi women are jailed and beaten for. I guess the ultra conservative ways and strict religious codes of Saudi Arabia are more in line with your conservative way of thinking. Also, for the record, rape is often unprosecuted or turned around to be the woman's fault for which SHE is charged and prosecuted.

    I asked the question, and thank you for having the courage to answer, because we have to realize that enemies and allies are relative. Conservatives like to set things in stone. You vilify perceived enemies while lavishing praise on so-called allies. The US was giving money to the Talaban as late as April of 2001. Just once I would like to hear a conservative say, "I see your point" or "I never thought of that in those terms before." Instead you toe party lines to a fault even when it's not in your own best interest. Case in point, your choice of Saudi Arabia over Venezuela. Your child or any American is infinitely safer in Venezuela any day of the week. You feel compelled to choose SA because someone told you they were our friends. Conservatives are lot's of things. Free thinkers is not on that list.

    April 3rd, 2008 7:25 pm simonesdad2008
  27. davidwwalters,

    The question was about conservatism in general. About McCain, you may be right.

    And, although reform and greater efficiency wouldn't heart the VA, I don't see focusing on preventing spiritual brothers of al-Zawahiri from running America as an entirely inappropriate allocation of resources.

    April 4th, 2008 7:05 am Norski
  28. simonesdad2008,

    I'm well aware of the ridiculous limitations which traditional Arab culture places on women, and have posted on the topic several times.

    However, in some respects, yes: "the ultra conservative ways and strict religious codes of Saudi Arabia are more in line with your conservative way of thinking."

    Although the comparison is invidious, there are some parallels. For example, my daughters have enough dignity and self-respect (at least) to dress modestly. I realize that contemporary American mores dictate that women dress in a sexually provocative fashion: but that does not mean that demeaning costume is a good idea.

    The point is that, although I deplore the Middle Eastern attitude toward women and trousers: given a choice, I'd rather see one of my family go to Saudi Arabia. I think that any of my offspring would have the intelligence and common sense to avoid offending the peculiar sensibilities of the locals. My concern would be that they either missed some arcane point of "Islamic" custom, or caught an enforcer on a bad day.

    As to "courage to answer" ??

    What courage? Although I recognized the questions as rhetorical devices, they afforded me an opportunity to make some plain and factual statements about conservatives and conservatism.

    "Conservatives like to set things in stone. You vilify perceived enemies while lavishing praise on so-called allies." Mainstream American English has a serious limitation: "you" singular and "you" plural are indistinguishable, except by context.

    And, in this case, the context is not all that clear.

    If the "you" was singular, I'd like to point out that I try not to vilify people whose views I do not agree with. I generally have quite a sufficient number of targets in their assumptions and their associations of feelings and facts.

    I do not like to "set things in stone," apart from some obvious realities: like the tendency of stones to accelerate toward the center of the Earth, when released from one's hand. Quite the contrary, I enjoy living in a time when a great deal is changing - and, in many cases, should change.

    America giving money to the Taliban as recently as 2001, I still don't 'know' this, but assuming it to be true, it's possible. Even likely, considering the issues Afghanistan had with the former Soviet Union.

    And, "you toe party lines to a fault even when it's not in your own best interest." Here, the "you" is, in context, clearly singular.

    I am toeing no party line. My preference, given a choice between two dictatorships, is the dictatorship which has been passed, with relatively little fuss, about a half-dozen times, from Abdul to Abdullah, during the twentieth century.

    I regard Saudi Arabia as a kingdom with a stable dynasty, and an established set of rules. The Venezuela of Hugo Chavez does not strike me as quite so stable: and, equally important, King Abdullah has much less reason to provoke an international incident by assaulting an American citizen, than Hugo does.

    In fact, it's conceivable that Hugo Chavez might gain local popularity by such a move.

    As to not being a 'free thinker,' I have no problem with that. As the saying goes, "don't let you mind be so open, that your brains fall out."

    April 4th, 2008 7:31 am Norski
  29. Norski....
    Yeah, i applied it to John McCain because he is sucking up to the republican base to the point of wearing out those industrial strength knee-pads. (So much for that "maverick" moniker.)
    As to "greater efficiency" for the VA.......no, that ain't the answer to the glut of patients they are serving...
    No, we as a nation seem good at getting into conflict and NOT dealing with the consequences.
    And again i will add, that opposing the war in iraq doesn't mean opposition to protecting our nation from harm. The best way to do that is to;
    1)Finish the job in Afghanistan
    2)Remove all our troops from that region when we have done that.
    3)Take care of our Vets......unlike most.....they really do earn their living.

    April 4th, 2008 7:44 am davidwwalters
  30. @Sheena Raven great post!

    @davidwwalters

    "No, i doubt JC would be a republican..."

    Well there's no way He would be a liberal — abortion, homosexuality, evolution, don't sit very well with Him.

    Neither ideology is perfect (conservatism vs. liberalism), but it's definitely better to be on the right than the left. :)

    Oh, and just because you read the NT 3 times over doesn't mean a thing. The OT is just as relevant and you cannot have a complete understanding of Christianity unless you understand how the two testaments relate

    April 4th, 2008 7:48 am Prevail Magazine
  31. davidwalters,

    I recognize the importance of caring for soldiers who have served America.

    And, I recognize that the war on terror is a complex issue, not a simple 'out of [insert country or region]' slogan.

    As for your point #2 ("Remove all our troops from that region when we have done that...") -

    The last I knew, America still had troops in Korea, Japan, and Germany: and a number of other parts of the world. I'd be astounded, if the Middle East did not fit the pattern of long-term commitment to security that America has maintained for over a half-century.

    I doubt that waiting until the last American soldier is out of any part of the Middle East is a practical timetable for VA reform.

    April 4th, 2008 7:54 am Norski
  32. Prevail....
    i've read the readable parts of the OT as well and it did provide some insight into Jewish thought in particular.......
    No, my incarceration did spur my interest in what Jesus was about. Of peculiar interest was this:
    ActCh4:32 And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own, but all things were common property to them."
    Doesn't sound like the 1stchurch in Jerusalem was very republican......sounds more like a socialist commune to me.
    Now how the hell can you spin that?

    April 4th, 2008 8:02 am davidwwalters
  33. Norski.....
    ".......I'd be astounded, if the Middle East did not fit the pattern of long-term commitment to security that America has maintained for over a half-century."
    In Germany&Korea there was one big difference:
    I cannot speak for Koreans........but MOST Germans wanted us in Germany after ww2 to save their asses from the Russians.
    MOST Iraqis want us OUT. Big F**king Difference!
    McCain certainly is trying to sell this nonsense to an ignorant public......except they aren't quite as ignorant any longer.

    April 4th, 2008 8:10 am davidwwalters
  34. @Prevail Magazine

    Well said my friend.

    April 4th, 2008 8:17 am Urban Conservative
  35. @davidwwalters

    No "spin" necessary.

    To use Biblical scripture to say that Jesus supports socialism in its form today would be a little ignorant.

    In that specific situation, sharing everything definitely helped the apostles in their mission to preach the gospel. If you read the whole chapter, you'll see why the beleivers were inspired to do what they did. Clearly there isn't a theme in the Bible that says all out socialism is the way to go.

    In fact, like I said, the system He would support is probably something in between, where the poor are taken care of but also that each individual would get rewards according to his works.

    I got a bunch of scriptures to support that:

    Revelation 22:12
    Psalms 28:4
    Romans 2:6
    Matthew 16:27
    1 Corinthians 3:8
    Job 34:11

    April 4th, 2008 8:35 am Prevail Magazine
  36. davidwwalters,

    "MOST Iraqis want us OUT. Big F**king Difference!
    McCain certainly is trying to sell this nonsense to an ignorant public"

    And so the wheel turns.

    (signed) one of an ignorant public

    April 4th, 2008 8:48 am Norski
  37. Norski,

    The various use of the word "you" in my post you responded to were ambiguous unless you were the writer. You, Norski, did a good job of distinguishing when I was speaking about conservatives collectively and when I was addressing you specifically. We don't think of Venezuelans first when we the think of the free flow of illegals streaming in from South America. Imagine if Saudis had the illegal access to the US that Venezuelans have just by virtue of being in South America. Scary, my friend. Venezuelan people have no animosity towards the US or it's people. The same can not be said about SA (see 9/11 hijackers and Bin Laden) Yes, the governments are at odds but they are not blowing up or targeting military residences like they have done in SA. My point is not to defend Chavez or even criticize the Saudis. My point is to say that "allies" and "enemies" are relative. The all or nothing nature of conservative thought can not reconcile this.

    That said, you, Norski, actually gave some thoughtful responses to my questions, rhetorical or not. It is appreciated at this end. We are at different ends of the spectrum and I'm not sending anyone I love or care about to SA on purpose anytime soon but I respect your viewpoint.

    April 4th, 2008 9:27 am simonesdad2008
  38. Norski...
    Pardon my rudeness....but the point is, the tired excuses used by this administration to occupy Iraq are beginning to be questioned by many. Will it be enough to make a difference in November.....? Maybe not, and JohnMcCain will occupy the white house while our troops are occupying a foreign nation full of people that HATE us......and it will be NOTHING like our occupation of West Germany after WW2.
    I remember being on a C-141 leaving Pope AFB Oct 1983......i was sitting on my parachute loading every 5 round with a tracer......nervous as hell because i thought we we going to Beirut........where 100's of my marine brothers died because Reagan thought occupying Lebanon would be a good idea.......occupying a Moslem country was a bad idea then. it was a bad idea in 1991, and it is still a bad idea today.
    I enjoy answering your posts because they are so thoughtful and intelligent.

    April 4th, 2008 12:09 pm davidwwalters
  39. Pevail Mag.

    .......you can carry the biblical discussion to me @ davidwwalter@gmail.com
    i'll be glad to discuss why Jesus would not be a republican today.

    April 4th, 2008 12:11 pm davidwwalters
  40. simonesdad2008,

    Thanks for that response.

    About Venezuela and Saudi Arabia: I'm sure you'd not send anyone you cared about, or even a minor enemy, to either country. However, the question was, "if you had to send your daughter off to one of these two countries for a year, which would it be, Saudi Arabia or Venezuela."

    Given the necessity of relocation of a member of my family, with only those two choices, I'd hold my nose, metaphorically speaking, and pick the least unacceptable: Saudi Arabia.

    And, it's not the Venezuelan people I'd be worried about. It's the dictator, and his support system. In fact, particularly since mine is a Catholic family, the Venezuelan people and culture would make that country the preferred one - after Hugo is out of power, and providing that a worse despot didn't replace him.

    April 4th, 2008 12:35 pm Norski
  41. davidwwalters,

    I believe I understand your concern. And, perhaps, why you have such strong feelings on the matter.

    A point, though, might be whether Germany is a good contrast to Iraq. I started noticing foreign policy in the late sixties. As I recall, anti-American demonstrations and Teutonic equivalents of 'Yankee go home!' have been fairly routine parts of (during the Vietnam War) West German and (more recently) German society.

    I get the impression that there's a faction, at least, in Germany that doesn't like to have Americans on their side of the Atlantic.

    I can see their point, in a way.

    April 4th, 2008 12:39 pm Norski
  42. Norski,
    Like i said, i cannot speak for Koreans.......i lived in Frankfurt from 1964-1967, and some of my relatives lived in Coburg(not far from Bamburg). I trained in Germany also in 1982 with a German Airborne unit.
    Germans tolerated Americans for the most part, during the years of occupation.......particularly because they knew and feared the Russians, with good reason. But they too tired of our presence. And why we still need to operate bases there is beyond me, given the tremendous expense of maintaining them. As a kid i understood the mission of the United States in postwar Germany......to protect them. But keeping bases all over the world now is an expense we cannot afford any longer. And we certainly cannot expect it to be any less expensive for our nation & it's taxpayers(like you).
    Perhaps it could be argued that we must protect Iraq from Iran(on a much larger scale than we did in the 80's).......or from "terrorists", just as we protected Germany from the Soviet Union. Yes, we can almost see the similarities.......hell when i was last in Germany, we were on guard against the Bader-Meinhoff Gang. They targeted US soldiers. They were terrorists. So is it the same?
    But make no mistake about it.......there terrorists in Iraq are in a whole different league than the German brand of terrorist. And support for terrorism was almost non-existent in Germany, unlike Iraq. Not one US Soldier, Marine, Airman, or Sailor is worth loosing in Iraq........ for what? I suppose it boils down to believing whether or not you think the terrorist will follow our guys home. That's what this election may boil down to.

    April 4th, 2008 1:15 pm davidwwalters
  43. Norski,

    Right, if you HAD to send someone. I was not suggesting you would voluntarily. I would still fear a general population and cultural and religious predisposition against westerners versus a single dictator if I HAD to choose one. Pakistan is one of our so-called allies too. To me it points out a basic flaw in the conservative lock step approach to everything. I would travel to Venezuela and Cuba for that matter, before I would step foot in SA, Pakistan or any Islamic country. I can not recall, and you may correct me if I am wrong, any Americans targeted or attacked or detained unlawfully in Venezuela. Yeah, Chavez should go but he is more of an annoyance to America than a threat. He doesn't have the world wide support of fellow Catholics or even Hispanics or even South Americans. Oil is our ally. We do better when we are honest and not pretend to be friends with countries that if you took the oil away, we would marginalize.

    April 4th, 2008 1:37 pm simonesdad2008
  44. @davidwwalters

    No need — let me explain something.

    My political views do not dictate my religious views. Whether or not Jesus would be a Republican is irrelevant. You know what, I'll agree with you: He wouldn't be a Republican, but he sure as heck wouldn't be a Democrat either. And that's because both systems, ultimately, are corrupt.

    His government will be of a totally order, and as I said before, and will probably have the best of both ideologies.

    April 4th, 2008 1:43 pm Prevail Magazine
  45. Prevail.....
    point taken.....but i will say this. What i find odd about the NT, and the Gospels in particular is the oblique way the political background is mentioned.......or not mentioned at all.......yet we know from Josephus what was actually going on. Jesus was crucified.....a very Roman punishment for crimes...not against God, but for sedition, revolution against the empire. Jesus was leading a revolution of the poor(Ebionites) against authority.

    April 4th, 2008 5:06 pm davidwwalters

  46. April 4th, 2008 5:58 pm Anonymous
  47. Jesus was crucified not because of anything he did against Rome. Pilate said he washed his hands of the situation — and even offered Jesus a chance by letting the Jewish people pick someone to release from prison. They chose Barabbas.

    The Jewish leaders of the time wanted Jesus dead because He was usurping their leadership.

    All in all, the ultimate reason why Jesus was killed was to be made a sacrifice for our sins.

    April 4th, 2008 6:09 pm Prevail Magazine
  48. Prevail,
    Had Jesus been punished by the the Jewish authorities as the gospels state......he would have died by stoning. That was the legal punishment for blasphemers. Just ask St. Stephen.

    April 4th, 2008 6:37 pm davidwwalters
  49. all of this said, how does the following news about bob barr affect the gop's chances of holding on to the white house?

    http://thevote.abc13.com/2008/04/another-fly-in.html

    April 6th, 2008 5:56 am tom abrahams
  50. It's just silly to guess what Jesus would be....he had some definite feelings about corruption - that's for sure....turned those tables over in the synagogue - that's for sure. He would be against abortion, that's is a no-brainer....it's really all a no-brainer....he was just love and there is NO party like that ... lol
    Anyway,
    Norski, I hate to disagree with you but the majority of Iraqis DO want us there. My friend grew up there (he is Iraqi), escaped with his life about 13 years ago and has been over there recently helping the US special forces. He also helped the FBI before they brought down Saddam because he was in Saddam's army for 6 years (every boy over 18 was in the army). I can tell you for sure that most Iraqis want us....
    Except for al-Sadr's group of Shiite (shi'a)(my friend said that guy just likes the power and his followers are "stupid") and those Sunni's who were in the Bath party with Saddam, the Iraqi's want us there and they appreciate what we are doing. Don't let the liberal media sway you by only finding those people that do not want us there for their interviews. My friend helped the US because they love their country and anyone with an ounce of brains over there knows we are helping. He worked with many informants who were Iraqi and they gave their lives for their country.

    *I now have a small bag of money that belonged to one of Bin Laden's top men. The US tracked him down to his home and then he escaped....he dropped this bag of change (some coins from Turkey, Iran, Iraq...pretty cool, and a great story to tell people)....

    April 6th, 2008 6:37 pm petunia
  51. Barack Obama will not be elected as president of the United States because he is a MUSLIM. MUSLIMS ARE GOING TO BURN BURN BURN. Only those who are white, and those who have accepted Jesus into his life will be elected. If the godless liberals of the country elect such a monster into the white house. God will smite the United States of America. We will be doomed to failure. Also, there is a reason it is called the WHITE house. ITS FOR WHITE PEOPLE. If Barack Obama were white, and accepted Jesus, he would not have the hateful positions he does. We must go back to the time of JESUS and STONE ALLL HOMOSEXUALS. IF we lived according to the bible, and stoned all criminals to death, including mothers who have abortions, society would be in a much better place. I know that he will be assasinated by GODS choosing.

    All you dirty heathens will BURN!!!!!
    God Bless You All
    God Loves you

    April 7th, 2008 6:10 am Heathenhater
  52. If ever I see a dirty heathen on the street, I will not move for him. Only devout Christians know the path to God and to Heaven, and so I can not say that Obama will be allowed by God to become president of our great nation. His middle name is Hussein! He belongs in Iraq with all his towel-head jihad bombers. He is a godless liberal, and he should find Jesus. It is because of these freakin' Muslim fanatics that there exists so much pain and suffering in the world. If everyone would simply admit that Muhammad and Buddha and Shiva and Freakydeekydoitchguy are all false idols, and just embrace Jesus, then the world will be a lot better off. Those Chinos should put down their chopsticks and admit that Jesus is right, and always will be right, and so I will light on fire any heathens that cross my path. Metaphorically of course.

    April 7th, 2008 6:11 am OhHolyKnight
  53. Barrack Obama a liberal? NO!

    I'm shocked - shocked I say - to find gambling going on in this casino! :)

    April 7th, 2008 10:34 am Bryan
  54. Heathenhater and Oholynight -

    You are just both pot stirrers...not real Christians, what do you call them in the computer world? Worms? there is a name.....

    April 7th, 2008 11:24 am petunia
  55. Petunia,

    you are not a real Christian. If you really embraced Christ, you would help annihilate the threat of heathens in the world by mass conversion and/or extermination. But you sit there in your house and let the ills of the world continue, like the genocides in Africa and the Palestinian conflict, which everyone knows are caused by dirty god-hating heathens who hate Jesus and hate knowledge and truth. As soon as they--and you--accept the truth, that Christianity is the ONLY truth, and that only through Christ can you achieve salvation, will you realize that your indifference to the crimes of the world was detrimental. Repent and embrace the lord! It's not too late to avoid eternal damnation!

    Also, I am no worm. Anyone who claim that a disciple of Jesus is a worm is sure to condemn themselves to the eternal flames of Satan's lair. If you choose to pursue this path, I will pray for your soul.

    April 9th, 2008 5:42 am OhHolyKnight
  56. Democrats are completely clueless.Obama will be the nominee and he is a liberal. Haven't the debacles of McGovern(1972),Dukakis(1988),Gore(2000),and Kerry(2004) taught them that Americans don't want a leftist punk as our President? This election shouldn't even be close.Is Obama actually going to stand up there and say he is against capital punishment when 68% of Americans are for it?That's political suicide.Just ask Dukakis.The problem is simple:The left-wing, crackpot base decides their nominee in the primaries and they can't win the general election.I'm a Bush supporter but I admit that he was an unpopular President in 2004 and ripe for defeat.What do the Democrats do? Run a complete moron,far-left liberal like a Kerry and lose.Go figure.I'll bet it will happen again in November.

    April 9th, 2008 9:36 am Templar in Outremer
  57. Templar in Outremer,

    Bush was appointed president in 2000. Don't forget that. Then he started a bogus war right before 2004 and Americans, rightly or not, are reluctant to change administrations during a war. Obama will be our next president and Bush and his dreadful legacy will have a lot to do with it. Saying Bush is "unpopular" is like saying Michael Jackson is "quirky." People want to put the last 8 years behind them. McCain is a symbol of the failed Bush years. Hillary is a pathological liar. Barack, warts and all, is 100 times better than either on his worst day. Barack is a LEADER. He is a visionary. He sees what is possible and is not boxed in by old ideas, old tactics and old politics. How do the 17,000 people who voted for Bush in Indiana last time feel about their contribution to the continuation of the worst American president in history?

    April 9th, 2008 10:04 am simonesdad2008
  58. Leadership is the key word simoensdad

    April 9th, 2008 12:01 pm davidwwalters
  59. Not all leaders are good people - Hitler, Stalin and Saddam had a lot of followers who believed every word they said. You say Obama is a great leader because he gets people to like him....but WHAT is he about? (and please don't say "change" or I'll scream). What will he DO...he never actually gives definitive answers about that. What will he do about Iran? What are his ideas on foreign policy?....oh yea, he said he would "talk" to them....that will solve things.
    David Koresh was a great leader too hon. Lots of people were blinded by him and died for him....Obama reminds me too much of that story.....blind love of a man they don't really know much about.

    April 9th, 2008 4:54 pm petunia
  60. petunia,

    I'll concede we don't know a lot about what Barack will do. We don't know what any of them will do. We never know. Tell me, when Bush was running for president what exactly did he say he would DO. Did he mention starting a bogus war? Did he mention the highest gas prices in history? Did he mention his indifference to a catastrophic natural disaster? No, but he did it. Presidential elections are about the direction Americans want this country to go. The problem with your examples of great leaders who were not great people is that none of them were elected by Americans. You are so used to settling for the same tired politics that anything new and innovative scares you. If you operate out of fear.

    Once upon a time a man named Dick Fosbury came along and decided that there was a better way to high jump. For the history of the sport dating back to the ancient Greeks, there was one way to jump over the bar. He found a new way. He found a better way. At the time, he looked ridiculous doing it and people said anyone who tried it risked breaking their neck. Then in 1968 he won the gold medal in the Olympics. Even then people doubted the technique. Elite athletes at the time weren't willing to give up their tried and true techniques they had spent a lifetime mastering.

    As we know today, the "Fosbury Flop" is the standard way to high jump. Anyone not doing it is at a distinct competitive disadvantage. I suspect you, petunia, want to hold on to the old straddle method of getting over that bar. It's too scary for you to consider something new at the time it is being developed. You could have never signed the Declaration of Independence. You would have been too scared of British rule to break the law (as it was at the time) by signing the document. History is full of petunias. We don't know their names because they never did anything or led anything or left the safe confines of their scared little lives.

    Keep trying to get over that bar, petunia. Good luck with that horse and buggy too....

    Dick Fosbury:
    http://starbulletin.com/1999/02/13/sports/story2.html

    April 10th, 2008 4:59 am simonesdad2008
  61. OK Templar in Outremer Bush is legit. He won, got the most votes etc. That was a long time ago and can't be undone. He's the best this country has ever had in the Oval Office and I'm leading a petition to get his face added to Mount Rushmore. Who's with me!

    That being said, I hope Bush sticks to McCain like glue during the general election. I hope he is there at every turn reminding everyone how great we have had it in the Bush years. I hope George drives home the point that a vote for McCain is an endorsement and an extension of the job he did over the last 8 years. I hope McCain puts aside the bitterness of the South Carolina primary in 2000 and realizes that Bush is his best buddy and best chance to win the White House.

    April 10th, 2008 5:18 am simonesdad2008
  62. People are always saying how could Barack sit in the pews for 20 years and listen to Rev. Wright and not be affected?

    Well, the same way a Catholic can go to Mass for 20 years and use birth control or eat a juicy steak on a Friday night. People take what they need and what is practicle in their lives from their church. If the priest or bishop or Pope can't get you to do certain things or think in a certain way, do you think Rev. Wright can? They can still be a member of the church and support the church financially but have their own ideas about what is right and wrong as it applies to them. None of us (unless you are in a cult) take every word of our religious beliefs and live our lives that way. It would be nearly impossible in today's world.

    So think about what you do and don't do as it relates to your church before you judge Barack.

    April 10th, 2008 5:31 am simonesdad2008
  63. A Christian using birth control is not a Christian. He is a false Christian, and should be exiled from the Church altogether. If not for America's rampant suing craze, in which anyone can sue anyone for anything, including getting punished for blasphemy, our churches would be cleansed of what devout Christians call "Chreasters" -- those who go to Church only at Christmas and Easter. In other words, no better than devil worshipers

    †.

    April 10th, 2008 6:26 am OhHolyKnight
  64. Simonsdad,
    I want you to go back in history a little here. Bush had an actual platform, when he ran in 2000, about what his views were about foreign policy, taxes, education, etc. . If you recall, there was a terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 2001. (It probably could have been avoided if Clinton would have had a better stand on foreign policy by the way). Things did change after that....yes. Did things have to change?... slightly, yes. However, Bush's actual stand on things did not change, his ideas about things did not change. The economy, the higher oil prices...why not get mad at the terrorists about those things?
    Obama has never really talked about what he wants to do---listen to his speeches. He is a great orator, a motivator...I agree. But WHAT does he believe? WHAT are his stands on things.... no one knows. THAT is my point.

    April 10th, 2008 6:33 am petunia
  65. Ohholyknight - SHUT UP
    People like you are why people DON'T want to be Christians. I am a Christian....I don't act with hatred like you....read you bible and stay off of TBN!
    Again, I think you are just a bogus pot stirrer---I hope you are, sheesh

    April 10th, 2008 6:35 am petunia
  66. Simonsdad,
    I'm all for something new - just not something wrong. Obama is a left wingnut who I wouldn't even want to befriend much less lead the country. His views are so OUT THERE in left field that he scares me MUCH more than the Clintons ever did. I'd rather a Kennedy run this country....
    I'm all for a black president, I think that would be awesome to show the world we are beyond all the racial crap. I'm all for doing something with healthcare too, so the drug companies and the doctors don't gouge us and we need to get the medical inflation in line with normal inflation.
    You can all blame Bush for it all, but it simply is taking the "simple" (and I mean that about how people's brain's work) way out.
    I want to point out that it sure seems that people who are intelligent are generally republicans and people who are less educated are democrats....hmmm, I wonder why that is?

    April 10th, 2008 7:00 am petunia
  67. I know what your point is because it is so simplistic. Keep doing the same things no matter what so you can say at the end of the day, "I stuck to my plan." Life is fluid, my man. Yes, I agree, plans should be made but if you made your family fortune selling typewriters at some point you have to change the plan to suit the times. Preferably BEFORE typewriters become obsolete. Every political candidate has all of their plans and their platform on their official web sites. McCain's health plan, for example, wouldn't even cover the very treatment he received for skin cancer. Everyone gets a $5,000 tax break towards health care. So don't have a baby or have surgery or, God forbid, come down with any disease. That 5k is gone in two days and the rest is out of pocket. Nice plan..and I'm sure he will stick to it no matter what. I got that from his web site. I took the time to learn about the man instead of just assuming he is at odds with what is in my best interest because he is one of you guys.

    Yeah, Bush couldn't tell you the Prime Minister of Afghanistan's name when he was running for president. Nice foreign policy. No child left behind? Nice idea. No funding. And sure you can blame Clinton for 9/11 if you want. Clinton didn't invade Iraq in retaliation though. Remember how Bush courted the Christian right to get elected? Ask them how they feel about Bush today. What about "Mission Accomplished" That was a nice plan too.

    LEADERS make plans and execute them. If the desired result is not achieved, the plan is modified. When you stick to a plan in the face of obvious failure what does that say about you as a LEADER?

    So "stay the course" petunia. "Stay the course."

    April 10th, 2008 7:00 am simonesdad2008
  68. petunia,

    "I'm all for something new - just not something wrong."
    I realize you are a more intelligent republican, but with all do respect, you have no idea what is right or wrong for this country. Oh your heart is in the right place but you can not possibly know what is right for an entire country. You know what is right for you and your family. That may be very different from others or even the majority of Americans. You sound like one of those doctors who predicted that a whole generation of high jumpers would be wiped out by neck injuries if they adopted the Fosbury Flop. Did you read the article link? Do you hear yourself in the quotes of all of the naysayers at the time. Their hearts were in the right place too but they were dead wrong and so are you.

    April 10th, 2008 7:13 am simonesdad2008
  69. It had been a while since I have posted here, but I see that all that love is still going on.

    simonesdad2008, you are such a Obama lover, tell me one thing that he is going to do, one piece of legislation that he is going to produce that is going to make things better for this country.

    I will tell you what would truly help this country.

    1. Stop Welfare - End it now, can't take care of your kids on your own, then stop Fing having babies. It is not my responsibility to take care of you and your family, and it sure the hell is not the Government job to take my hard earned money so you can sit on your ass. I don't care how heart less that is it's the truth so deal with it.

    2. Stop spending so much money on education. It is not the amount of money the you give to the schools that determines a kids education, it is the parents that take part in their education that determines if they are going to learn.

    3. Stop illegal immigration, deport all illegals, no matter where they are from, from our country, and reform the process for citizenship, and worker visa's. I have no issue with anyone becoming a part of our society, but there are rules, and you break them you pay the price, that goes for the companies that higher them, and the landlords that house them.

    Do you get the impression that I could careless about others, well your wrong I do care? But it is not the Governments place to play nanny. The idea in a free market is that the churches and private organizations would provide for the needy, rather then providing for a nanny state.

    People need to pull their heads out of their asses and in the famous words of JFK, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your Country". This goes along with defending her, and her ideals. This goes along with taking personal responsibility in your own actions, and us not the Government taking care of each other.

    If a person is not happy with the way their life is going then they should do something about it. It is a pursuit of happiness, not a promise of happiness that the Federal Government is suppose to protect. I have no problem paying taxes that go for the defense of our nation, for the infrastructure of our nation, but everything else out side of that should be handled in the private sector, or the local level of Government.

    One word for Barrack, Just try and come and take my Guns away and see what happens. Only a tyrant and criminals are scared of citizens legally owning fire arms.

    April 10th, 2008 10:50 am JarrodM
  70. I just thought of one other thing that I left out of my last message. My understanding, and it is by no means an expert opinion, but my understanding is that the thought by our for-fathers in setting up the constitution the way they did was so that all men, no mater what way they wanted to live their life where free to live it that way.

    Meaning that if I wanted to be a generous person then I go purse to give to charity, or start a charity. That if I wanted to be a soldier I could go out to be a soldier. If I wanted to be a doctor I could pursue to being a doctor. That if I wanted to live a conservative life style that I could live that life style or if I wanted to live a liberal lifestyle that I could live that way also.

    The point is that as a society, no matter what side of the fence that you stand on, we have given way to much power and control to the Federal Government. It was never supposed to be this large, or this full of programs, or administrations.

    The only solution I see is to start cutting and getting rid of a lot of these programs, and for the states to take back the power the way it should be.

    April 10th, 2008 10:59 am JarrodM
  71. petunia:
    ".....it sure seems that people who are intelligent are generally republicans and people who are less educated are democrats....hmmm, I wonder why that is?"
    -Why i guess it's all the weed they(liberal/progressives)smoke!....sssssssssssT!
    aaaaaaah

    April 10th, 2008 2:53 pm davidwwalters
  72. You are proving my point simonsdad and davidwwalters,
    The intelligent people actually know something. You must start listening to the people who know how this country (and world) works. Global economy, fiscal restraint, national security.....there are experts you know. We are all armchair politicians guessing what is best for this country. I study and listen to people who know more than we do....that's what smart is all about.
    First, simonsdad i guess you didn't read about how I feel we need to change some things - just not go about it the wrong way. I am all for change but not when it's helter skelter change, change for change sake. That's what Obama is riding on - "we need change" is all I hear. Well, most people agree (as do I) but no one bothers to ask how he will do that. He is SOFT on foreign policy...that alone should be a turn off in this day and age but people are not even interested beyond the nose on their face.
    DW - now we're on the same page....:)

    April 10th, 2008 4:03 pm petunia
  73. "Global economy, fiscal restraint, national security.....there are experts you know." Who are these so-called experts you study and listen to? I'm willing to give a listen.

    "I feel we need to change some things - just not go about it the wrong way. I am all for change but not when it's helter skelter change, change for change sake." If you want to call him liberal or the most liberal or inexperienced or vague on details a reasonable person could say ok but what is helter skelter about Barack Obama? To me it all sounds like fear. You sound scared. True innovators like Barack are unafraid. They are leaders who deliver the scared into the future (sometimes kicking and screaming) but they LEAD. They take the risks some are not willing to take because they are visionaries. Barack Obama has raised the most money from the most donors in history. He doubled the total money raised of Hillary and nearly tripled that of McCain in the same month he weathered the Rev. Wright dust up. What does that tell you? In my opinion his campaign is orderly and strategic and effective and successful and resonates with voters. What exactly is "helter skelter" about that? It is an indication of the type of president he would be. The other remaining candidates have both run out of money in this campaign. What would your fiscal restraint expert say about that? I'm no fiscal expert but I would ask, if you can't manage your own campaign finances, why should I believe you can be responsible for the country's? McCain has told us straight out that he knows nothing about the economy and would enlist "experts" to help him. Are these the same experts you "study and listen to?" McCain has told us he is willing to commit to 100 years in Iraq. What do your experts say about that? We, as a country, are in debt while Iraq enjoys a surplus. Do your experts want to sign up for 100 more years of that?

    April 11th, 2008 12:16 am simonesdad2008
  74. I agree with you article, you make some good points people should become aware of.

    April 11th, 2008 5:18 am Jim Gold
  75. petunia,

    I have read the bible. Perhaps you should too. You'll find some interesting stuff. Have you ever sat down and considered why the bible contradicts itself so much? Perhaps because it was written by PEOPLE? And people make mistakes, especially thousands of years ago when they didn't have the science and technology we have access to now. That said, who's to say Jesus Christ was anything more than a drunk on the street who, at about the age of 30, decided in a drunken haze that he is, in fact, the "son of god." Religion is like the stock market: you just have to sell at the right time. I am not the reason people are turned off of Christianity. The fact that Christianity is a religion that contradicts itself, and the fact that Christianity has been the direct cause of so much conflict throughout history--the Holocaust, the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, just to name a few--THOSE are the reasons that rational people get turned off of organized religion altogether. Organized religion--and Christianity is the worst offender of this--is nothing but a big group of people devoutly following the corruptible, human leaders who claim to know the true path to some heaven they have created.

    And it is because of all of this that we get such controversies as bad language (the f-word might be as commonplace as the word "common" if not for "God" deciding that, for whatever reason, that word is wrong), homosexuality concerns (simply because the bible says "no gays," we have to deny the right of people in love to love each other when it does us personally no harm at all), and many, many wars and struggles (the Iraq War would have 0 support if we didn't have anti-Islamic propaganda spreading throughout America; Hitler would never have sought global dominion, especially over the Jews; and McCarthyism would not have spread if we couldn't point the finger of evil at those cold-hearted, red-bannered, god-hating atheist bastards across the pond).

    I should, I suppose, state that I used to be an avid conservative and that I USED to support George W. and the war in Iraq. But I mean, come on! There comes a point when you just gotta say enough is enough. It's ridiculous and it's pointless, our presence over that at this point.

    April 11th, 2008 5:54 am OhHolyKnight
  76. Iraq is now able and contributing 100s of millions to reconstruction and going to be giving more....so they are helping with some of that "surplus".
    You say I sound scared of Obama - oh yea I am. Because he's so soft on everything - who knows what he will do and God knows we don't want him to listen to his board of advisers (MR. Wright being one and another is a Merrill A. McPeak, who implied U.S. politicians are afraid of Jewish voters in Miami and New York City and that American Jews are the "problem" impeding a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict....he Christian Zionists were driving America's policy in Iraq to benefit Israel.....and much more.)
    These are the people he listens to? YEA i'm scared.

    And Oh Holy knight - I knew I called you out.... why don't you go crawl back under your rock. So your answer is to pull out of Iraq all together? Sorry, that will have global implications.....and don't go trying your garbage about Why the bible contradicts itself - it doesn't. You can't read it out of context and you have to have some KNOWLEDGE about the culture, Roman history, Hebrew, Aramaic etc. My husband went to seminary, try learning a little before you pipe up. Any 'ol joe can rea the bible and put whatever spin they want to on it - look at MR. "so called Rev." Wright.

    April 11th, 2008 6:32 pm petunia
  77. petunia,

    I never said you sounded scared of Obama. You said that. I said you sound scared, period. I don't think people were actually scared of Dick Fosbury himself. He was so far ahead of his time and had departed so far from the accepted (and inadequate) status quo, that people like you said his innovations would be disastrous. They predicted all sorts of horrific scenarios. Either you refuse to read about Fosbury or you can not grasp the obvious parallels of their stories. All I'm getting from you is common conservative talking points. "Soft" on this or that, fear mongering, etc. Who are YOUR experts, petunia. I'm still waiting for that. I thought you said you were so smart as a republican. Einstein was smart too but he wore the exact same clothes everyday of his adult life. He said he didn't want to waste time thinking about what to wear. You are also cloaked in old thinking, old ideas and view anything new or even considering anything new as a waste of time. I know what and how you think. You are a conservative. If I want to know what all conservatives think all I have to do is ask one. You guys are in lock step with one another. Sort of like a cult. The cult of conservatism doesn't allow you think independently. It restricts your ability to evaluate issues on your own. Anyone who breaks rank is severely reprimanded and possibly shunned. Ask John McCain about that.

    April 12th, 2008 3:04 am simonesdad2008
  78. petunia,
    in spite of my obvious mental deficiencies(abnormal amounts of THC consumed).....i too want to read what these "experts" tell us .......
    and then compare it to how i, myself have witnessed events. But that is just how mental lightweights like me survive in this world, to listen AND observe.

    April 12th, 2008 12:27 pm davidwwalters
  79. Sometimes, I think the best thing John McCain could do for his candidacy would be to go on a long vacation, get a lot of rest and come back in November. By then, he might find that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have completely disappeared. The Democratic Primary looks like two punchdrunk fighters trying to hand the bout to the other.

    For example, just when it looked like the Hillary-Bosnia flap was starting to blow over, here comes Bill appearing before the usual crowd of curious onlookers ("Hey Bob, didn't that guy used to be a president?") explaining how Hillary screwed up the Bosnia story. According to Bill, she made the claim at 11 at night when she was tired from lack of sleep. Big deal, said Bill. Problem was, Hillary said it multiple times-and not at some late hour as Bill claimed. Then Bill stuck it in even farther, asking his listeners to understand how it is to be sixty years old and tired. You know, plays tricks on your memory don't it? Well, I don't know about you, but I'm not interested in having someone as commander-in-chief who is starting to lose her memory due to old age. Not that I believe that; on the contrary, Hillary's selective memory is astounding. As for Bill, he is starting to remind me of Pete Rose at an autograph show.

    Anyway, I have a question for those Clinton-admirers out there: Are you starting to realize that the Clintons-both of them-are nothing more than a couple of BS artists?

    Meanwhile, just as our "bringer togetherer" presidential candidate, Barack Obama, was starting to put the Wright deal behind him-at least in the minds of the Democratic voters-he stepped in it himself. This time, it was not the words of his wife, Michelle, nor the words of his pastor, but his own words. In San Francisco, speaking before an audience of well, "San Franciscoers" (inside joke), Obama described the backwoods, gun-totin', bible-thumpin', minority hatin', immigrant-bashin' hicks that populate Pennsylvania. You know, people right out of the cast of "The Deer Hunter", people who are not too receptive to a "46-year-old- black guy" like him.

    What is it about those people in Pennsylvania? First, their own Governor, Ed Rendell implies that they are racists and not willing to vote for a black candidate. Now Obama delights an elite San Francisco audience with his own description of a Dickensian Pennsylvania inhabited by steel workers and coal minors.

    As a personal comment, I lived in Pittsburgh from 1987-1990, and I happen to have a high opinion of the folks there. (Pittsburgh, unlike Philadelphia, which is a classical Eastern city, would be classified more as a Midwestern city culturally.)

    But I digress. Obama's remark was ridiculous. After first defending himself defiantly in Terre Haute from criticism by Hillary and the McCain campaign, Obama admitted that he chose the wrong words. Indeed.

    I am having serious doubts about Obama-specifically on his honesty (in speaking about Wright) and his judgement. As for his experience, he is obviously lacking. I seriously suspect that there is a side to the Obamas that they are hiding. It would be great if the mainstream media started asking him more pointed questions-which they don't. The msm was forced to discuss the Wright issue. Hopefully, they will be forced to examine the relationship between Obama and former (unrepentent)Weather Underground bomber, William Ayers (now Professor William Ayers). That is yet another story out there that relates directly to Obama's fitness for president.

    Meanwhile, the Great Sausage Race stumbles toward the finish line.

    gary fouse
    fousesquawk

    April 12th, 2008 2:04 pm fouse, gary c
  80. Michael Mukasey, Josh Bolten, Jim Nussle, Mike Leavitt, Michael Chertoff and Condoleezza Rice just to name a few. I want you to look up each bio and see what these people did before they were advisers....
    Much smarter than any of us....

    April 12th, 2008 2:57 pm petunia
  81. petunia.....
    i s'pose that's what distinguishes a free thinker from a follower........"Much smarter than any of us...."
    i am familiar with Bolten, Chertoff, and Rice's bios and i am not impressed......lots of school......little practical application. The application of their collective thought has granted us (in part, to be fair)......this grand Cluster-F**K(our foreign policy).
    What we need to do as informed citizens.......is not to take other's word based upon some silly bio or resume.......but to judge for ourselves and to ask DIFFICULT questions.......and compare this to what we know from our own experiences.
    But we seem to allow so-called experts to lead us down one-way trips to hell, all the while they're telling us we we are approaching paradise. i am used to this.......i've seen it occur for 40 yrs or more.....ssssssssT!aaaaaaaaaaaaah!

    April 12th, 2008 4:06 pm davidwwalters
  82. If I would hire someone for a job, I would want schooling, knowledge and experience. I want someone smart and with a good resume. Not some nut who thinks he/she knows it all.
    oh yea, all your practical experience has made you an expert....that's what's wrong with this country. I read the bios, I follow what they think, I do the research and agree....paleeeeeeessssse. You are blind liberals who know it all....
    Let's see, who are Obama's advisers? Oh yea, the Rev. and McPeak- oh great....they sound brilliant. Another is Axelrod ...he was a political columnist.....that's all? whoa, what a resume. He became a political strategist after that, an "expert" on web campaigning (i will say, he's good at that but not going to give good advice about anything else....in short, a salesman just like Obama).
    Penny Pritzker (a really, really rich Democrat....crazy).....Ms. Moneybags is the chair of the finance committee....no wonder, not only has she contributed a bundle but she and her family were ordered to pay $460 million to avoid being punished for the failure of Superior bank. Boy, this crowd is great so far.
    Let's see. A new comer to politics....Goolsbee.... and even fellow democrats say things like: "Goolsbee may be a dandy economist but he is a fool when it comes to dealing with foreign officials" and "They may run a terrific campaign. But governing and managing foreign policy is not the same as campaigning."
    He called The Canadian's ambassador to US and told him that Obama was "going to speak out on NAFTA but reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value."----oops.
    Marian Robinson, Barack Obama's mother-in-law, has emerged as a vital element of the campaign by caring for the Obama children during the long race. Oh yea, and she was finance chair for Barack's Senate campaign. I wonder what church she goes to?
    Another Obama adviser, Power, told the BBC that "Obama's plan to withdraw all troops from Iraq within 16 months was subject to change once he took office." - Where did he find these people???
    http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/832864,CST-NWS-sweet09.article

    Oh, and Obama's resume on Foreign Policy: Chairman of the Oversight Commitee on NATO for Afganistan! Impressive huh! Ok so he held no meetings and didn’t resign so someone could actually work on the commitee before the Tallaban surge that is coming this spring, but it is on Obama’s resume and is impressive isn’t it?

    So---there is SOOOO much practical application.....

    April 12th, 2008 6:40 pm petunia
  83. petunia,
    it doesn't take a genius to figure out that $50 Billion submarines to fight insurgents is perhaps,.........unwarranted?

    April 12th, 2008 9:11 pm davidwwalters
  84. First, I have never claimed any administration does everything right....we are all human. The question is - who will do the fewest stupid things...?
    Anyway....One thing you all make me do is learn more, question myself and my beliefs. You haven't changed my mind or party (and I'm sure I will not change yours) but this is all good for me.
    But back to the Sub....this is where that "smart stuff" comes in. Sometimes you have to turn to people who do know more about strategy and wartime efforts....
    The submarine thing sounds a bit extreme I must admit. I would assume someone knows what they are doing. When I started looking for the story (never sound it - give me a link), I was thinking that we still have to have submarines for other things happening in the world. We are not only fighting in Iraq but we have conflicts and things happening all over the world and we have to always be "on guard" for any other conflict or problem that may occur.

    One military person wrote this:

    "The reason the Navy needs more submarines to execute the maritime strategy is so the Navy can shift the war-fighting burden from its surface fleet to the underwater service, and in that way enable the surface combatant fleet to shape its force to better execute the maritime strategy.

    Translated into lay terms: more subs would free up our battleships, cruisers, destroyers and corvettes to fight terrorists, pirates and insurgents-at-sea and to show the flag at foreign ports: you know, the day-to-day bread and butter of Navy operations that subs can't do.

    April 13th, 2008 6:23 pm petunia
  85. petunia,

    You just gave us a perfect example of what is wrong with the librals of our country. The take a tag line, or they take a little sound bit from the media, and embrace it as the fact, with out ever looking for the truth.

    I had an argument the other day with some one about the universal health care. They stated that they pay about 1000 a month in family health care, and they are tired of having to pay for others health care with their payment, for example people who collect welfare rather then get a job. He stated that universal health care would stop him from having to pay for their health care. But the fact is, that universal health care would make his health care worth a lot less, making him have to pay more to keep the same health care, and he would still be paying for the others health care, because they would tax it out of you.

    The fact of the matter is that everything has a price. When one part of society does not pay their part the rest of us have to pick up the slack. The sad truth is that not everyone is going to have the best of life, and most of the time it is their choice.

    Another example global warming. Every day more information comes out on how unfactual the claim of global warming is, and that in fact over the past 10 years it has been colder then the 10 years before. In fact the warmest period of time in the last century was during the great depression.

    So I'm confused is the world truly going to end or is maybe the earth just does not have a predictable cycle, and we are just figuring that out now, and we have to realize that weather changes, and each winter and summer will not be the same.

    If you want to live in a socialistic society then go move to europe where it has been embrased, and they pay much much higher taxes then we have here. Leave our country out of it. Yes I'm telling you, if you don't like it get out, because your heading down a path that is only going to end in internal war. Go back and read up on the civil war, and find out what it truly was about, slavery had nothing to do with the start of the civil war.

    April 14th, 2008 2:15 am JarrodM
  86. JarrodM,

    Your a dolt.

    I have nothing to say of your ignorance of history.

    You are the type of person who really does not understand anything.

    And to all of those people who have no life and think religion is a good thing.

    your all dolts too

    I just saw on CNN that the US was double funding the war in Iraq, because, the iraqis are not paying for anything.

    Please respond, and i will have more time to respond to all you dolty conservatives tomorrow. I just am out of time.

    April 14th, 2008 4:46 am Heathenhater
  87. petunia,

    The bible isn't contradictory? Excuse me? Would you like it if I cited some direct bible verses, or would I still be incorrect? How bout these ones:

    Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."
    VERSUS
    I Samuel 6:19 " . . . and the people lamented because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter."
    OR
    Numbers 15:36 "And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."

    Not satisfied? I could give more if you'd like. Or, if you'd rather not embarrass yourself, you can just read for yourself. There is evidence of biblical fallacy all over the Internet and in plenty of books.

    It is not even the Old Testament contradicting the New one. God tells Moses "Thou shalt not kill," and simultaneously tells Joshua to raze cities to the ground and kill all of his opposition. The Bible tells us not to steal, but then cites examples in which biblical heroes DO steal, and it tells us to love our parents then hate them, or that Jesus is divine versus man (I'm not even going to get into that one, but for fun, I'll just throw in the Council of Nicaea).

    BUT EVEN IF the Bible didn't contradict itself (which it does, which is why there are countless denominations stupidly feuding with one another), the historical events I mentioned are still DIRECTLY caused by Christianity. So God's will and Jesus's message have been making us kill everyone who doesn't agree with us. Thanks Jesus!

    And as for Iraq, immediately withdrawal is not really an option anymore, I'll admit that. But everything we've done up to this point, and everything we're still doing, is so completely stained by failure after failure. Oh, but let's stay there and drain our economy and global respect for as long as we can so we're not a superpower anymore! Hooray, we'll be like everyone else! Gotta love it.

    Thanks for your time, petunia. You've been great. I love that people like you still exist, seriously. It makes me feel a whole lot better, knowing that I am not the most ignorant person out there. So, really, really, thank you!

    April 14th, 2008 4:48 am OhHolyKnight
  88. I think heathenhater and oholyknight ar the same person - no two people could be equally that stupid...
    anyway, Jarrod...I agree. And people who listen to anything CNN has to say are in the same category as those who take sound bites and run with them. Fox news just reported that Iraq is starting to give money for the reconstruction of Iraq - starting with 100 million. As far as Al Gore and Global warming - don't get me started. Half of the scientific world don't believe the claims of global worming and many will not even voice their opinion out of fear of being reprimanded. Talking about NOT going against the grain and getting in trouble...wasn't the genius DW saying that Republicans have a bad time with that?

    Ohholyknight --- you are proving my point about taking the bible out of context.
    When God told Moses to tell the people 'thou shalt not kill', He meant thou shalt not murder innocent people, because we certainly read about God's ordering the execution of guilty people in His Law. But throughout history, elimination of criminal behavior or sins unto death have been a survival mechanism sanctioned by God for our society to live in peace.

    Look up all the people who were "killed" and you will see what I mean....Sodom and Gomorrah is a good example. God even said IF you find even 10 righteous people in the whole city he would not destroy it -- Couldn't even find that (maybe they were all democrats) :)

    April 14th, 2008 8:13 am petunia
  89. So I have read up a little on the so-called experts you rely upon, petunia. It is curious that you say something like your comments on CNN and then right after that regurgitate something from Fox. The truth about Fox and CNN and your experts is the same. If you are predisposed to a certain way of thinking you will quote, rely upon, cite as fact, etc. anything that supports your argument. You do it. I do it. We all do it. I read up on your list of "experts" and I thank you for giving me some names. I'm not going to attack or criticize them for their views. I think with the exception of Nussle they are all Bush appointed second stringers. All appointed after Bush's initial choices quit. There are good and smart people on both sides of this. The problem conservatives have is that anyone with valid ideas on anything must first pass some artificial standard of thinking the "right" way about abortion or guns or gays before they are welcomed in. In other words, if someone has a revolutionary way of addressing the economy or immigration or taxes or health care, they better not believe global warming exists or else their ideas will never see the light of day on your side. Drink the conservative kool aid and then we will listen to you. Well, in my opinion good ideas can come from anywhere. That is the beautiful thing about America. As a matter of fact, in general, conservatives look down on collaborative efforts if they don't approve of the partner. Your closed off cult of conservatism really limits the scope and breadth and dept of opinion and new ideas. So you have the same old stale "experts" giving us the same old stale ideas and solutions. Further more, anyone out of line is quickly dismissed as liberal or stupid or whatever. I subscribe to this blog to hear what you guys are thinking. I came to it with an open mind. Petunia, you are smart and I believe you truly believe in what you are saying on here. It's hard to admit or even recognize when you are on the wrong side of history. I'm not here to try to change your mind. I'm here to forecast the future for you. Barack Obama will be the next president. Colin Powell might be the vice president. There is a new day on the horizon. You guys will regroup and hopefully the resounding defeat you suffer in this (and the last for that matter) election cycle will finally force you to rethink your politics, your tactics and your view of what is possible in this country. You guys had the Reps and Senators and White House and (apparently) a blank check. Are we better off today than we were 8 years ago? The voters of this country will answer that question loud and clear in November.

    April 14th, 2008 9:30 am simonesdad2008
  90. Simon, I would love some change but the change that I think Obama will bring to this country will strangle us not help us breath easier. I choose to listen to Fox news more than CNN (i do watch both - I even watch NBC who I think may be a little communist...lol). But Fox news is NOT as bias. Yes, they are more conservative but they will run stories on both sides, they will let you hear all the story. CNN will not even run some stories because they are too liberal and don't want anyone to hear the whole truth. Has CNN reported about Ben Stien's movie? They didn't have much to say about the "garlic nose" comment either....and many more.
    I truly believe that liberals have been blinded by the idea of change so much that they will do anything....take anyone. Obama has fooled people into believing he's the only answer....it's scary.

    I appreciate other people's views and really do appreciate the debate. It' makes me really learn more and study about these people. All of us are at least informed. How many people are voting "just because"? Everyone should know all they can know before deciding either way.

    April 14th, 2008 10:04 am petunia