what about stem cell research? don't you think "mainstream christians" have family members with cancer or other terminal diseases?
give me a break dude. the left has never belittled mainstream christians. if anything, republicans are doing the belittling by treating them like brainwashed morons.
Fine....educate my dumbass......is there a Christian Religious leader or Church [/b] that have officially come out in favor of Stem Cell research???
And I NEVER said the Left belittled mainstream Christianity, I said that by belittling the Religious Right they have alienated mainstream Christians who view "A Christian is my brother"........BIG difference.
I think the Major[/b] point that most of you are missing is simply this.....
By virtue of you participating in, caring about or being involved in any political issues whatsoever you are in a 10% at best minority in this country.
While you rationalize "If everyone was as caring/smart/humanitarian as I am they would vote a certain way", the majority of voters vote on single issues or unimportant quirks.
This doesn't make these folks stupid, or their vote less important. It just reflects the political climate that we as a society have created.
one of the candidates was asked, (i'm paraphrasing both the question and answer) "if a business owner thinks homosexuality is immoral and finds out one of his employees is gay should they be able to fire the employee?"
he stared off blankly for a minute while the gears whirred away. then turned and answered ,"yes a business should be able to do as it pleases."
i'm not trying to make a partisan statement when i say i really thought we had advanced past this already.
Hey bastard, the government doesnt exist to force people to do what you want them to do. To support someones right to make such a decision doesnt mean you support the decision itself, just that you have a sincere belief in liberty. Something that no lefty has. Youre hopelessly naive if you think that making it illegal to fire people because theyre gay is going to stop someone so inclined anyway. They will find some pretext to do it. All such laws succede in doing obscuring what it is they are ostensibly installed to wipe out. Still, superficial results are more than good enough for you dispicable vermin. Anyone engaging this guy should know two things.
1) One he is opposed to laws giving equal rights to all Americans. He has made it plain here and elsewhere that he believes that the anti-segregation laws that opened up stores, lunch counters and schools to African Americans are wrong and take away his liberties.
Hey bastard, the government doesnt exist to force people to do what you want them to do.[/b]
Youre hopelessly naive if you think that making it illegal to fire people because theyre...[/b]
He strongly and obscenely believes that our civil rights laws obscure racism, but do not diminish it: All such laws succede in doing obscuring what it is they are ostensibly installed to wipe out.[/b]
If you support our civil rights laws he believes you are dispicable vermin[/b].
I can say alot of people I know that voted republican (mainly military and blue collar) who have never voted Democrat, are looking for almost anything reaonable that will change the current way the country is being governed. Alot of people I would not have thought to be, are completely disenchanted by Bush.
This doesn't mean that the Dems have it at this point, but it is their's to lose. For the first time in a long time they could possibly gain alot of staunch republican among their voting base for this next election IF they handle everythig correctly.
The Republicans have almost no chance of winning in 2008 for three very important reasons.
1) Bush (and his terrible record) has crushed the spirit of the far right wing of the party. They are totally in a daze and are planning to sit this one out just like 1996.
2) Republicans have nothing to run on right now. Most wedge issues are favoring Dems by a very large majority right now. This is the most important change in the electorate since 2000. The great equalizers for Republicans, national security and limited gov't, are now owned by Dems.
3) No good candidates. As you could see, the Republicans made the Dem debate look like a Springsteen concert by comparison. Rich is totally correct when he says that many people will vote strictly on visual appeal, which the GOP is seriously lacking.
You may be right, but I think this was the same basic attitude the Left had when approaching the '04 elections.
Besides the war and it's associated issues, what "wedge" issues do you think the Dems have a lock on with Mid-Americans??
As far as an attractive candidate, it's amazing what the "political machine" can do in a years time.
Wedge issues that are in play this year.
Environment/Energy Independence- The GOPs credibility on this issue is nil
Managing Gov't/Spending- After Katrina and now the war GOP trails the Dems decisively in these areas.
Security- Abu Ghraib, Walter Reed,etc, etc What was once a giant plus for GOP has now come to a dead heat and in some cases seems to an albatross around a la McCain's massively foundering campaign.
Wedge issues which will have little impact in 2008:
Gay Marriage Abortion School Choice Supreme Court
Think I am wrong talk to GOP strategists who are freaking out right now. They know that Bush is not going to throw them any bones and they saw how that played last year. Get ready for 2006 redux.
And they GOP has who the have. There is no RFK waiting in the wings.
Most Christians and most Evangelicals believe in the bible and the teachings of Christ. In the past, Republican operatives have been able to exploit one Christian issue. Abortion. Most Evangelicals and many Catholics and others, believe this should be decided not by a women and her doctor, but by government interference.
Probably because they view it as murder, which is forbidden by law.
what about stem cell research? don't you think "mainstream christians" have family members with cancer or other terminal diseases?
give me a break dude. the left has never belittled mainstream christians. if anything, republicans are doing the belittling by treating them like brainwashed morons.
Fine....educate my dumbass......is there a Christian Religious leader or Church [/b] that have officially come out in favor of Stem Cell research???
And I NEVER said the Left belittled mainstream Christianity, I said that by belittling the Religious Right they have alienated mainstream Christians who view "A Christian is my brother"........BIG difference.
You proceed to prop up one straw man after another.
All the "mainstream Christians" I know (and I'm from the South) find those people just as terrifying as I do. Mainstream Christians, in my experience, also display some ability to think for themselves, which you don't seem to credit them with.
Does it ever occur to you that, being in Texas, you are the one that's a touch outside of the mainstream?
what about stem cell research? don't you think "mainstream christians" have family members with cancer or other terminal diseases?
give me a break dude. the left has never belittled mainstream christians. if anything, republicans are doing the belittling by treating them like brainwashed morons.
Fine....educate my dumbass......is there a Christian Religious leader or Church [/b] that have officially come out in favor of Stem Cell research???
You proceed to prop up one straw man after another.
All the "mainstream Christians" I know (and I'm from the South) find those people just as terrifying as I do. Mainstream Christians, in my experience, also display some ability to think for themselves, which you don't seem to credit them with.
Does it ever occur to you that, being in Texas, you are the one that's a touch outside of the mainstream?
The Strawman be you....'all the mainstream Christians you know" doesn't add up to ANY Church doctrine or Religious leader....you know, like that Pope guy.
Environment/Energy Independence- The GOPs credibility on this issue is nil
Managing Gov't/Spending- After Katrina and now the war GOP trails the Dems decisively in these areas.
Security- Abu Ghraib, Walter Reed,etc, etc What was once a giant plus for GOP has now come to a dead heat and in some cases seems to an albatross around a la McCain's massively foundering campaign.
Wedge issues which will have little impact in 2008:
Gay Marriage Abortion School Choice Supreme Court
Think I am wrong talk to GOP strategists who are freaking out right now. They know that Bush is not going to throw them any bones and they saw how that played last year. Get ready for 2006 redux.
And they GOP has who the have. There is no RFK waiting in the wings. Immigration will be the #1 tool of the right......unfortunately for them, Bush has taken an unpopular stance and the Reps will wait until late in the game to play this card as to not make Bush look exceedingly bad......although at this point, I'm sure plenty of them don't care.
Immigration will be the #1 tool of the right......unfortunately for them, Bush has taken an unpopular stance and the Reps will wait until late in the game to play this card as to not make Bush look exceedingly bad......although at this point, I'm sure plenty of them don't care. Great populist issue. They don't look like "us". They are breaking the law. They are stealing our jobs. They are using our services.
Rudy Gulianni: Supports Senate guest worker plan & path to citizenship. (Nov 2006) Sounds like a liberal to me.
Mitt Romney: Tuition breaks encourage illegal immigration. (Nov 2005) Give a few minutes he'll come up with the oppisite position.
Sam Brownback: Voted YES on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006) Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006) Voted YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship. (May 2006) Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998) Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998) Sounds like a liberal to me.
John McCain: Make possible for immigrants to do a job Americans won't do. (Oct 2004) Give everyone in the world an opportunity to come to America. (Oct 2004) No more ballot initiatives against immigration. (Mar 1999) More help for legal immigrants when immigrating & once here. (Jul 1998) Voted YES on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006) Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006) Voted YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship. (May 2006) Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998) Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998) Sounds like a liberal to me.
Fred Thompson: Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998) Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998) Liberal!
Tom Tancredo: Parts of Miami are like a Third World country. (Dec 2006) Guest-worker program equals amnesty. (Dec 2006) Opposes chain migration from anchor babies citizenship. (Dec 2006) Voted YES on preventing tipping off Mexicans about Minuteman Project. (Jun 2006) Voted YES on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment. (May 2004) Voted NO on extending Immigrant Residency rules. (May 2001) Rated 100% by FAIR, indicating a voting record restricting immigration. (Dec 2003
Looks like Tancredo is the republican nominee. Can you say President Clinton?
what about stem cell research? don't you think "mainstream christians" have family members with cancer or other terminal diseases?
give me a break dude. the left has never belittled mainstream christians. if anything, republicans are doing the belittling by treating them like brainwashed morons.
Fine....educate my dumbass......is there a Christian Religious leader or Church [/b] that have officially come out in favor of Stem Cell research???
You proceed to prop up one straw man after another.
All the "mainstream Christians" I know (and I'm from the South) find those people just as terrifying as I do. Mainstream Christians, in my experience, also display some ability to think for themselves, which you don't seem to credit them with.
Does it ever occur to you that, being in Texas, you are the one that's a touch outside of the mainstream?
The Strawman be you....'all the mainstream Christians you know" doesn't add up to ANY Church doctrine or Religious leader....you know, like that Pope guy.
Clever edit.
I'm not talking about stem-cell research which--regardless of whether any major Christian leader has come out in support of it--is really only something that the ectreme religious right gets exercised over. I'm talking about this:
And I NEVER said the Left belittled mainstream Christianity, I said that by belittling the Religious Right they have alienated mainstream Christians who view "A Christian is my brother"........BIG difference.
But if you want to talk about Catholics, I happen to live in New York--a bastion of American Catholicism--and to come from a Catholic family. Do you really mean to say that you think most Catholics view somebody "belittling" Pat Robertson as a slight against them? A large portion of the religious right doesn't even view Catholics as legitimate Christians.
Faux.....no I don't think a Catholic hears an insult about Pat Robertson and is offended in the least.
But I do think that quite often people refer to "Christians" when indeed they mean a nut like Falwell, and those "mainstream" Christians see it as a slur.
Faux.....no I don't think a Catholic hears an insult about Pat Robertson and is offended in the least.
But I do think that quite often people refer to "Christians" when indeed they mean a nut like Falwell, and those "mainstream" Christians see it as a slur.
Thanks.....I thought my edit was clever too.
People who use "Christian" as a slur account for only the tiniest minority of this country's population--and I don't think a single one of them is prominent within the Democratic party.
Again, that party's leaders are almost as bad as the Republicans in inappropriately injecting religion into public discourse.
Faux.....no I don't think a Catholic hears an insult about Pat Robertson and is offended in the least.
But I do think that quite often people refer to "Christians" when indeed they mean a nut like Falwell, and those "mainstream" Christians see it as a slur.
Thanks.....I thought my edit was clever too.
People who use "Christian" as a slur account for only the tiniest minority of this country's population--and I don't think a single one of them is prominent within the Democratic party.
Again, that party's leaders are almost as bad as the Republicans in inappropriately injecting religion into public discourse.
Dude....you don't GET it!!!!!
90% of the voting public wouldn't KNOW who is prominent in the Democratic Party!!
It's an image built and sustained by over-political celebrities, lunatic fringe groups, big mouth individuals and a cult of personality media.
It's not about substance, it's about image.
And my suggestion was that the left needs to do a better job of attracting Christians.......
Faux.....no I don't think a Catholic hears an insult about Pat Robertson and is offended in the least.
But I do think that quite often people refer to "Christians" when indeed they mean a nut like Falwell, and those "mainstream" Christians see it as a slur.
Thanks.....I thought my edit was clever too.
People who use "Christian" as a slur account for only the tiniest minority of this country's population--and I don't think a single one of them is prominent within the Democratic party.
Again, that party's leaders are almost as bad as the Republicans in inappropriately injecting religion into public discourse.
Dude....you don't GET it!!!!!
90% of the voting public wouldn't KNOW who is prominent in the Democratic Party!!
It's an image built and sustained by over-political celebrities, lunatic fringe groups, big mouth individuals and a cult of personality media.
It's not about substance, it's about image.
And my suggestion was that the left needs to do a better job of attracting Christians.......
Do you disagree with that??
No, you don't get it.
"Prominent" as in publicly visible. As in I'm not talking about backroom campaign finance operatives. I'm talking about politicians. Name one Democratic candidate for national office that has spoken out against "Christianity". One--I don't think you can.
***click-clack of Rich firing up Google***
And I vehemently disagree with your suggestion--I look forward to the day when I have the option of voting for politicians that don't pander to Christians.
"Prominent" as in publicly visible. As in I'm not talking about backroom campaign finance operatives. I'm talking about politicians. Name one Democratic candidate for national office that has spoken out against "Christianity". One--I don't think you can.
***click-clack of Rich firing up Google***
I agree 100%.....no well known, visible, recognizeable or currently running Democrat is dumb enough to say anything Anti-Christian....would be political suicide.
I've come to grips with the fact that the citizens of our Country are not interested in taking part in, or paying much attention to our political issues, or for the most part, the candidates themselves(unless of course they do something to make "Access Hollywood").
You apparently disagree and think that the average American voter is well informed and make their voting choice based on in depth study, deep introspective thought and overwhelming knowledge of the issues and candidates.
We'll just have to disagree on that one.
And I would hope that we could have a Government that doesn't pander to ANY special interest group, just ain't gonna happen any time soon!
"Prominent" as in publicly visible. As in I'm not talking about backroom campaign finance operatives. I'm talking about politicians. Name one Democratic candidate for national office that has spoken out against "Christianity". One--I don't think you can.
***click-clack of Rich firing up Google***
I agree 100%.....no well known, visible, recognizeable or currently running Democrat is dumb enough to say anything Anti-Christian....would be political suicide.
I've come to grips with the fact that the citizens of our Country are not interested in taking part in, or paying much attention to our political issues, or for the most part, the candidates themselves(unless of course they do something to make "Access Hollywood").
You apparently disagree and think that the average American voter is well informed and make their voting choice based on in depth study, deep introspective thought and overwhelming knowledge of the issues and candidates.
We'll just have to disagree on that one.
No, I don't think that.
I would never defend the American voter (although I vaguely recall you objecting to people who voted for the current president being referred to as "idiots" and the like upthread).
But let's say you're correct. Let's say that it is impossible to penetrate the public's aggressive ignorance. What then? Nobody should ever attempt to run an issues-driven campaign again?
And if you are correct, you certainly can't put this one on the Democrats. If the "beleagured Christian" or the voter who is ass-hurt over Rosie O'Donnell is committed to the idea that the Democrats are contemptuous of "mainstream Christianity" in the face of all evidence to the contrary, then there's little to be done to dissuade him or her form that idea. Personally, while I think the American voter is ignorant and incurious, I don't think he or she is quite that dumb.
And if you are correct, you certainly can't put this one on the Democrats.
Who says I'm trying to "put anything" on anybody?
If you've read my posts you'll know I am probably going to vote Democrat....so naturally I WANT the Democrats to win(given they decide to run my candidate of choice).
I think in order for them to win and/or gain supporters, they need to improve in certain areas.
Calling people dumb vs. accusing them of being uninformed, uninterested and unmotivated is, in my mind, totally different and a lot more of an insult.
And if you are correct, you certainly can't put this one on the Democrats.
Who says I'm trying to "put anything" on anybody?
If you've read my posts you'll know I am probably going to vote Democrat....so naturally I WANT the Democrats to win(given they decide to run my candidate of choice).
I think in order for them to win and/or gain supporters, they need to improve in certain areas.
Calling people dumb vs. accusing them of being uninformed, uninterested and unmotivated is, in my mind, totally different and a lot more of an insult.
I really don't see how.
I can think of few things dumber than choosing to be "uninformed, uninterested and unmotivated" about the coming election.
And if you are correct, you certainly can't put this one on the Democrats.
Who says I'm trying to "put anything" on anybody?
And, Rich, I'm happy to go back and forth with you, but please pick a position and stick with it.
And my suggestion was that the left needs to do a better job of attracting Christians.......
Do you disagree with that??
^^^^^You, putting "the left's" supposed failure to attract "Christians" on it. But it now emerges that "Christians" are wholly impervious to logic/evidence and that there's nothing to be done to pry them away from the Republican party, anyway.
And if you are correct, you certainly can't put this one on the Democrats.
Who says I'm trying to "put anything" on anybody?
If you've read my posts you'll know I am probably going to vote Democrat....so naturally I WANT the Democrats to win(given they decide to run my candidate of choice).
I think in order for them to win and/or gain supporters, they need to improve in certain areas.
Calling people dumb vs. accusing them of being uninformed, uninterested and unmotivated is, in my mind, totally different and a lot more of an insult.
I really don't see how.
I can think of few things dumber than choosing to be "uninformed, uninterested and unmotivated" about the coming election.
Well, I'm pretty sure, based on your history of posts, the concept that you're smarter than the average person/voter won't be a difficult theory for you to swallow.
And if you are correct, you certainly can't put this one on the Democrats.
Who says I'm trying to "put anything" on anybody?
And, Rich, I'm happy to go back and forth with you, but please pick a position and stick with it.
And my suggestion was that the left needs to do a better job of attracting Christians.......
Do you disagree with that??
^^^^^You, putting "the left's" supposed failure to attract "Christians" on it. But it now emerges that "Christians" are wholly impervious to logic/evidence and that there's nothing to be done to pry them away from the Republican party, anyway.
OK....one more then it's lights out.....
The left, as evidenced here by multiple postings, has indeed been able to attract at least SOME Christians......
I contend that at least SOME percentage of Christians(politically responsible or not) have been alienated by the IMAGE[/b] of the Left/Democrats.
The fact that they will not get these votes, hurts them.
On the whole, I think the average voter(not the average Christian) is no where near as educated or interested in the issues that you(and probably I) think are important.
And I believe more people vote because "I'm against or for abortion/racism/homosexuality/the War/Gay Marriage/etc./etc. without having a clue as to where a party or candidate stand on other issues other than the "image" that has been projected to them.
If you disagree with that, fine.....I think you're wrong.
And if you are correct, you certainly can't put this one on the Democrats.
Who says I'm trying to "put anything" on anybody?
And, Rich, I'm happy to go back and forth with you, but please pick a position and stick with it.
And my suggestion was that the left needs to do a better job of attracting Christians.......
Do you disagree with that??
^^^^^You, putting "the left's" supposed failure to attract "Christians" on it. But it now emerges that "Christians" are wholly impervious to logic/evidence and that there's nothing to be done to pry them away from the Republican party, anyway.
OK....one more then it's lights out.....
The left, as evidenced here by multiple postings, has indeed been able to attract at least SOME Christians......
I contend that at least SOME percentage of Christians(politically responsible or not) have been alienated by the IMAGE[/b] of the Left/Democrats.
The fact that they will not get these votes, hurts them.
On the whole, I think the average voter(not the average Christian) is no where near as educated or interested in the issues that you(and probably I) think are important.
And I believe more people vote because "I'm against or for abortion/racism/homosexuality/the War/Gay Marriage/etc./etc. without having a clue as to where a party or candidate stand on other issues other than the "image" that has been projected to them.
If you disagree with that, fine.....I think you're wrong.
Goodnight.
Rich, please stop batting at your straw men. Nobody has more contempt for the American voter than me. Unlike you, I don't have qualms about applying pejoratives to anybody that voted for the current administration. I have no illusions about the bases in which most Americans pick their candidate--and that's what they do: pick a person and not a set of ideas. I think I've made that clear many times on this board.
All that I take issue with are these bizarre theories of yours about how the Democrats have alienated "mainstream Christians".
I don't hate the American voter. Remember the American voter voted for Gore not Bush in 2000.
The next national vote will be the 2008 party primaries. The primary voters, especially in the traditional early states, are amongst the most informed electorate in the country.
Here is something to chuckle about. Rockadelic is echoing Howard Dean. His argument that the Democrats need to do more to woe the Christian vote - the Southern conservative Christian vote - is what Howard Dean has been talking about for the last 4 years. What Rocky is saying is the same thing that Dean was trying to say when he said "We need to win the vote of the guy in the pickup with the confederate flag decal". (Or words to that effect.)
As head of National Dems Dean put those ideas into action in what was called the 50 State Strategy. The results were Democratic wins in numbers larger than anyone had expected. States and congressional districts that were thought to be permanent Republican strong holds went Democratic.
Not only is Deli right, but Howard Dean is way ahead of him.
All that I take issue with are these bizarre theories of yours about how the Democrats have alienated "mainstream Christians".
Fair enough......I'll try to present evidence to support my stance....
But first you have to understand, and I've tried to hammer this home with you more than once and it doesn't seem to click, that is NOT a Democrat or the Democratic Party that I'm accusing of alienating Christians.
It's the IMAGE of what these people stand for as projected by high profile celebrities and citizens who are stereotyped, mostly by self proclamation, that they are aligned with the Left/Democrats.
You also have to realize that in a two party system perception is very black and white Left = Democrat and Right = Republican. This is a fact that can not be denied or ignored.
So the MOST popular TV celebrity in our society is constantly making political statements which get massive media coverage.
This persons soundbites and quotes are more recognizable to the average American than those of the current candidates.
They are regurgitated on numerous primetime "News" shows and in every National Enquirer-like rag sold in the Supermarkets.
These comments influence the way the average person views these political issues.
So when this person makes outlandish comments they are often used by the Right as an example of how the "Left" thinks.
When these comments are Anti-Christian they are perceived to represent a viewpoint held by the Left.
When this person makes comments like "Christianity is no different than radical Islam" it certainly alienates people.
But not everyone pays attention to "celebrities"....
One of the richest and most vocal supporters of the democratic party is Ted Turner.
When he is quoted as saying..."Christianity is a religion for losers,???
And in 2001, when some CNN employees showed up at a meeting with ashes on their foreheads on Ash Wednesday, Turner called them ???Jesus freaks??? and told them they ???ought to be working for Fox".
This alienates people.
We know and understand how volatile and insulting something like a cartoon can be to a devout Muslim, why can't we comprehend the same concept when it comes to the above comments about devout Christians??
The ONLY way to deny this is to claim that Ted Turner and Rosie O'Donnell don't represent the Democratic Party. And theorhetically that may be true, but realistcally you must realize that the perception is quite different.
All that I take issue with are these bizarre theories of yours about how the Democrats have alienated "mainstream Christians".
Fair enough......I'll try to present evidence to support my stance....
But first you have to understand, and I've tried to hammer this home with you more than once and it doesn't seem to click, that is NOT a Democrat or the Democratic Party that I'm accusing of alienating Christians.
It's the IMAGE of what these people stand for as projected by high profile celebrities and citizens who are stereotyped, mostly by self proclamation, that they are aligned with the Left/Democrats.
You also have to realize that in a two party system perception is very black and white Left = Democrat and Right = Republican. This is a fact that can not be denied or ignored.
So the MOST popular TV celebrity in our society is constantly making political statements which get massive media coverage.
This persons soundbites and quotes are more recognizable to the average American than those of the current candidates.
They are regurgitated on numerous primetime "News" shows and in every National Enquirer-like rag sold in the Supermarkets.
These comments influence the way the average person views these political issues.
So when this person makes outlandish comments they are often used by the Right as an example of how the "Left" thinks.
When these comments are Anti-Christian they are perceived to represent a viewpoint held by the Left.
When this person makes comments like "Christianity is no different than radical Islam" it certainly alienates people.
But not everyone pays attention to "celebrities"....
One of the richest and most vocal supporters of the democratic party is Ted Turner.
When he is quoted as saying..."Christianity is a religion for losers,???
And in 2001, when some CNN employees showed up at a meeting with ashes on their foreheads on Ash Wednesday, Turner called them ???Jesus freaks??? and told them they ???ought to be working for Fox".
This alienates people.
We know and understand how volatile and insulting something like a cartoon can be to a devout Muslim, why can't we comprehend the same concept when it comes to the above comments about devout Christians??
The ONLY way to deny this is to claim that Ted Turner and Rosie O'Donnell don't represent the Democratic Party. And theorhetically that may be true, but realistcally you must realize that the perception is quite different.
LOL
The only person I know who thinks that Rosie O'Donnell is a proxy for the Democratic party is you, Rich. I don't know anyone else that watches her show (does she have a show?) or keeps track of her public statements. If it weren't for your constant updates on her activities via SoulStrut I wouldn't even know whether she was alive or dead. I don't think the rest of the world (or America) is nearly as worried about her or her political predilections as you are.
Comments
Fine....educate my dumbass......is there a Christian Religious leader or Church [/b] that have officially come out in favor of Stem Cell research???
And I NEVER said the Left belittled mainstream Christianity, I said that by belittling the Religious Right they have alienated mainstream Christians who view "A Christian is my brother"........BIG difference.
I think the Major[/b] point that most of you are missing is simply this.....
By virtue of you participating in, caring about or being involved in any political issues whatsoever you are in a 10% at best minority in this country.
While you rationalize "If everyone was as caring/smart/humanitarian as I am they would vote a certain way", the majority of voters vote on single issues or unimportant quirks.
This doesn't make these folks stupid, or their vote less important. It just reflects the political climate that we as a society have created.
Hey bastard, the government doesnt exist to force people to do what you want them to do. To support someones right to make such a decision doesnt mean you support the decision itself, just that you have a sincere belief in liberty. Something that no lefty has. Youre hopelessly naive if you think that making it illegal to fire people because theyre gay is going to stop someone so inclined anyway. They will find some pretext to do it. All such laws succede in doing obscuring what it is they are ostensibly installed to wipe out. Still, superficial results are more than good enough for you dispicable vermin.
Anyone engaging this guy should know two things.
1) One he is opposed to laws giving equal rights to all Americans. He has made it plain here and elsewhere that he believes that the anti-segregation laws that opened up stores, lunch counters and schools to African Americans are wrong and take away his liberties.
Hey bastard, the government doesnt exist to force people to do what you want them to do.[/b]
Youre hopelessly naive if you think that making it illegal to fire people because theyre...[/b]
He strongly and obscenely believes that our civil rights laws obscure racism, but do not diminish it: All such laws succede in doing obscuring what it is they are ostensibly installed to wipe out.[/b]
If you support our civil rights laws he believes you are dispicable vermin[/b].
2) He never posts about music.
This doesn't mean that the Dems have it at this point, but it is their's to lose. For the first time in a long time they could possibly gain alot of staunch republican among their voting base for this next election IF they handle everythig correctly.
Wedge issues that are in play this year.
Environment/Energy Independence- The GOPs credibility on this issue is nil
Managing Gov't/Spending- After Katrina and now the war GOP trails the Dems decisively in these areas.
Security- Abu Ghraib, Walter Reed,etc, etc What was once a giant plus for GOP has now come to a dead heat and in some cases seems to an albatross around a la McCain's massively foundering campaign.
Wedge issues which will have little impact in 2008:
Gay Marriage
Abortion
School Choice
Supreme Court
Think I am wrong talk to GOP strategists who are freaking out right now. They know that Bush is not going to throw them any bones and they saw how that played last year. Get ready for 2006 redux.
And they GOP has who the have. There is no RFK waiting in the wings.
Probably because they view it as murder, which is forbidden by law.
You proceed to prop up one straw man after another.
All the "mainstream Christians" I know (and I'm from the South) find those people just as terrifying as I do. Mainstream Christians, in my experience, also display some ability to think for themselves, which you don't seem to credit them with.
Does it ever occur to you that, being in Texas, you are the one that's a touch outside of the mainstream?
The Strawman be you....'all the mainstream Christians you know" doesn't add up to ANY Church doctrine or Religious leader....you know, like that Pope guy.
Wedge issues that are in play this year.
Environment/Energy Independence- The GOPs credibility on this issue is nil
Managing Gov't/Spending- After Katrina and now the war GOP trails the Dems decisively in these areas.
Security- Abu Ghraib, Walter Reed,etc, etc What was once a giant plus for GOP has now come to a dead heat and in some cases seems to an albatross around a la McCain's massively foundering campaign.
Wedge issues which will have little impact in 2008:
Gay Marriage
Abortion
School Choice
Supreme Court
Think I am wrong talk to GOP strategists who are freaking out right now. They know that Bush is not going to throw them any bones and they saw how that played last year. Get ready for 2006 redux.
And they GOP has who the have. There is no RFK waiting in the wings.
Immigration will be the #1 tool of the right......unfortunately for them, Bush has taken an unpopular stance and the Reps will wait until late in the game to play this card as to not make Bush look exceedingly bad......although at this point, I'm sure plenty of them don't care.
Immigration will be the #1 tool of the right......unfortunately for them, Bush has taken an unpopular stance and the Reps will wait until late in the game to play this card as to not make Bush look exceedingly bad......although at this point, I'm sure plenty of them don't care.
Great populist issue. They don't look like "us". They are breaking the law. They are stealing our jobs. They are using our services.
Rudy Gulianni: Supports Senate guest worker plan & path to citizenship. (Nov 2006)
Sounds like a liberal to me.
Mitt Romney: Tuition breaks encourage illegal immigration. (Nov 2005)
Give a few minutes he'll come up with the oppisite position.
Sam Brownback: Voted YES on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006)
Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006)
Voted YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship. (May 2006)
Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998)
Sounds like a liberal to me.
John McCain: Make possible for immigrants to do a job Americans won't do. (Oct 2004)
Give everyone in the world an opportunity to come to America. (Oct 2004)
No more ballot initiatives against immigration. (Mar 1999)
More help for legal immigrants when immigrating & once here. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006)
Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006)
Voted YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship. (May 2006)
Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998)
Sounds like a liberal to me.
Fred Thompson: Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998)
Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998)
Liberal!
Tom Tancredo: Parts of Miami are like a Third World country. (Dec 2006)
Guest-worker program equals amnesty. (Dec 2006)
Opposes chain migration from anchor babies citizenship. (Dec 2006)
Voted YES on preventing tipping off Mexicans about Minuteman Project. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment. (May 2004)
Voted NO on extending Immigrant Residency rules. (May 2001)
Rated 100% by FAIR, indicating a voting record restricting immigration. (Dec 2003
Looks like Tancredo is the republican nominee. Can you say President Clinton?
http://www.ontheissues.org/Immigration.htm#Mitt_Romney
Clever edit.
I'm not talking about stem-cell research which--regardless of whether any major Christian leader has come out in support of it--is really only something that the ectreme religious right gets exercised over. I'm talking about this:
But if you want to talk about Catholics, I happen to live in New York--a bastion of American Catholicism--and to come from a Catholic family. Do you really mean to say that you think most Catholics view somebody "belittling" Pat Robertson as a slight against them? A large portion of the religious right doesn't even view Catholics as legitimate Christians.
But I do think that quite often people refer to "Christians" when indeed they mean a nut like Falwell, and those "mainstream" Christians see it as a slur.
Thanks.....I thought my edit was clever too.
People who use "Christian" as a slur account for only the tiniest minority of this country's population--and I don't think a single one of them is prominent within the Democratic party.
Again, that party's leaders are almost as bad as the Republicans in inappropriately injecting religion into public discourse.
Dude....you don't GET it!!!!!
90% of the voting public wouldn't KNOW who is prominent in the Democratic Party!!
It's an image built and sustained by over-political celebrities, lunatic fringe groups, big mouth individuals and a cult of personality media.
It's not about substance, it's about image.
And my suggestion was that the left needs to do a better job of attracting Christians.......
Do you disagree with that??
No, you don't get it.
"Prominent" as in publicly visible. As in I'm not talking about backroom campaign finance operatives. I'm talking about politicians. Name one Democratic candidate for national office that has spoken out against "Christianity". One--I don't think you can.
***click-clack of Rich firing up Google***
And I vehemently disagree with your suggestion--I look forward to the day when I have the option of voting for politicians that don't pander to Christians.
I agree 100%.....no well known, visible, recognizeable or currently running Democrat is dumb enough to say anything Anti-Christian....would be political suicide.
I've come to grips with the fact that the citizens of our Country are not interested in taking part in, or paying much attention to our political issues, or for the most part, the candidates themselves(unless of course they do something to make "Access Hollywood").
You apparently disagree and think that the average American voter is well informed and make their voting choice based on in depth study, deep introspective thought and overwhelming knowledge of the issues and candidates.
We'll just have to disagree on that one.
And I would hope that we could have a Government that doesn't pander to ANY special interest group, just ain't gonna happen any time soon!
No, I don't think that.
I would never defend the American voter (although I vaguely recall you objecting to people who voted for the current president being referred to as "idiots" and the like upthread).
But let's say you're correct. Let's say that it is impossible to penetrate the public's aggressive ignorance. What then? Nobody should ever attempt to run an issues-driven campaign again?
And if you are correct, you certainly can't put this one on the Democrats. If the "beleagured Christian" or the voter who is ass-hurt over Rosie O'Donnell is committed to the idea that the Democrats are contemptuous of "mainstream Christianity" in the face of all evidence to the contrary, then there's little to be done to dissuade him or her form that idea. Personally, while I think the American voter is ignorant and incurious, I don't think he or she is quite that dumb.
Who says I'm trying to "put anything" on anybody?
If you've read my posts you'll know I am probably going to vote Democrat....so naturally I WANT the Democrats to win(given they decide to run my candidate of choice).
I think in order for them to win and/or gain supporters, they need to improve in certain areas.
Calling people dumb vs. accusing them of being uninformed, uninterested and unmotivated is, in my mind, totally different and a lot more of an insult.
They(and you) just shouldn't be surprised when the voters don't necessarily vote based on said platforms and issues.
Republican Debate = 1.7 Million Viewers
I really don't see how.
I can think of few things dumber than choosing to be "uninformed, uninterested and unmotivated" about the coming election.
And, Rich, I'm happy to go back and forth with you, but please pick a position and stick with it.
^^^^^You, putting "the left's" supposed failure to attract "Christians" on it. But it now emerges that "Christians" are wholly impervious to logic/evidence and that there's nothing to be done to pry them away from the Republican party, anyway.
Well, I'm pretty sure, based on your history of posts, the concept that you're smarter than the average person/voter won't be a difficult theory for you to swallow.
I'm crashing now....thanks for the discourse.
OK....one more then it's lights out.....
The left, as evidenced here by multiple postings, has indeed been able to attract at least SOME Christians......
I contend that at least SOME percentage of Christians(politically responsible or not) have been alienated by the IMAGE[/b] of the Left/Democrats.
The fact that they will not get these votes, hurts them.
On the whole, I think the average voter(not the average Christian) is no where near as educated or interested in the issues that you(and probably I) think are important.
And I believe more people vote because "I'm against or for abortion/racism/homosexuality/the War/Gay Marriage/etc./etc. without having a clue as to where a party or candidate stand on other issues other than the "image" that has been projected to them.
If you disagree with that, fine.....I think you're wrong.
Goodnight.
Rich, please stop batting at your straw men. Nobody has more contempt for the American voter than me. Unlike you, I don't have qualms about applying pejoratives to anybody that voted for the current administration. I have no illusions about the bases in which most Americans pick their candidate--and that's what they do: pick a person and not a set of ideas. I think I've made that clear many times on this board.
All that I take issue with are these bizarre theories of yours about how the Democrats have alienated "mainstream Christians".
The next national vote will be the 2008 party primaries. The primary voters, especially in the traditional early states, are amongst the most informed electorate in the country.
As head of National Dems Dean put those ideas into action in what was called the 50 State Strategy. The results were Democratic wins in numbers larger than anyone had expected. States and congressional districts that were thought to be permanent Republican strong holds went Democratic.
Not only is Deli right, but Howard Dean is way ahead of him.
Fair enough......I'll try to present evidence to support my stance....
But first you have to understand, and I've tried to hammer this home with you more than once and it doesn't seem to click, that is NOT a Democrat or the Democratic Party that I'm accusing of alienating Christians.
It's the IMAGE of what these people stand for as projected by high profile celebrities and citizens who are stereotyped, mostly by self proclamation, that they are aligned with the Left/Democrats.
You also have to realize that in a two party system perception is very black and white Left = Democrat and Right = Republican. This is a fact that can not be denied or ignored.
So the MOST popular TV celebrity in our society is constantly making political statements which get massive media coverage.
This persons soundbites and quotes are more recognizable to the average American than those of the current candidates.
They are regurgitated on numerous primetime "News" shows and in every National Enquirer-like rag sold in the Supermarkets.
These comments influence the way the average person views these political issues.
So when this person makes outlandish comments they are often used by the Right as an example of how the "Left" thinks.
When these comments are Anti-Christian they are perceived to represent a viewpoint held by the Left.
When this person makes comments like "Christianity is no different than radical Islam" it certainly alienates people.
But not everyone pays attention to "celebrities"....
One of the richest and most vocal supporters of the democratic party is Ted Turner.
When he is quoted as saying..."Christianity is a religion for losers,???
And in 2001, when some CNN employees showed up at a meeting with ashes on their foreheads on Ash Wednesday, Turner called them ???Jesus freaks??? and told them they ???ought to be working for Fox".
This alienates people.
We know and understand how volatile and insulting something like a cartoon can be to a devout Muslim, why can't we comprehend the same concept when it comes to the above comments about devout Christians??
The ONLY way to deny this is to claim that Ted Turner and Rosie O'Donnell don't represent the Democratic Party. And theorhetically that may be true, but realistcally you must realize that the perception is quite different.
LOL
The only person I know who thinks that Rosie O'Donnell is a proxy for the Democratic party is you, Rich. I don't know anyone else that watches her show (does she have a show?) or keeps track of her public statements. If it weren't for your constant updates on her activities via SoulStrut I wouldn't even know whether she was alive or dead. I don't think the rest of the world (or America) is nearly as worried about her or her political predilections as you are.