Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 90
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    You obviously come from the David Barton school of denial of the founding principle of the Separation of Church and State. Otherwise, this post of yours has no meaning. Please note that I specified a theocratic agenda which is a far cry from theology, and, specifically, has nothing to do with the christianity of christ.
    Separation of Church and State is only just one more little tick on the long list of issues that has two sides of thoughts, passions of convictions, and political leanings. But if we take your argument at face value to the extreme and you were for it being illegal to even mention any form or reference in any way to the word God in any Gov public building, against any student attending a public school to even mentioning what religion he belongs to while talking in the halls between classes in a private conversation with his two closest friends, etc.... And I was for prayers of every religion to be held at the beginning of every court session and before every gathering of more than 3 people at any gov owned property, and felt that religion classes must be mandatory in every public school with the addition of a 10 minute quiet time every day with a mandatory direction that every student outwardly appear to be praying that whole time.......


    ......it is still a great country that we all have the freedoms to vote however we see fit. And don't scare others to another country because they have different views than someone else.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Separation of Church and State is only just one more little tick on the long list of issues that has two sides of thoughts, passions of convictions, and political leanings.
    That "only just one more tick", as you so quaintly put it, is one of the cornerstones which separates the US from the rest of the world. No biggie, right?

    But if we take your argument at face value to the extreme and you were for it being illegal to even mention the word God in any Gov public building, against any student attending a public school to even mentioning what religion he belongs to while talking in the halls between classes in a private conversation with his two closest friends, etc.... And I was for prayers of every religion to be held at the beginning of every court session and before every gathering of more than 3 people at any gov owned property, and felt that religion classes must be mandatory in every public school with the addition of a 10 minute quiet time every day with a mandatory direction that every student outwardly appear to be praying that whole time.......
    My, but you're easily distracted into an argument that doesn't exist.

    ......it is still a great country that we all have the freedoms to vote however we see fit.
    What you fail to acknowledge or distinguish is that you are expressing the precious rights of the individual citizen. Does the phrase "theocratic agenda" really elude you so severely? If a funded, organized effort were to state "I hope we answer the alarm clock and take this nation back for Krishna" , would you be equally as flippant? Such statements imply that this nation was taken away from 'Krishna'. Who exactly was the big-bad-wolf who stole the nation away?
  3. #23  
    Life...you are focusing on an issue seperation of Church and State, an arguement I did not take up either way.

    I was focusing on a right, on the comment that appeared that if they did not agree with your view they should not be in this country.
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Life...you are focusing on an issue seperation of Church and State, an arguement I did not take up either way.
    By addressing this cornerstone as you did, you did take a position. One contrary to reality, but a position, nonetheless.
    I was focusing on a right, on the comment that appeared that if they did not agree with your view they should not be in this country.
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    Those with theocratic agendas should be voting in another nation.
    Re-read what I stated, then review again my previous post. If you still cannot understand the difference between an individual's right and a theocratic agenda, you're either willfully ignorant or David Barton, himself! If you're hiding behind the fact that agendas are comprised of individuals, why not just come out and say it?
  5.    #25  
    I've just finished watching all 4 hours of tonight's NH debate.

    I watched at double speed while playing at least 25+ games of intense XBox live GRAW, but I watched it nonetheless (all true btw).

    My gut tells me that Obama did not hurt himself. Hillary began a little rough and uncomfortable, but got better as things went on.

    What was particularly unhelpful to her was that Edwards in effect shived her in the back -- criticizing her and defending Obama after she had tried to contrast herself to Obama.

    Hillary is in the awkward position of feeling as though she must rebalance the rationalizion of her candidacy -- from arguing that her experience was what made "her ready from day one" -- to now feeling pressure to voice a desire for and the capacity to achieve, change. This while everyone else on stage did everything they could to paint her as from the past, as being a captive of the status quo. (unfair, but that's how it was presented).

    At this stage, with the primary only 3 days away, a debate tie for Obama is likely a win (and he likely did better than that.) He has excitement and momentum going for him -- and she was entirely unsuccessfull in derailing that.

    The reservoir of love that NH still holds for Bill and her are likely not enough. Though now tied in the polls, at this moment I believe he will defeat her in NH, maybe by more than a few points.

    I remain convinced that Obama would be an exceptionally vulnerable candidate in November. I fear he would be more like how Kerry and Edwards were in 2004: trying so hard to seem nice, that they never replied to the crap aimed at them.

    As for the GOP side, Everyone on stage seemed to take pleasure in coyly mocking Mr. Silly Puddy at every oppurtunity. Mr. Puddy ended the night melted into a puddle at the foot of the stage. (Last seen he was being sopped up by a maintenance crew made up of illegals.)

    McCain & Huckabee handled themselves credibly. Huckabee likely helped himself more for S. Carolina.

    BARYE's NH Prediction --

    GOP: McCain by at least 7% over Silly Puddy (though I wouldn't be surprised by 10+%)

    Dems: Obama over Hillary (by enough that I don't want to predict it)

    S. Carolina Prediction --

    GOP: Huckabee beats McCain by a 5%

    Dems: Obama beats Hillary by 6%
    Last edited by BARYE; 01/06/2008 at 09:51 AM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    I remain convinced that Obama would be an exceptionally vulnerable candidate in November. I fear he would be more like how Kerry and Edwards were in 2004: trying so hard to seem nice, that they never replied to the crap aimed at them.
    I think the opposite, as long as the domestic issues dominate.

    Obama is way better communicator than Kerry (isn't everyone?).

    I know many blue collar workers who will not vote for Hillary because to totally irrational dislike for her. They will vote for Obama. The Dems can get back some of the Regan Democrats if they pick Obama.

    The worst case scenario for Dems is as follows:

    The nominees are: Obama vs. McCain.

    Before the election, there is a major national/international crisis (like an attack on US soil). The focus shifts away from domestic issues back to national security (it will in a heartbeat). McCain wins.
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  7. #27  
    I think Obama and Edwards did very well. Edwards surprised me; I'd been puzzled to see that he came in second in Iowa based on my impression of him 4 years ago, but I can see how his "change" argument can be compelling for many people.

    I loved Obama's line, "You're likable enough, Hillary."

    None of the Dems seemed really convincing when they talked about national security. They all seemed sleepy or bored for the first half hour of the debate. I suspect it's because they realize that talking about terrorism turns off their supporters.

    I was disappointed to realize that the only Dem with substantive experience left is Richardson. I wish Biden were still in the race. I would trust him with managing our foreign policy and national security.

    The fact that JFK and Lincoln did okay gives me some hope that an inexperienced, but inspiring leader like Obama might rise to the challenge. His victory speech in Iowa was awesome, btw. He could be good for the country.


    On the Republican side, lack of experience isn't as big an issue, though many of them don't have foreign policy expertise. I think McCain was the winner and Romney the loser. It seemed no one liked Romney. The most memorable moment for me was when Giuliani pointed out that Reagan had a policy of amnesty for illegal immigrants, and so would have been the target of one of Romney's negative ads.

    Thompson, for the first time IMO, came across as knowledgeable and as having very good judgement, but it may not matter since he's not really a contender. And while I can see why many young people like what Ron Paul has to say about the Constitution, his ideas are dangerous and ignorant. I was glad that Romney and others were familiar with Qutb and the real objectives of Islamic terrorists.


    I thought the format of the debate was a refreshing change. It was good to see them all addressing each other openly without too much structure.

    I don't follow state polls closely enough to make a prediction, but in the end, I'd like to see Obama versus McCain.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad View Post
    The worst case scenario for Dems is as follows:

    The nominees are: Obama vs. McCain.

    Before the election, there is a major national/international crisis (like an attack on US soil). The focus shifts away from domestic issues back to national security (it will in a heartbeat). McCain wins.
    McCain will clearly do well, and likely win, in NH, however not finish as well in SC. However, after Bush's sucker-punch on him in SC in 2000, McCain has been a badly compromised person, politically. While Repugs are certainly more refined at smiling as they kill in their use of fear-mongering, the nation is exhausted from their chronic drumbeat. Even under your worst-case scenario, I'll take that bet ... all the way to Penn Ave.
  9. #29  
    All of the democrat-ic candidates are similar enough in their views to suit me. I like any of them but what I am looking for is who is the most electable. I suspect many conservatives would like to see the very liberal but inexperienced Obama win the primary simply because they perceive him as easier to pick off than Hillary come this November.
  10. #30  
    I fear Hillary as a President, not as a candidate. Obama is MUCH more electable than Hillary.

    And I think they're equally inexperienced, despite her claim of 35 years of experience getting things done and Obama's positioning her as the establishment candidate.
  11. gojeda's Avatar
    Posts
    93 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #31  
    Anyone else notice how there are very few black people are Obama rallies?

    I know this is by design, but I wonder who exactly is behind it? The Obama campaign or the networks?
  12. gojeda's Avatar
    Posts
    93 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad View Post
    I think the opposite, as long as the domestic issues dominate.

    Obama is way better communicator than Kerry (isn't everyone?).

    I know many blue collar workers who will not vote for Hillary because to totally irrational dislike for her. They will vote for Obama. The Dems can get back some of the Regan Democrats if they pick Obama.

    The worst case scenario for Dems is as follows:

    The nominees are: Obama vs. McCain.

    Before the election, there is a major national/international crisis (like an attack on US soil). The focus shifts away from domestic issues back to national security (it will in a heartbeat). McCain wins.
    The Republican strategy should be to hammer away at Obama's sophomoric view of the world and lack of congressional experience while the Democraps will focus on McCains support for Bush (the war) and his health questions - while drawing the focus on domestic issues.

    On paper, it is an interesting matchup.
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by gojeda View Post
    Anyone else notice how there are very few black people are Obama rallies?

    I know this is by design, but I wonder who exactly is behind it? The Obama campaign or the networks?
    Iowa at 96% White doesn't ring a bell, Chuckles? And we all know how multi-racial New Hampshire is.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by gojeda View Post
    Anyone else notice how there are very few black people are Obama rallies?

    I know this is by design, but I wonder who exactly is behind it? The Obama campaign or the networks?


    Actually, if you look at the places he has been campaigning, there are very few black people to be seen. Honestly, what is the % of black people in Iowa and New Hampshire? And what % of those black people vote and if they do vote, what % live close enough to see him. White people make up like 95% + of Iowa...

    I think you are looking for something that is not there...

    Look at these SC pics:

    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...outh-carolina/

    http://www.sptimes.com/2007/12/23/Wo..._deep_in.shtml
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  15. gojeda's Avatar
    Posts
    93 Posts
    Global Posts
    104 Global Posts
    #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    Iowa at 96% White doesn't ring a bell, Chuckles? And we all know how multi-racial New Hampshire is.
    So you are saying that Obama has only held rallies in these two places?



    Damn - this must have been an Obama imposter then.....in lilly-white Washington DC!
  16.    #36  
    S.Carolina's Democratic Party is possibly more than half black.

    Though there is genuine love for both Bill and Hill in the African American community, I have have always feared that Obama would trump that.

    That loyalty is more specifically directed at Bill in any case -- few for instance know that Hillary's White House chief of staff from the beginning was Maggie Williams, a Black woman -- a woman who had previously worked for the Children's Defense Fund (which was lead by Marian Wright Edelman, another longtime friend of Hillary's, and another distingished Black woman.)

    A lot of decisions by voters are right now being made on the basis of visceral feeling -- as opposed to creatures like mine's cynical dispassionate rationality.

    Its so hard to be negative in the primary -- especially by a Hillary against an Obama (for a multitude of reasons).

    Voters see Obama now unsullied, unbruised by mud or Swiftboating.

    Come November the GOP scum squad will make him seem unfit for jury duty.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by gojeda View Post
    So you are saying that Obama has only held rallies in these two places?



    Damn - this must have been an Obama imposter then.....in lilly-white Washington DC!
    What campus, junior?

    Sucks to be on the wrong side of every issue, doesn't it, sock-puppet?
  18. #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    Its so hard to be negative in the primary -- especially by a Hillary against an Obama (for a multitude of reasons).

    Voters see Obama now unsullied, unbruised by mud or Swiftboating.

    Come November the GOP scum squad will make him seem unfit for jury duty.
    Actually, obama handles mud very nicely... I forget where I read it, but he slammed hillary when she spoke on his experience by quoting her husband during his run as president (his first run). It was a classic.

    Plus, obama put most if not all of his dirt out there already... hey, I've done coke... I drink... I smoke... etc, etc....

    Heck, bill clinton and bush II had tons of personal dirt... my goodness did they not have tons of dirt.

    I doubt if swiftboat will be in this election... they hated kerry. Period. They presented the facts as they saw them and were relentless. Can't say that I see the same for obama... unless I missed something.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    I fear Hillary as a President, not as a candidate. Obama is MUCH more electable than Hillary.

    And I think they're equally inexperienced, despite her claim of 35 years of experience getting things done and Obama's positioning her as the establishment candidate.
    I agree... although, I think hillary could get started a lot faster and understands the "game."

    Big question would be who would obama get to run as vice president... or hillary as vice president?

    Wow....
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  20.    #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    Actually, obama handles mud very nicely... I forget where I read it, but he slammed hillary when she spoke on his experience by quoting her husband during his run as president (his first run). It was a classic.

    Plus, obama put most if not all of his dirt out there already... hey, I've done coke... I drink... I smoke... etc, etc....

    Heck, bill clinton and bush II had tons of personal dirt... my goodness did they not have tons of dirt.

    I doubt if swiftboat will be in this election... they hated kerry. Period. They presented the facts as they saw them and were relentless. Can't say that I see the same for obama... unless I missed something.
    Unfortunately I've been in this movie before.

    As someone who has a little experience in this stuff, I know how easy it is to become EUPHORIC about our candidate during the nomination process.

    McGovern was a bomber pilot who knew war, and understood peace.

    Carter seemed like the second coming of somebody --

    Dukakis was going to bring us competence and retreive us from the dumb hands of the ideologues.

    Kerry was a war hero who would bring us back from the blood, death, and lies of Iraq.

    An effective negative ad is more powerful than a dozen truths.

    How many here remember how popular "Hillary Care" was before the GOP (and health insurance) scumsters went after it ???
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions