Silence. Did everyone go to the religious board?nm

• Silence. Did everyone go to the religious board?nm - Wow.
  • I'm sitting here laughing - see message - Kaydie
    • Hi Kaydie, See Message - Sherry
      • I believe you are right - Kaydie
  • No.............sm - m
    • Got it. Thanks. nm - Wow.

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Please keep all religious/faith topics and discussions on the Faith board.  This would involve your beliefs, whether Christian or atheist, etc. 

The Politics board is strictly for political topics and discussions. 

Moderator

I'm referring to posts on the conservative political board under the post about Michelle Malkin. 

First reaction is if these issues, which have been posted on O's website ever since he launched his campaign, are of such sudden concern to the cons and femocons, why did they not get addressed during the RNC?  Do you not see the high-jack strategy as the cons try to talk out of both sides of their mouths and reinvent themselves as the new age liberals?  How is this different than the now exposed folly of the compassionate conservative Bush/Cheney ploy?   

Small business.  Either you can't read, you think that we can't or your spin cycle is stuck in high gear.  Go here:  http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/#small-business.  Plans to give tax relief for small businesses and startups, eliminate capital gains taxes on them and provide a $500 new making work pay tax credit (one of many) for workers.  For all those IC MTs out there, this is aimed at reducing the burden of double taxation in the current structure where small businesses pay both employer AND employee side of payroll tax.  Obama will INVEST $250 million per year in support of entrepreneurship, by creating national network of public-private business incubators to facilitate start-up creation.  Your $250,000/yr figure applied to tax cuts on INDIVIDUALS who earn in excess of that amount.  Therefore, your offshore, job loss, and massive flight to lower income argument does not hold water on this point.  Please cite the right-wing rag you have taken this $6 billion dollar additional tax on small business claim.  I'm not finding that in O's plan.  The tax breaks to the "lower brackets" (losing their homes, can't decide whether to get medicine or food this month, and if they are lucky, can gas their tank once a month) is addressed below.    

On the plight of the struggling rich.  Define rich, please.  From the bottom, INDIVIDUAL incomes in excess of $250,000/yr might look about right.  From the top, $5 million a year maybe (one of McC's not-so-funny jokes, some would wonder).  The 90% of the federal tax bill claim must be a typo.    Go here for 2008 info: http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2008/04/the_rich_and_their_taxes.html. Our top 1% of filers pay 40% or tax burden.  An accurate argument would include these facts as well.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth.  In the United States at the end of 2001, 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth, and the top 1% controlled 38%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth.  Let's say that one more time.  Top 1% gets 38%, bottom 40% get less than 1%.  Since they are not earning a living wage, probably that is why they cannot afford to pay tax.  Got the picture?

There is only one reason our long suffering corporations are taking their business overseas.  Greed.  They do not want to pay their share and they get tax incentives currently for outsourcing.  Do not take us down the path of needing to address sweat shop working conditions, 7-day work weeks, $2/day wages in developing countries where US labor laws do not apply.  Greed is not a universal American value.    

There you go again.  Please try to keep this discussion in the context of McCain plans and how they are different than Bush plans.  You are spinning way out in right field without a paddle on that ridiculous statement about keeping people in lower brackets.  What in the world make you think this kind of ignorance is going to help JM/SP win the election. 

Preying on discontent, fear and division was a blatent and nauseating subtext for the RNC this entire week.  I do agree with inspecting history, and the history that is under the microscope now is Bush/Cheney and JM voting history.  Do you really want to bring up govt "borrowing."  Again, Bush is the record setter in this regard and while we are talkin' W, don't forget the Bush slash and burn policies toward our seniors.  Here's a link for you to a rather exhaustive analysis on 12 reason privatizing social security is a bad idea.  http://www.socsec.org/publications.asp?pubid=503.  You can get back to me on that one with your rebuttal.  My question would be putting WHICH people before WHICH party? 

Survey Americans on which party they associate election fraud with in the past, say, 30 years or so and tell me what you come up with.  So you forgot to mention what JM's plan is on this one.   Again, just saying no to personal attacks and steering you back on course.  JM's plan for lobbying and earmarks is what exactly.  I see O has one. 

JM hate war?  LMAO.  So what was all that military service orgie this week all about?   The entire McCain family for generations have shown to us just how much they hate war.  Where is his war prevention strategy?  Did I miss the part where he sang Give Peace a Chance?  Sam, really, do you care nothing about your own credibility or that of your candidates?  Am laughing too hard to comment further on this. 

Here's a link for you to serve as a primer on the Patriot Act controversy.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act#Controversy.  Will not address the attempts you are making to minimize the unconstitutional aspect of this legislation.  I would like an explanation as to how RNC protestors engaging in destruction of private property, vandalism, resisting arrest, disturbing the peace and such have suddenly been charged with terrorism?  The we have not been attacked yet defense does not make me feel warm and fuzzy about standing legislation that violates the constitution 9 ways to Sunday.  Far mongering does not a justification make.  O's plan demonstrates ways to tackle terrorism that do not involve trashing the constitution. 

There are many issues swirling around the separation of church and state.  Christian theocracy will be kept in the marginal fringes where they belong.  Religious principles will not be incorporated into laws that seek to remove a woman's right to control her own body.  Freedom from religion is also at stake here as are hate crime definitions that provide protection for Moslems in the US.  That is the freedom the cons overlook every time. 

some respect?

You publicly post on the other board that you *try not to visit the bog of eternal stench.*

Well, doesn't look like you are trying all that hard. Or is that another example of Conservative honesty, like your buddy on the other board lies 3 times before suddenly deciding to be *up front* (in her own words) about the whole bogus line of crap she was spouting.

You and your 2 friends don't respect anyone unless they're a member of your little club, think exactly as you think, belong to the same political party as you belong, and believe in the very same little narrow SUBsection of one particular religion.

That's what I interpret from YOUR WRITTEN WORDS.  Your posts don't show respect.  They only show twisted *facts*, ignorance, anger and hatred.

You can't be *respectful* on your own board but suddenly, when you come here - HERE - the place YOU call *the bog of eternal stench* you suddenly discover some respectability during your mouse click from there to here?

Please.  Some of us aren't as stupid as you think we are.

You're becoming quite a bore.  You and your friends stated you don't want us on your board, but you're not happy unless you're picking a fight.  You and your *gang* told us to leave and not to post on *your* board.  Maybe that should work both ways.

Out of ALL the problems with radical Conservatives, maybe the most annoying thing is that you don't believe in equality at all.  You believe in SUPERIORITY.  Somewhere along the line, someone made you think you were special and above everyone else.  Sheesh!  You're not happy unless you're dictating to everyone else in the country what they're allowed to do in their own personal lives regarding life, death, science, etc. You even think YOUR GOD IS BETTER than everyone else's.

You want to make the rules, censor people and tell them which boards they can and cannot post on, but YOU want to invade them all and spew your ignorance and hatred. 

In my heart, I believe there are sincere, honest, intelligent Conservatives out there who are capable of a sensible debate.  I've seen them.  (I hope you don't chase them away, too.)  But and your crew don't fall in that category, and this will be the last of your inane posts I will subject myself to.

Talk about stench. Just read your very own posts.

Can we get the political board back to the true purpose of this board – to share opinions of why we like our candidate.  Not bash and cut down others because they don’t agree with you.

I stayed away from this board for the past couple days because anyone who had anything positive to say about Sarah Palin got slammed, bashed, kicked down, etc.  After awhile I found it all too draining, and was not seeing any reason to come.  Yes, I did see some of it towards people who favored Barack Obama, but if you read the posts again it is mostly towards anyone who favored Sarah Palin/John McCain.

I thought the political board was for posting information regarding politics and candidates.  What I have seen for the past few days is that it has been an attack board.  Especially if you have anything positive you want to share about Sarah Palin.  You say something good about her and you get attacked, you answer back, and you get attacked more, and then when you get mad and pretty much say stop attacking me, they come back with this “Geez, I’m allowed to have an opinion”.

Another thing I am tired of seeing is the slanderous, hate filled, really off the wall comments about Sarah Palin.  The latest was something about her daughter actually had her baby.  Talk about just bizarre comments.  I thought what’s next, she’s an alien from another planet?  The more I kept reading the more the comments were getting just really weird and bizarre.  Of course nobody ever having any proof of any of these allegations.  I then came to realize that the posters were just trying to get a fight going.

I also saw posts that had nothing to do with politics but attacking a poster named Sam.  Again, probably trying to get another fight going for no good reason and on things that have nothing to do whatsoever with politics.  I’ve read “Sam is like an annoying nat that you sway away”, “Sam, please let me know where you work” or “she must have her quota” or “sam is to the politics board as oracle is to the”  This childish rhetoric is getting old.  I’m not defending sam she is a big girl and I can see by her posts she can take care of herself, but my point is that this has nothing to do with politics.  If you want a fight maybe you could request that the administrator create a separate “fight and degrade” section.

I’ve read the administrators post a couple different times called Beware of Flaming.  She/he said as long as we realize that not everyone is going to agree we shouldn’t wear our feelings on our sleeves and a little more oversight on here would be good.  Let people express his or her opinion and move on.  If you don’t like someone just ignore that person. “It’s not rocket science, you know” (I liked that statement)

I consider posting on this board a privilege and not a right.  If you don’t agree with something and you post that you don’t agree and state the facts why (and are civilized about it) that’s one thing, but when you bash and degrade others without showing proof and just want to start fights and belittle others it just seems a bit juvenile to me.

I come to the politics board to hear ideas and stuff (facts) about the candidates.  That is how I’m learning about each one, but I don’t want to read people attack other posters for no good reason.  I'd like to hear about Obama/Biden & McCain/Palin, but I want to hear facts.

If you like to fight so much why don’t you pick on people that you can fight to face to face. 

...why doesn't anyone know her at the church she says she attends? 

Someone who believes that a fetus is a human being?   Your label "religious wacko" is very disrespectful and unkind.   I am pro-life and I am not mentally unstable. 

Like it or not, the fight to protect the unborn will NEVER EVER stop. 

Gay marriage is an important issue for the religious right.

What exactly do they want a president to do about it?

By Jonathan Weisman and Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 14, 2005; A08

When hundreds of religious activists try to get arrested today to protest cutting programs for the poor, prominent conservatives such as James Dobson, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell will not be among them.

That is a great relief to Republican leaders, who have dismissed the burgeoning protests as the work of liberals. But it raises the question: Why in recent years have conservative Christians asserted their influence on efforts to relieve Third World debt, AIDS in Africa, strife in Sudan and international sex trafficking -- but remained on the sidelines while liberal Christians protest domestic spending cuts?

Conservative Christian groups such as Focus on the Family say it is a matter of priorities, and their priorities are abortion, same-sex marriage and seating judges who will back their position against those practices.

It's not a question of the poor not being important or that meeting their needs is not important, said Paul Hetrick, a spokesman for Focus on the Family, Dobson's influential, Colorado-based Christian organization. But whether or not a baby is killed in the seventh or eighth month of pregnancy, that is less important than help for the poor? We would respectfully disagree with that.

Jim Wallis, editor of the liberal Christian journal Sojourners and an organizer of today's protest, was not buying it. Such conservative religious leaders have agreed to support cutting food stamps for poor people if Republicans support them on judicial nominees, he said. They are trading the lives of poor people for their agenda. They're being, and this is the worst insult, unbiblical.

At issue is a House-passed budget-cutting measure that would save $50 billion over five years by trimming food stamp rolls, imposing new fees on Medicaid recipients, squeezing student lenders, cutting child-support enforcement funds and paring agriculture programs. House negotiators are trying to reach accord with senators who passed a more modest $35 billion bill that largely spares programs for the poor.

At the same time, House and Senate negotiators are hashing out their differences on a tax-cutting measure that is likely to include an extension of cuts in the tax rate on dividends and capital gains.

To mainline Protestant groups and some evangelical activists, the twin measures are an affront, especially during the Christmas season. Leaders of five denominations -- the United Methodist Church, Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Presbyterian Church USA and United Church of Christ -- issued a joint statement last week calling on Congress to go back to the drawing board and come up with a budget that brings good news to the poor.

Around 300 religious activists have vowed to kneel in prayer this morning at the Cannon House Office Building and remain there until they are arrested. Wallis said that as they are led off, they will chant a phrase from Isaiah: Woe to you legislators of infamous laws . . . who refuse justice to the unfortunate, who cheat the poor among my people of their rights, who make widows their prey and rob the orphan.

To GOP leaders and their supporters in the Christian community, it is not that simple. Acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said yesterday that the activists' position is not intellectually right.

The right tax policy, such as keeping tax rates low on business investment, grows the economy, increases federal revenue -- and increased federal revenue makes it easier for us to pursue policies that we all can agree have social benefit, he said.

Dobson also has praised what he calls pro-family tax cuts. And Janice Crouse, a senior fellow at the Christian group Concerned Women for America, said religious conservatives know that the government is not really capable of love.

You look to the government for justice, and you look to the church and individuals for mercy. I think Hurricane Katrina is a good example of that. FEMA just failed, and the church and the Salvation Army and corporations stepped in and met the need, she said.

Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Family Research Council, said the government's role should be to encourage charitable giving, perhaps through tax cuts.

There is a [biblical] mandate to take care of the poor. There is no dispute of that fact, he said. But it does not say government should do it. That's a shifting of responsibility.

The Family Research Council is involved in efforts to stop the bloodshed in the Darfur region of Sudan as well as sex trafficking and slavery abroad. But Perkins said those issues are far different from the budget cuts now under protest. The difference there is enforcing laws to keep people from being enslaved, to be sold as sex slaves, he said. We're talking here about massive welfare programs.

The Rev. Richard Cizik, a vice president of the National Association of Evangelicals, returned yesterday from the Montreal conference on global climate change, another issue of interest to evangelicals. Frankly, I don't hear a lot of conversation among evangelicals about budget cuts in anti-poverty programs, he said. What I hear our people asking is, why are we spending $231 million on a bridge to nowhere in Alaska and can't find $50 million for African Union forces to stop genocide in Darfur?