Republicans worried about Obama

[BigRedChief]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/07/republicans-worried-about-obama/

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Hillary Clinton isn't the only one worried about Barack Obama's post-Iowa momentum. A former top Republican official tells CNN Obama could win a significant portion of the Republican vote in a general election, if he becomes the Democratic nominee.

The leading Republican strategist, who requested anonymity because this person advises a number of Republican presidential candidates, told CNN "I think Barack Obama is a potential Robert Kennedy or Reagan figure." And "In terms of raw political horsepower, he is the most electable of any of the Democrats and potentially more electable than Bill Clinton. If he ran the right campaign he could appeal to a substantial number of Republicans and Independents."

This person insists an Obama nomination isn't a done deal. "He could make a mistake. His people could get overconfident. He needs to continue to push his theme even as she continues to hit him on different issues."
In the days since he won the caucuses, the New York senator's campaign has hit Obama on a number of issues, including his decision to hire a former lobbyist to manage his New Hampshire campaign, and his past position on the Patriot Act.

Former President Bill Clinton compared Obama's early position on the Iraq war to President Bush's, and national reporters were summoned to an urgent conference call because some callers on the 'Do Not Call' registry had received robo-calls from Obama's campaign that Clinton's staff alleges did not fully comply with election law.

Yet Obama now holds a 10-point edge over Clinton in the new CNN/WMUR poll of New Hampshire primary voters released last night, and an even larger advantage in some other surveys.

This top Republican explains that Obama "is incredibly nice, he's likable. People want to like him. He's the personification of bringing people together. He's the personification of unity. People like that and it works."
He says Senator Clinton "lacks a gut level connection" with voters. "I'd rather run [a Republican] against her because she turns out our base. He [Obama] doesn't have the baggage she has and he appeals to Republicans and Independents in this post-partisan way."

[HolmeZz]

The way Romney and Giuliani were talking about him you could tell they were scared. Huckabee and Paul spoke pretty positively of him and that probably went over well, particularly with indys.

[BigRedChief]

From his 2004 Democratic convention speech:

The pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_state_vs._blue_state_divide); Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them too. We worship an awesome God in the Blue States, and we don't like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_League) in the Blue States and yes, we got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.[40] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#_note-keynote)
-------------------------------------------------------
When we send our young men and women into harm's way, we have a solemn obligation not to fudge the numbers or shade the truth about why they're going, to care for their families while they're gone, to tend to the soldiers upon their return, and to never, ever go to war without enough troops to win the war, secure the peace, and earn the respect of the world.
--------------------------------------------------------

Sounds like a Republican could have said those words very easily.

[BigRedChief]

The way Romney and Giuliani were talking about him you could tell they were scared. Huckabee and Paul spoke pretty positively of him and that probably went over well, particularly with indys.
And he had the courage to stand up and say he inhaled, did drugs in his youth. Have the Repoublicans did this?

[Pittsie]

I'm elated, estatic, overjoyed, etc. that it looks like the Dems have finally figured out the most electable candidate. I was beginning to lose hope.

[HolmeZz]

From his 2004 Democratic convention speech:

The pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_state_vs._blue_state_divide); Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them too. We worship an awesome God in the Blue States, and we don't like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_League) in the Blue States and yes, we got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and patriots who supported the war in Iraq. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.[40] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#_note-keynote)
-------------------------------------------------------
When we send our young men and women into harm's way, we have a solemn obligation not to fudge the numbers or shade the truth about why they're going, to care for their families while they're gone, to tend to the soldiers upon their return, and to never, ever go to war without enough troops to win the war, secure the peace, and earn the respect of the world.
--------------------------------------------------------

Sounds like a Republican could have said those words very easily.

Great speech.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MNCLomrqIN8&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MNCLomrqIN8&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/56-m8wx1mwo&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/56-m8wx1mwo&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[banyon]

I think this shift will also impact the Republican nomination. Before voters had to decide who could beat Hillary. I think the question of who can beat Obama favors different candidates maybe.

[HonestChieffan]

Great to hear a guy who takes his oath on the Koran talking to middle America about God.

He must be stopped.

[HolmeZz]

Great to hear a guy who takes his oath on the Koran talking to middle America about God.

He must be stopped.

And this is really what people should fear: that people this stupid do exist in America.

[Brock]

Great to hear a guy who takes his oath on the Koran talking to middle America about God.

He must be stopped.

A weak lie.

[BigRedChief]

Great to hear a guy who takes his oath on the Koran talking to middle America about God.

He must be stopped.
Obama's father left them when he was two. His dad was of Muslim ancestory out of Kenya but an atheist.

He's a Church of Christ follower.

[HolmeZz]

Obama's father left them when he was two. His dad was of Muslim ancestory out of Kenya but an atheist.

He's a Church of Christ follower.

He's confusing Obama with the congressman from Minnesota.

[Cochise]

Obama's father left them when he was two. His dad was of Muslim ancestory out of Kenya but an atheist.

He's a Church of Christ follower.

Personally I don't put much stock in the religiousity of people who are pro-abortion. But that's really neither here nor there.

[BigRedChief]

Personally I don't put much stock in the religiousity of people who are pro-abortion. But that's really neither here nor there.
Not really important to me either. It should reflect in his polices and stances on the issues and thats whats important not whether they inhaled in college.

[Cochise]

Not really important to me either. It should reflect in his polices and stances on the issues and thats whats important not whether they inhaled in college.

That wasn't really what I meant. I mean I doubt their sincerity of belief if they could support something like that.

[BigRedChief]

That wasn't really what I meant. I mean I doubt their sincerity of belief if they could support something like that.
I don't see how anyone especially a conservative could support government dictated morality either.

[Cochise]

I don't see how anyone especially a conservative could support government dictated morality either.

Every action of government is dictating someone's morality. The only question is whose it is.

[jAZ]

Great to hear a guy who takes his oath on the Koran talking to middle America about God.

He must be stopped.
The nut-job 1%.

What are the odds you're the guy they eventually arrest at an Obama event with a gun and a suicide note?

Glad that your number keeps shrinking. That Obama is able to create such enthusiasm and fear says a great deal about how far our nation has come.

[Laz]

saw his wife making a speech last night .... she did a fine job.

well spoken, intelligent,earnest



i'm still hoping that it's McCain vs Obama :D

[Laz]

Great to hear a guy who takes his oath on the Koran talking to middle America about God.

He must be stopped.


i bet you have 3 names

[Cochise]

Surely that was just an ill-conceived attempt to be funny.

[Laz]

Surely that was just an ill-conceived attempt to be funny.
we should ALL hope

[dirk digler]

Great to hear a guy who takes his oath on the Koran talking to middle America about God.

He must be stopped.

You're one of the biggest douchebags on the Planet why don't you do us all a favor and shoot yourself in the face

[dirk digler]

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080107/NATION/415598644/1001

Obama gets beefed-up protection

By Joseph Curl
January 7, 2008

MANCHESTER, N.H. — Secret Service presence has increased for Sen. Barack Obama since his dramatic win in Iowa, amid fears over the safety of the man seeking to become America's first black president.

The Illinois senator's security now rivals that of President Bush, with a dozen Secret Service agents wearing dark suits and earpieces leading bomb-sniffing dogs through event venues, sweeping all equipment brought by journalists and flanking the candidate as he plunges into crowds of supporters.

"For many black supporters, there is a lot of anxiety that he will be killed, and it is on people's minds," said Melissa Harris-Lacewell, a Princeton University professor of political science and contemporary black culture.

"You can't make a prediction like this — like he has 'a 50 percent chance of getting shot.' But the greater his visibility and the greater his access to people, there is a danger," she said.

Another black presidential candidate, Jesse Jackson, drew Secret Service protection because of violent threats during his campaigns in the 1980s. And former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell ruled out a presidential run in part because his wife expressed fears he would be assassinated.

Mr. Obama, who reportedly resisted asking for Secret Service protection but personally requested a detail of agents after friends insisted, has been under federal watch since early last year. No one will say whether he has received an explicit death threat — his campaign said yesterday only that "we don't comment on security" — but officials have tracked racist chatter on white-supremacist Web sites.

The Internet is rife with theories that someone may try to assassinate the senator — typing into Google "assassinate Obama" brings up more than 2,000 hits. Anyone from Islamist terrorists to racist Americans to operatives of Halliburton and Blackwater are speculated about, but other, more nefarious Web sites are for real, according to reports from the Associated Press.

At his first morning event yesterday, at least a dozen plainclothes Secret Service agents, most with yellow pins on their lapels, stood guard in and around the Palace Theater, and, unlike other candidates touring the state, uniformed police were also on hand. The theater was emptied early so bomb-detecting dogs could sweep through, and journalists covering the event were corralled for inspection.

[HolmeZz]

Personally I don't put much stock in the religiousity of people who are pro-abortion. But that's really neither here nor there.

I don't put much stock in the religiousity of people who are pro-death penalty.

[jAZ]

I hate the ewmbedded quote tag.
Good to hear that he's not getting the Butto treatment.

[Laz]

I don't put much stock in the religiousity of people who are pro-death penalty.
oops ... works both ways, i guess. ROFL

[StcChief]

Good to hear that he's not getting the Butto treatment.
yet

[Cochise]

I don't put much stock in the religiousity of people who are pro-death penalty.

What is it about religion that makes the death penalty untenable? It's permissible and even prescribed in all the major religious texts that I know of.

Although it may not fit with what an irreligious person thinks religion should be, there's no tacit incompatibility there like there is with abortion.

[HolmeZz]

What is it about religion that makes the death penalty untenable?

I don't know, the fact that plenty of innocent people end up on death row?

[BigRedChief]

Obama had better not get assinated.:shake:

[Cochise]

I don't know, the fact that plenty of innocent people end up on death row?

You ignored the substance of the post that explains it, so I don't know what further I can add.

[HolmeZz]

You ignored the substance of the post that explains it, so I don't know what further I can add.

No. You equated a position on abortion with one's religious convictions. The reasoning against abortion is that it's the taking of an innocent life. If that is the criteria, those same pro-lifers should be against the death penalty, which has put to death innocent people way too frequently. Yet I don't see you questioning the religious convictions or morals of people in support of that position.

[Cochise]

No. You equated a position on abortion with one's religious convictions. The reasoning against abortion is that it's the taking of an innocent life. If that is the criteria, those same pro-lifers should be against the death penalty, which has put to death innocent people way too frequently. Yet I don't see you questioning the religious convictions or morals of people in support of that position.

So, should we ban everything that can kill someone if used improperly?

Your argument has nothing to do with religion.

Going to church probably kills people every year in car accidents. Should the church tell people to stay home rather than take the risk?

This argument is pretty lame, and you're assuming a personal affirmation of the death penalty which I've not given.

[Brock]

the death penalty, which almost routinely puts to death innocent people.

Pure hyperbole.

[HolmeZz]

Pure hyperbole.

A tad, which is why I edited it.

[HolmeZz]

So, should we ban everything that can kill someone if used improperly?

Continuing to support something that kills innocent people when there are alternatives is very irresponsible.

Your argument has nothing to do with religion.

Sure it does. But apparently you only care about 'innocent life' when it's in the womb.

Going to church probably kills people every year in car accidents. Should the church tell people to stay home rather than take the risk?

Yeah, do you understand the concept of choice? You don't have to go to Church. Whatever you choose to do in life, you're running a risk. You just happen to be bringing it upon yourself.

This argument is pretty lame, and you're assuming a personal affirmation of the death penalty which I've not given.

I wasn't accusing you of being pro-capitol punishment. You made one blanket statement that would pretty much characterize the morality and convictions of liberals. I made one that would characterize conservatives.

[patteeu]

No. You equated a position on abortion with one's religious convictions. The reasoning against abortion is that it's the taking of an innocent life. If that is the criteria, those same pro-lifers should be against the death penalty, which has put to death innocent people way too frequently. Yet I don't see you questioning the religious convictions or morals of people in support of that position.

People who oppose holding innocent people against their will in prisons don't oppose all incarceration even though convicts are bound to be mistakenly convicted from time to time.

Obviously, you hit on the distinction between abortion and the death penalty though. Innocence.

[HolmeZz]

People who oppose holding innocent people against their will in prisons don't oppose all incarceration even though convicts are bound to be mistakenly convicted from time to time.

Definitely, but there's just a little bit of difference in someone being dead and someone being alive.

Obviously, you hit on the distinction between abortion and the death penalty though. Innocence.

Distinction? I was pointing out a similarity.

[SportsRacer]

Great to hear a guy who takes his oath on the Koran talking to middle America about God.

He must be stopped.

You're retarded. That's not name-calling, either. You really are retarded.

Unless you're being sarcastic.

[noa]

That wasn't really what I meant. I mean I doubt their sincerity of belief if they could support something like that.

I think this statement really de-railed the thread, but I don't really think it is appropriate to judge other people's religious beliefs based on one issue, no matter how offensive that issue is to you. Aside from the death penalty argument HolmeZz made, one could doubt your religious beliefs based on your support for a war that has killed over 100,000 non-combatants from a country that posed no threat to your safety. In other words, over 100,000 innocent lives. But I don't use that type of thinking to judge people, as I know your religious beliefs are sincere, no matter how warped they may seem to others.

[patteeu]

Distinction? I was pointing out a similarity.

Right, but you were wrong. I shouldn't have edited out the word "inadvertently".

[HolmeZz]

Right, but you were wrong. I shouldn't have edited out the word "inadvertently".

I think you only made my point. The Death Penalty takes innocent lives just like people claim abortion does.

[Cochise]

I think this statement really de-railed the thread, but I don't really think it is appropriate to judge other people's religious beliefs based on one issue, no matter how offensive that issue is to you.

There are some issues that would not cause me to feel that way. It's not impossible to see that someone who is religious could feel that war is sometimes justified, or that capital punishment is permissible. But, by what calculus could one reconcile abortion with any kind of Christian worldview? It militates against it in every point. How could the two occupy the same space?

[Cochise]

I think you only made my point. The Death Penalty takes innocent lives just like people claim abortion does.

The purpose of abortion is to take innocent life. The death penalty has done it before, but it's not common nor is it the purpose.

[noa]

There are some issues that would not cause me to feel that way. It's not impossible to see that someone who is religious could feel that war is sometimes justified, or that capital punishment is permissible. But, by what calculus could one reconcile abortion with any kind of Christian worldview? It militates against it in every point. How could the two occupy the same space?

I agree with you. It does seem very difficult to not find an inconsistency there. I just think it is better to avoid judging a person's religious beliefs from your own point of view, no matter how irreconcilable the other person's beliefs may seem.

[Sully]

Ah...
More Christians telling other Christians that they aren't good enough Christians.


...fantastic.

[Chiefmanwillcatch]

Sounds like the Affirmative action for prez ,racial heroism crowd is going nuts for him

[Cochise]

I agree with you. It does seem very difficult to not find an inconsistency there. I just think it is better to avoid judging a person's religious beliefs from your own point of view, no matter how irreconcilable the other person's beliefs may seem.

I don't mean to say, "he's not a Christian". You couldn't point to anyone in the world and say, they definitely are one. Some preachers obviously turn out to not be such good people.

I was just pointing out that it seems to me impossible to honestly hold both positions.

[HolmeZz]

The purpose of abortion is to take innocent life. The death penalty has done it before, but it's not common nor is it the purpose.

Hilarious. The fact that the death penalty takes innocent lives should be ignored because it's not 'common'? If it takes one innocent life it's already taken one too many. The reality is that it takes a lot more than that.

[Sully]

I was just pointing out that it seems to me impossible to honestly hold both positions.

I think it's mainly hard for you to reconcile the positions because you believe that anyone in the world is "Pro" abortion.
I'd counter that those who are pro CHOICE are that way, for the most part, out of a feeling of compassion. Perhaps not for, what many believe to be, an embryo, but for someone who finds themself in (possibly through their own fault) a desperate situation. But they certainly aren't Pro abortion, as most I've ever talked to are anti-abortion, but simply want it legal in order to keep people from killing themselves.

It's not the best logic, but either is believing that anyone is pro abortion.

[patteeu]

Hilarious. The fact that the death penalty takes innocent lives should be ignored because it's not 'common'? If it takes one innocent life it's already taken one too many. The reality is that it takes a lot more than that.

The fact that the death penalty only takes innocent lives because man can never be perfect rather than by design is what matters here. Most Christians can tolerate collateral damage as long as the cause is just. I suppose you could argue that if it was so imperfect that the chance of innocence vs guilt of a guy on death row was little more than a crap shoot, it would violate some Christian concept of morality, but the reality is that it is a lot less imperfect than that.

[Cochise]

Perhaps not for, what many believe to be, an embryo, but for someone who finds themself in (possibly through their own fault) a desperate situation.

So it's ok to kill someone who's an inconvenience?

[Sully]

So it's ok to kill someone who's an inconvenience?
I'm not going to make that argument, because that's not what I believe. I'm just trying to tell you where they are coming from... not a place of "killing someone because it's an inconvenience," but from "Doing away with an embryo (not a person) in order to save another life."

Too often it becomes a tool of convenience... but those who are most for choice are certainly not backing it for the convenience factor, any more than those who believe in Just-War Theory believe in Killing people just because they live in a different country out of convenience.

[Cochise]

I'm not going to make that argument, because that's not what I believe. I'm just trying to tell you where they are coming from... not a place of "killing someone because it's an inconvenience," but from "Doing away with an embryo (not a person) in order to save another life."

What percentage of abortions performed are done to save the mother's life? 1%? Probably less?

[patteeu]

So it's ok to kill someone who's an inconvenience?

I disagree with the angle Sully is taking to explain how Christians could rationalize abortion. I think they first have to convince themselves that the fetus isn't really life. Once they've done that, it's relatively easy to tip the scales in favor of the convenience or "the mental health" of the potential mother.

[Sully]

What percentage of abortions performed are done to save the mother's life? 1%? Probably less?
Medically? Probably about that, but I don't know.

Otherwise? Considering coat hangers, abusive families, deadbeat babydaddies, etc... I'm sure the percentage is much higher.

[patteeu]

... "Doing away with an embryo (not a person) in order to s ...

OK, I see that Sully and I are kind of on the same page.

[noa]

So it's ok to kill someone who's an inconvenience?

How about the idea that even a devout Christian can believe people need to be able to make their own choices in their lives? That is how we are to be judged, based on our actions from free will. Knowing that America is not a wholly Christian country, perhaps one could believe that people should be able to make their own choices without the government thrusting religious beliefs on them. Thus, they are not pro-abortion, they are pro living in a free country that lets people make their own decisions. This seems to be consistent with Christianity, even if the act of abortion is not.

[Sully]

I disagree with the angle Sully is taking to explain how Christians could rationalize abortion. I think they first have to convince themselves that the fetus isn't really life. Once they've done that, it's relatively easy to tip the scales in favor of the convenience or "the mental health" of the potential mother.
Although I seem to have fallen into the trap of Cochise's abortion argument, all I was really trying to argue is that NO ONE is Pro abortion, rather they are pro choice. Yes, that probably comes easier once you believe an emryo isn't a person, I'd never argue otherwise.
I just don't see many peole fighting for that cause because they love abortions. I'm just trying to shed light on a viewpoint other than the most villainous one we can all think of.

[Cochise]

How about the idea that even a devout Christian can believe people need to be able to make their own choices in their lives?

Why do we have any laws, if not to protect the innocent?

[HolmeZz]

The fact that the death penalty only takes innocent lives because man can never be perfect rather than by design is what matters here.

Wrong. The death penalty is not a necessity.

Most Christians can tolerate collateral damage as long as the cause is just.

It's scary that innocent lives are precious and invaluable when they're in the womb, but expendable when it comes to capitol punishment.

I suppose you could argue that if it was so imperfect that the chance of innocence vs guilt of a guy on death row was little more than a crap shoot, it would violate some Christian concept of morality, but the reality is that it is a lot less imperfect than that.

You're still working on a false premise. The death penalty is not a necessity. It's a choice. And by supporting it you're supporting the consequences that come with it; the taking of innocent life when it doesn't have to be that way, essentially the same argument made against abortion.

[Hydrae]

Why do we have any laws, if not to protect the innocent?


It comes down the sanctity of life and the definition of when that life "begins." There are arguments galore as to when that happens from conception to birth.

I also agree with Sully that this should probably be an individual belief rather than a government mandated timeframe.

[MGRS13]

Wow i'm so surprised this got turned into a life/choice battle. Republicans have come no where since Reagan. Abortion = last gasp for a dying party.

[BigRedChief]

Wow i'm so surprised this got turned into a life/choice battle. Republicans have come no where since Reagan. Abortion = last gasp for a dying party.Yep. They can't be anti- big government anymore. They are the kings of all time in government spending.

[BucEyedPea]

Both parties are king and queens of big government spending. They just spend it on different things. The 2 party system is broke. It's between leftists and leftists.

[Cochise]

Yep. They can't be anti- big government anymore. They are the kings of all time in government spending.

I am against it, and don't endorse the spending we have seen recently. I'm not for a candidate in the primary who is advocating big government. I'm not going to vote for a 'populist' for the nomination. Big government is not what the essence of conservatism is. I just made a statement about two seemingly incompatible views.

[noa]

I just made a statement about two seemingly incompatible views.

The way I read it, you said more than that. You doubted the sincerity of Obama's religious beliefs. This hints that maybe you think he (or any Pro Choice candidate for that matter) is playing Christian for political convenience. Its one thing to say you don't see how the two beliefs are compatible (and perhaps Obama's beliefs are misguided). It is another to question whether a person's belief in his religion is sincere.

[Cochise]

The way I read it, you said more than that. You doubted the sincerity of Obama's religious beliefs. This hints that maybe you think he (or any Pro Choice candidate for that matter) is playing Christian for political convenience. Its one thing to say you don't see how the two beliefs are compatible (and perhaps Obama's beliefs are misguided). It is another to question whether a person's belief in his religion is sincere.

I think you have it just about right.

I'm not calling him a dishonest person who says he's religious for political convenience. I just don't think it's likely that a person who supports abortion has strongly held religious beliefs.

It's fine if that's true of him. It would resolve the contradiction, and still leave him an honest man, which I think he is.

[patteeu]

As someone who insincerely attends church every week in order to make a positive impression on others (mainly my kids), I frequently doubt the sincerity of politicians' religious beliefs.

[noa]

As someone who insincerely attends church every week in order to make a positive impression on others (mainly my kids), I frequently doubt the sincerity of politicians' religious beliefs.

I think Bill was sincere when he said "Thank God" after finding out Hillary was a lesbian and he didn't have to have sex with her anymore.

[Chiefmanwillcatch]

Obama "is incredibly nice, he's likable. People want to like him. He's the personification of bringing people together. He's the personification of unity. People like that and it works."
This is normal rhetoric of LIBERALS who mistakingly think that Black president would make everyone nicer and make all of our problems go away.

Not going to happen. What will happen is that ANOTHER 'inexperienced' politician will win and create the same mistakes as Bush.

[Sully]

This is normal rhetoric of LIBERALS who mistakingly think that Black president would make everyone nicer and make all of our problems go away.

Not going to happen. What will happen is that ANOTHER 'inexperienced' politician will win and create the same mistakes as Bush.
So... for the 4th time you've brought race into it.
I know this is out there, but do you think that it's possible that many that are enamored with Obama are fond of him for many reasons... none of which happen to be that he is black? It seems that you want so badly to push that the only reason liberals like him is because of some sympathy race vote. I'd bet for the VAST majority of voters... that isn't even close to being the case.

[HolmeZz]

This is normal rhetoric of LIBERALS who mistakingly think that Black president would make everyone nicer and make all of our problems go away.

You seem to be more infatuated with race than anybody else.

Not going to happen. What will happen is that ANOTHER 'inexperienced' politician will win and create the same mistakes as Bush.

Bush is a dope, for one. Guys he put in charge, like Cheney, Powell, and Rumsfeld, despite having tons of experience, made mistakes and failed our country.

[Sully]

Bush seemed to surround himself with sycophants. I don't believe Obama will make the same mistake.

[Jilly]

I think you have it just about right.

I'm not calling him a dishonest person who says he's religious for political convenience. I just don't think it's likely that a person who supports abortion has strongly held religious beliefs.

It's fine if that's true of him. It would resolve the contradiction, and still leave him an honest man, which I think he is.

I'm not sure that I'm hearing all this argument correctly, but from what i'm reading here, your argument is that because Obama is pro choice then that makes him less religious because in your opinion no Christian can be pro choice? Is that a good representation of what you're saying?

[Chiefmanwillcatch]

Face it. Obama is the racial sympathy vote.

Dummycrats who didn't mention this in their campaign for presidency are only going to lose out. If they did then you take away his potent weapon(sysmpathy for blacks)

Thats the way Democrats think and feel.

Obama would only lose to a candidate in a wheelchair who was paralyzed by being beaten to near death by skinheads and the KKK.

[Nightfyre]

Face it. Obama is the racial sympathy vote.

Dummycrats who didn't mention this in their campaign for presidency are only going to lose out. If they did then you take away his potent weapon(sysmpathy for blacks)

Thats the way Democrats think and feel.

Obama would only lose to a candidate in a wheelchair who was paralyzed by being beaten to near death by skinheads and the KKK.
:rolleyes:

[Cochise]

This clown has got to be a caricature poster. I wonder who's working the strings on this strawman puppet.

[Nightfyre]

This clown has got to be a caricature poster. I wonder who's working the strings on this strawman puppet.
I agree.

[Chiefmanwillcatch]

This clown has got to be a caricature poster. I wonder who's working the strings on this strawman puppet.

Can't attack the argument. Attack the writer.

[Nightfyre]

Can't attack the argument. Attack the writer.
ROFL

[Sully]

Face it. Obama is the racial sympathy vote.

Dummycrats who didn't mention this in their campaign for presidency are only going to lose out. If they did then you take away his potent weapon(sysmpathy for blacks)

Thats the way Democrats think and feel.

Obama would only lose to a candidate in a wheelchair who was paralyzed by being beaten to near death by skinheads and the KKK.
Kotter?

[HolmeZz]

Kotter?

Nah, Kotter likes Obama.

[penguinz]

Can't attack the argument. Attack the writer.No one is attacking the writer because of inability to attack the argument. People are 'attacking' the writer because he is coming across as ignorant and racist.

[Nightfyre]

Can't attack the argument. Attack the writer.
You "argument" is a statement that because Obama is black, his support is based in racial sympathy. Support your thesis so that there is an actual argument.

[Sully]

Nah, Kotter likes Obama.
Doesn't mean he doesn't like to **** with folks.

[Chiefmanwillcatch]

You "argument" is a statement that because Obama is black, his support is based in racial sympathy. Support your thesis so that there is an actual argument.


There can be no argument of substance about this topic. It's an opinion. And it's theory just based on 'keywords' and articles written by liberals and even the little piece by the republican. Goes to the fact how liberals think. Biden even accidentally said so. 'Obama is a well spoken black man'. LOL. So what! Liberals like that. They want a black for president because that's what liberals do. If not a woman then a black. It's all symbolism over substance.

[dirk digler]

so Chiefmanwillgetyou who do you support or are you to chicken shit to say?

[Chief Henry]

Will Barrack Hussein Obama nominate a white person or Black American as a VP Candidate?

[noa]

Will Barrack Hussein Obama nominate a white person or Black American as a VP Candidate?

Would it matter to you?

[HolmeZz]

Will Barrack Hussein Obama nominate a white person or Black American as a VP Candidate?

I think he'll hedge his bets and nominate a white american.

[Nightfyre]

There can be no argument of substance about this topic. It's an opinion. And it's theory just based on 'keywords' and articles written by liberals and even the little piece by the republican. Goes to the fact how liberals think. Biden even accidentally said so. 'Obama is a well spoken black man'. LOL. So what! Liberals like that. They want a black for president because that's what liberals do. If not a woman then a black. It's all symbolism over substance.
I'm sure if Condi Rice ran, she'd get the democratic vote :rolleyes: Shows exactly how insubstantial your opinion really is.

[Cochise]

I agree.

It's ironic that someone has arrived to try to drum up the race issue, after the electorate chose him in a state that is 98% white.

I guess that one is too valuable to lose a grip on.

[jAZ]

yet
Maybe I should have said the Musharaff treatment... I was refering to being short changed on security.

I hope you don't mean that "yet" in that context.

Having full Presidential security is really good.

[Chiefmanwillcatch]

I'm sure if Condi Rice ran, she'd get the democratic vote :rolleyes: Shows exactly how insubstantial your opinion really is.

I bet she would get some support if she were in democratic circles.

[Chief Henry]

Would it matter to you?


I'm not voting for him. So it doesn't matter. I'm wondering about
you and the BHO supporters. Will he nominate a white person or a black person. If he nominates a white person, why would he do that ?

[HolmeZz]

I'm not voting for him. So it doesn't matter. I'm wondering about
you and the BHO supporters. Will he nominate a white person or a black person. If he nominates a white person, why would he do that ?

Nobody has any idea what point you're trying to make.

[dirk digler]

I'm not voting for him. So it doesn't matter. I'm wondering about
you and the BHO supporters. Will he nominate a white person or a black person. If he nominates a white person, why would he do that ?

CH are you really a red-neck?

Biden, Evan Byah, or John Wariner would be good VP's candidates.

[Chief Henry]

CH are you really a red-neck?

Biden, Evan Byah, or John Wariner would be good VP's candidates.


Redneck ? Nope. I'm just wondering what his supporters are thinking
as far as who they want him to nominate as VP. Will color be a factor since he is black.

Someone here, i think Holmezz thought that he'd pick a white person to "hedge" his bets.

When I read that he'll pick a "white person to hedge his bets" That kind of hints at a perceived color problem/barrier for BHO.


I can's stick around to chat. One of my nephews has a basketball game in about 15 minutes.

But I am curious about your thoughts.

[HolmeZz]

Someone here, i think Holmezz thought that he'd pick a white person to "hedge" his bets.

When I read that he'll pick a "white person to hedge his bets" That kind of hints at a perceived color problem/barrier for BHO.

My humor shouldn't be that hard to understand.

[Ugly Duck]

(Obama) takes his oath on the Koran....

He's a Church of Christ follower.

Help me out here... does the Church of Christ use the Koran instead of the Bible?

[go bowe]

This is normal rhetoric of LIBERALS * * *gee, did you miss the first part of that quote?

it's what we pagans call taking a statement out of context to misrepresent it...

here is the statement in context: This top Republican explains that Obama "is incredibly nice, he's likable. People want to like him. He's the personification of bringing people together.

i don't quite understand why a top REPUBLICAN would be using the normal rhetoric of LIBERALS...

is this some new disinformation campaign?

[BucEyedPea]

I don't think Obama is a Church of Christ member...it's another name I believe. But Church of Christ is pretty liberal.

[BigRedChief]

Having full Presidential security is really good.Thats a good thing.
He's going to be the next president of the United States.

[BigRedChief]

I don't think Obama is a Church of Christ member...it's another name I believe. But Church of Christ is pretty liberal.
From wikipedia

A theme of Obama's keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, and the title of his 2006 book, The Audacity of Hope, was inspired by his pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright).[135] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#_note-123) In Chapter 6 of the book, titled "Faith," Obama writes that he "was not raised in a religious household." He describes his mother, raised by non-religious parents, as detached from religion, yet "in many ways the most spiritually awakened person that I have ever known." He describes his Kenyan father as "raised a Muslim (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim)," but a "confirmed atheist" by the time his parents met, and his Indonesian stepfather as "a man who saw religion as not particularly useful." The chapter details how Obama, in his twenties, while working with local churches as a community organizer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_organizing), came to understand "the power of the African American religious tradition to spur social change." Obama writes: "It was because of these newfound understandings—that religious commitment did not require me to suspend critical thinking, disengage from the battle for economic and social justice, or otherwise retreat from the world that I knew and loved—that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of Trinity United Church of Christ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright) one day and be baptized."[136] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#_note-124)

[BucEyedPea]

You said Church of Christ....not Trinity United Church of Christ.

[dirk digler]

Redneck ? Nope. I'm just wondering what his supporters are thinking
as far as who they want him to nominate as VP. Will color be a factor since he is black.

Someone here, i think Holmezz thought that he'd pick a white person to "hedge" his bets.

When I read that he'll pick a "white person to hedge his bets" That kind of hints at a perceived color problem/barrier for BHO.


I can's stick around to chat. One of my nephews has a basketball game in about 15 minutes.

But I am curious about your thoughts.

I am an Obama supporter and I believe he will pick one of the 3 that I listed and not because they are white but because they are strong on foreign policy.

IMHO race has nothing to do with why Obama is winning especially winning in lilly white Iowa and NH.

[Sully]

It's UCC.
I love that denom.

[BigRedChief]

You said Church of Christ....not Trinity United Church of Christ.
All the same to me. One God. Jesus is his son and savior of the world. The Holy Bible is the word of god. etc.etc. Got it. The rest is details.

[BucEyedPea]

Well, all I said was it wasn't the Church of Christ.

[mlyonsd]

Will Barrack Hussein Obama nominate a white person or Black American as a VP Candidate?

Why does their color matter more than their character? Let me put it into a different perspective.

Al Sharpton - no.
Jesse Jackson - no.
JC Watts - yes.

I'm just saying how they line up in your thinking matters more than color.

[Laz]

Will Barrack Hussein Obama nominate a white person or Black American as a VP Candidate?
i love how inbred retards like yourself go out of your way to include his middle name as some sort of racist indictment of his candidacy.


you're an ol' school repugnant

[go bowe]

Why does their color matter more than their character? Let me put it into a different perspective.

Al Sharpton - no.
Jesse Jackson - no.
JC Watts - no


I'm just saying how they line up in your thinking matters more than color.fyp...

[Cochise]

I don't really care about this stuff, but as a mainline guy, here is a writeup on the CoC from an organization I trust quite a bit. link (http://www.equip.org/site/c.muI1LaMNJrE/b.2820087/k.BF26/CP0604.htm)


The Church of Christ movement originally arose in the hopes of promoting unity among all Christians, but it eventually ended up separating itself from other Christian groups. Although the Church of Christ movement is basically Christian, it's difficult not to categorize certain factions as aberrant because of some of their more extreme doctrines and practices.

Of all its beliefs, the Church of Christ movement is perhaps best known for its view that water baptism is absolutely essential for salvation. This is no doubt a "sub-biblical" view of baptism. Acts 10:44-48, for example, records that Gentiles were filled with the Holy Spirit (and therefore saved) before they were baptized. Water baptism is certainly a normal part of becoming a Christian and a member of the church; nevertheless, it's still possible to be saved without having been baptized -- especially when circumstances make baptism very difficult if not impossible (cf. Luke 23:39-43). Now, some of the more extreme factions within the Church of Christ movement go even further, and argue that anyone who views baptism differently from them is not a Christian and is, therefore, lost -- even if that person has been baptized!

There are also reports that heavy-handed tactics are employed by a number of more extremist groups within the Church of Christ. The Boston Movement, for example, which evolved from a similar movement at the Crossroads Church of Christ, is probably the most well-known of these authoritarian groups. Both movements were rejected by the mainline Churches of Christ. This particular group goes so far as to say that other segments of the Church of Christ movement are non-Christian and will face eternal damnation.

And so, while the Church of Christ movement is orthodox in many of the essentials of the faith, it is plagued with a very loud segment whose views are so extreme that developing any type of Christian fellowship with them becomes almost an impossible task. But remember, don't throw the baby out with the bath water; there are many within the Church of Christ movement who are committed Christians.

[Sully]

I don't really care about this stuff, but as a mainline guy, here is a writeup on the CoC from an organization I trust quite a bit. link (http://www.equip.org/site/c.muI1LaMNJrE/b.2820087/k.BF26/CP0604.htm)
He's not Church of Christ... he's UCC.

[Cochise]

He's not Church of Christ... he's UCC.

Cheerfully withdrawn!

[Sully]

Cheerfully withdrawn!
No problem. It's obviously an easy mistake.

I've been seriously thinking of becoming UCC over the past few years. In addition to some great ideas, I love their ad campaigns. They had some great commercials a couple of years ago that networks refused to air,a nd thier big one over the past year or so is this...
http://www.saintjamesucc.com/images/thecomma.jpg

Along with the saying, "God is still speaking."

or

"Don't put a period where God put a comma."

[Cochise]

"God is still speaking."... "Don't put a period where God put a comma."

I guess I don't know whether to agree with that or not. What do they mean by that?

[Sully]

I guess I don't know whether to agree with that or not. What do they mean by that?
They are big on building a relationship with God, through all God does, through the people who you see God in, through the church you see God in, etc.

My interpretation, though it may not be wholly accurate, is this whittled down version:
The Bible is the basis of our beliefs, but it's not the end of what God has to say to us, and God is still being revealed to us through the world we live in.

[Cochise]

They are big on building a relationship with God, through all God does, through the people who you see God in, through the church you see God in, etc.

My interpretation, though it may not be wholly accurate, is this whittled down version:
The Bible is the basis of our beliefs, but it's not the end of what God has to say to us, and God is still being revealed to us through the world we live in.

I would agree that we have general revelation through the world as a supplement to direct revelation.

What is it that is still being revealed?

[Sully]

I would agree that we have general revelation through the world as a supplement to direct revelation.

What is it that is still being revealed?
Personally, I'd say that's up to each person as they build a relationship with God. God may reveal (and typically does) something different to you than to me.

[Sully]

You know... I'd say you'd probably get more out of this than by my explanations of it... seeing how I haven't made the jump...yet...

http://www.ucc.org/about-us/

[Cochise]

Personally, I'd say that's up to each person as they build a relationship with God. God may reveal (and typically does) something different to you than to me.

I don't dispute that he reveals himself more to us as our relationships improve. It just makes me curious/nervous when people say, "God is still speaking", because it seems to lead sometimes to thinks that undermine the sufficiency of what we've been given already.

It's just like how there are good teachers on tv and bad ones, but you can tell them apart. For me, tons of sirens start going off when one of them says that God is speaking directly to him or through him.

What you describe doesn't necessarily sound bad, but it makes me wonder what is taught day-to-day.

[Sully]

Go to that link from post 123, and also this one... they do a hell of a lot better job exlaining it than I can...

http://www.ucc.org/about-us/family-of-faith.html

[Cochise]

You know... I'd say you'd probably get more out of this than by my explanations of it... seeing how I haven't made the jump...yet...

http://www.ucc.org/about-us/

According to wikipedia, they are in full communion with PCUSA and the Evang. Lutheran church, which would indicate that they are a pretty liberal denomination (presbyterian church in america and lutheran/missouri synod being the more conservative counterparts I think), although I don't see anything tacitly wrong with that statement of faith.

It's interesting though that his church seems to identify with the Reformed tradition, a school of which I would consider myself a member.

[Sully]

According to wikipedia, they are in full communion with PCUSA and the Evang. Lutheran church, which would indicate that they are a pretty liberal denomination (presbyterian church in america and lutheran/missouri synod being the more conservative counterparts I think), although I don't see anything tacitly wrong with that statement of faith.

It's interesting though that his church seems to identify with the Reformed tradition, a school of which I would consider myself a member.
While the website claims that each church is different based on the community it serves (my wife's denomination is much the same way, as one church feels Baptist, and the other very liberal), I believe as a whole, UCC can be described as Liberal. Of course, I'm a lib, so that doesn't bother me in the slightest.

[Cochise]

While the website claims that each church is different based on the community it serves (my wife's denomination is much the same way, as one church feels Baptist, and the other very liberal), I believe as a whole, UCC can be described as Liberal. Of course, I'm a lib, so that doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Well, the labels can't be directly overlaid to their meanings in the political scene. I suppose a political conservative might be comfortable with liberal theology while others may not. And I guess a theological conservative could perfectly well have some liberal views on public policy. I don't think the words have the same meaning when they are applied to ecumenical conventions as they do in the political arena.

[Mr Luzcious]

According to wikipedia, they are in full communion with PCUSA and the Evang. Lutheran church, which would indicate that they are a pretty liberal denomination (presbyterian church in america and lutheran/missouri synod being the more conservative counterparts I think), although I don't see anything tacitly wrong with that statement of faith.

It's interesting though that his church seems to identify with the Reformed tradition, a school of which I would consider myself a member.

"...and shaping cutting edge theology.." Does that seem a little odd to you? It does to me.

Regardless, I'm not sure where you're seeing the Reformed tradition tie in, because I don't see it.

[Mr Luzcious]

And I would gladly vote for Obama over Guiliani or Romney, thats what I came in here to say.

[Cochise]

"...and shaping cutting edge theology.." Does that seem a little odd to you? It does to me.

Regardless, I'm not sure where you're seeing the Reformed tradition tie in, because I don't see it.

The article on wiki identified them as 'a mainline protestent denomination' and that they claimed to be so, is all. I wasn't making that judgement on my own. Maybe there's a different definition being used than the tradition of augustine/aquinas/luther/calvin/edwards that you and I are probably applying to the word.

[Mr Luzcious]

The article on wiki identified them as 'a mainline protestent denomination' and that they claimed to be so, is all. I wasn't making that judgement on my own. Maybe there's a different definition being used than the tradition of augustine/aquinas/luther/calvin/edwards that you and I are probably applying to the word.

Ah.. I meant to go to the wiki.. but I guess I went to their website instead. I didn't even realize my mistake... its been a long day.

[Chief Henry]

i love how inbred retards like yourself go out of your way to include his middle name as some sort of racist indictment of his candidacy.




Your speaking very proudly of your family blood lines Laz