Do we really need any further proof that Sally Quinn understands Martians better than she understands evangelicals?
How ironic that the Democratic Party and their supportive media now have a real problem with fornication amongst teenagers. Where have ya been all these years? Of course, had Bristol Palin been a teenage boy who had announced he was running off to Massachusetts to marry his boyfriend, the left would be holding such a one up as an enlightened, progressive role-model for all kiddos.
I’m growing weary of how people like Jim and rc don’t understand what many of us are saying. Listen carefully.
We don’t think Gov. Palin is unqualified because her teenage daughter is unmarried and pregnant. Nor do we think she’s unqualified because her youngest of five children is four months old and is mentally handicapped.
We find it incredible to hear the hypocrisy from the right on this. Can you even imagine the attacks coming from James Dobson and others if this was a Democratic candidate?
Can you begin to imagine the outright disgust that would be leveled because she was willing to be vice president or even president with a four month old who had Down Syndrome? Can you imagine the “told you so lectures” about the Democrats who promote teen pregnancy?
She had the baby and didn’t have an abortion. That’s wonderful. So would nearly everyone I know — Republican or Democrat. What sets some Democrats and some Republicans apart on this issue is that they believe families should make the decision — not the government.
We don’t think Palin is unqualified for these reasons, though if you knew your teenage daughter was pregnant out of wedlock, why would you take this job knowing that she would be on the front page of every paper in the world?
But the reason we think she’s unqualified is that she has no experience. (We disagree with similar claims about Obama. But it’s certainly a fair question for others to ask!) She was elected by just over 100,000 to be governor and has served just over a year.
When you’re #2 on a ticket with an elderly man who’s had serious cancer four times, you really need to be able to step into the presidency immediately.
We don’t think she’s qualified to do that — amazing woman though she seems to be.
Perhaps I should add that before this choice my vote was still up for grabs.
I might have voted for John McCain. Not because he’s a great American hero.
“Hero” has to do with how you respond to what unfolds in your life.
Barack Obama is a hero. Despite have so many odds against him, he kept pressing forward with courage. He decided not to cash in his Harvard law degree for the big bucks but chose instead to assist those who are disadvantaged. He’s been a faithful husband and father.
Sarah Palin is a hero. She gave life to this child and has been a good mom and a voice for reform as mayor and for a short while as governor.
Joe Biden is definitely a hero. Rather than let utter tragedy bring him down, he kept going, taking a long trainride home every night to be with his children.
In other words, “great American hero” didn’t draw me to McCain. Heroes are all around me. Most haven’t been in an enemy camp, but most of the “heroes” I know would respond the same way, I’m convinced (judging from the courage and faithfulness I see where they are).
What drew me to him was his experience and his willingness to buck both parties.
So this choice was incredibly important to me. Leiberman? Romney? Both would be defendable.
But I refuse to support a 72-year-old man who’s had serious bouts with cancer who chooses a person who is completely, completely inexperienced to lead this great country.
It’s all about perspective. Fact: Hypocrisy lives on both sides of the aisle. You just have to decide which platform you beliefs fit closest with your beliefs do the best you can with what you are given to work with.
I’m thinking we have a lot of work with now with Palin. Saw one quote of “Reagan in a skirt”.
Funny, we have an election that has broken the back of claims that women and blacks CAN’T succeed. Yet folks still complain. Amazing.
Steve Jr., Democrats and their operatives have suggested if she “can’t manage her own children, how can she manage the country.” Have you had your head buried in the sand the last couple of days. Democratic operatives have been throwing everything at this woman the last couple of days, so don’t even pretend to act like they haven’t suggested, or outright stated, their misgivings about the teenage pregnancy.
Just Wondering, why don’t you try listening carefully to me. If you are so concerned about experience, you really need to check the top of your own ticket. That was laid bare last night. Obama is a celebrity who, as Hillary Clinton said, made a speech four years ago. He hasn’t been a real part of any major legislation, indeed, he has spent his entire Senate career (less than four years) running for President. He apparently has been a community organizer who was somewhat less successful at it than Al Sharpton since no one had ever heard of Obama while he was in that position.
As to the hypocrisy charge, here is the difference: It isn’t that the Republicans think it is great a teenage girl and her boyfriend have found themselves expecting a child. Indeed, Palin referred to it as a problem. Here is the real distinction between the left and the religious right on these matters: The religious right acknowledges sexual sin, but yet also believes in redemption. The left, rather than acknowledge any sexual sin, tries to portray each and every one of them as a virtue — hence the sarcastic remark about a boy running off to Massachusetts to marry is boyfriend. That is the sort of thing that the left-wing finds enlightening and gets them fired up.
You also said, “She had the baby and didn’t have an abortion. That’s wonderful.” I’m curious, why do you think that is wonderful?
“Perhaps I should add that before this choice my vote was still up for grabs.”
“But I refuse to support a 72-year-old man who’s had serious bouts with cancer who chooses a person who is completely, completely inexperienced to lead this great country.”
And yet, you seem to be perfectly willing to vote for a man who is “completely, completely inexperienced to lead this great country.”
No wonder your moniker — you leave me just wondering as well.
Prayers up for LA from SE Texas - we felt very fortunate with Gustav, but also know someone took the brunt.
K - good points. The most disappointing pick in my lifetime for VP was Barack’s choice of an entrenched politician who is best known for being a Plagiarist. McCain’s choice, as is to be expected, is vilified by the extremist Left like Ms. Quinn. I remain an undecided voter who felt: a) Hillary got a raw deal; b) Barack has terrible and egotistical advisors for not picking Hillary; c) This will be a tight race that will reflect a lot of bickering - shocking as that is.
This is politics as usual but one thing that does catch my eye is that she can field dress a moose, fry it up in a pan, and never ever let her husband forget he’s a man.
In praying for Gustav victims, please remember that Haiti and Cuba were NOT spared by this storm. Damage is major in countries that don’t have the resources that we do to rebuild.
I and everyone I know who is moderate-to-left believe in sexual sin and in redemption. Are there those who don’t? Yes — on both sides of the aisle.
Still trying to imagine the response from the right if Obama had selected someone whose teenage daughter was pregnant and who had a four month old with Down Syndrome.
Why did I say, “That’s wonderful?” Because I’m again abortion. But like most Americans, I don’t want the government to make this call for everyone.
Before we all get too fired up I would suggest that we all read John Mark Hicks blog. Politics from either side is not going to be the answer to the problems of this world.
Sorry, but Sally Quinn is completely off base. She has no idea what she’s talking about.
To quote one of my favorite columnists:
“They claimed Palin was chosen only because she’s a woman. In fact, Palin was chosen because she’s pro-life, pro-gun, pro-drilling and pro-tax cuts. She’s fought both Republicans and Democrats on public corruption and does not have hair plugs like some other vice presidential candidate I could mention. In other words, she’s a “Republican.”
As for experience, well sorry, but Obama just doesn’t measure up. He has spent 143 working days in the Senate. And what did he spend those 143 days doing? Running for President.
Here are a few more quotes:
“Barack Obama has never led anything. Nothing. Nada.” — Rudy Giuliani
“I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities.” — Governor Sarah Palin
Kathleen Parker: ‘Should Palin and McCain prevail come November, feminism can curtsy and treat herself to a hard-earned vacation. The greatest achievement of feminism won’t be that a woman reached the vice presidency, but that a woman no longer needed feminists to get there.
This statement might very well help explain the Democrats’ tizzy - or as my grandmother would have said, ‘having a hissy fit” about Gov. Palin. If they would take a moment to look around, there are many high profile women in the situation of juggling marriage, children and spotlight jobs. Case in point: Rep. Michelle Bachman of MN. She and her husband have been married over 30 years, also have 5 children and have also found the time to foster parent 23 kids badly in need of loving nurturing. All this fuss and bother about a bright, successful politician, wife and mother is so silly.
The “Oh! Whatever will we do if McCain is unable to continue his term, we’d have a totally unprepared substitute?” crowd seems to have no trepidation with the head of their ticket being even more untried and, if elected, will step into the Presidency totally untried. [shaking head in amazement] Yes, he sat in a seat in both the Illinois and Washington Senates, but voted “present” about 90% of the time. Prepared? I would think not.
Sen. Obama himself has declared that we need a shift from Washington rippling out, to outside Washington coming in. Gov. Palin seems to fit his desire to a tee. imho.
I’m enjoying the fresh air of an Alaskan north wind breathing life into this election cycle!
Mike, also forgot to include that all the prayer groups I belong to have been praying for the Gulf coast states, now the Atlantic coastal states, and for the Caribbean countries affected by these storms. I, in particular are praying for the tiny Lesser Antilles since my grandson, Scott, is sufficiently recovered from the head injury last August to be in Dominic, in med. school. Prayers are definitely coveted for all these areas and for Scott and fellow students. Bless y’all and TIA.
Mike - Thanks for passing along the prayer invitation regarding those of us in Louisiana!
KentF - Thanks for your prayers and heart of encouragement!
Tim - Thanks for the perspective check regarding Haiti and Cuba. Despite any of our hardships, our lives are always full of blessings and others are always suffering in ways we can’t imagine. I needed that today!
Baron - Thanks for evidence that the right believes in redemption. Way to a reduce a man to his worst moments. Yes, you can google “Biden, plagiarism” and “McCain, adultery” and find out that “mistakes were made.” But let’s not reduce either to their worst moments. Both have served this country well — even if you don’t agree with their political viewpoints.
I want to respectfully disagree with Just Wonderin’ in his or her statement about abortion (because it’s the same argument I’ve heard from many “Pro-Choice” Christians).
The argument is: “I’m against abortion. But like most Americans, I don’t want the government to make this call for everyone.”
That’s EXACTLY the same as saying, “I’m against men having sex with 12-year-olds, but I don’t want the government to make this call for everyone.”
Either abortion is the murder of a human being or it’s not. If it is, then it must be made illegal and stopped. If it’s not, then it must be unlimited and unrestricted.
Remember, back in the 1800s, a lot of people were “Pro-Choice” regarding slavery — they were personally against slavery, but didn’t think the government should make that call for everyone.
Or like Bill Clinton says about abortion — they thought slavery should be safe, legal, and rare.
Politics and Culture — that is exactly why I have asked Just Wonderin’ to tell us why he is against abortion. He cannot have it both ways — he cannot say he is against abortion and thinks it is “wonderful” that Sarah Palin gave birth to a Downs Syndrome baby and then say he wants government to have no role in the protection of human life. It is a silly, self-contradictory position to take.
I’m still waiting for him to tell us why he is against abortion.
I’m supporting John McCain for president just like I did in the 2000 primary. I support him because he seems more committed to the United States than to the Republican party. He’s a moderate - not from either extreme. I like Palin for the same reasons.
I admire Obama for the way he has handled himself with dignity during the campaign. His record indicates that he is more interested in supporting his party than his country though. Look at his VP choice - someone with some major integrity issues.
1. If the Right really, really wants to do away with abortion, then why didn’t it while Republicans controlled the presidency, both houses, and the Supreme Court? It makes a better “red-meat” issue — along with school prayer, flag, and guns.
2. The overwhelming majority of Americans agree that rape is wrong — statutory or otherwise. But they are all over the map about abortion: all abortion is wrong; abortion is always wrong but sometimes necessary for certain reasons (rape, life of mother, incest, etc.); abortion is a tragedy that should be outlawed; abortion is a tragedy that should be eliminated by addressing poverty, ignorance, and lack of opportunities, etc. And that’s not to even begin to address those who aren’t even sure if abortion is taking a life. The Bible doesn’t address this. Though it speaks clearly about many things, it doesn’t say when life begins. (Having said that, I believe that life begins at conception.) How can a law be passed and enforced with the kind of disagreements there are? Can such a law really be passed when polls show that a very slight majority of Americans think that abortion is always wrong, but a much larger majority are against the reversal of Roe v. Wade?
3. Those who are older tell us that when abortion was illegal, the wealthy girls still had their abortions in safe clinics — just not here. Those who weren’t wealthy had theirs in dangerous back alleys.
OK, you HAVE to watch this “Daily Show” clip from a few days ago. As he often does, Jon Stewart highlights — in an extremely hilarious way — the inconsistencies and hypocrisies that prevail in the political world. In this case, these inconsistencies and political ploys involve the conservatives and Sarah Palin. Please, please give this a look.
I especially love Karl Rove’s comments, and then Palin’s own comments at the end. Don’t you think politicians slept better at night before the days of video tape?
You said, “Jon Stewart highlights — in an extremely hilarious way — the inconsistencies and hypocrisies that prevail in the political world.”
That should have read, “Jon Stewart highlights the inconsistencies and hypocrisies that prevail (according to him) in the Conservative political world.”
Oh, and Jon Stewart is a dick. My apologies in advance for my use of the word “dick.” =)
Steve, I’ve got to tip my hat to you on that clip. Wickedly funny and very revealing. Partisanship can shift the principles of us all if we are not careful. That cut through like a razor as much as I hate to admit it.
There are Christians on the “right” of the divide and Christians on the “left.” There are issues beyond gay marriage and abortion. And I really don’t think flinging mud in the faces of our brothers and sisters due to a difference in balloting is at all God-honoring.
In fact, I really don’t think God is as concerned with who we, as the minority of people in the world (Christians and temporary citizens of the US) vote for so much as he is concerned what we’re as his people and citizens of his kingdom are doing for and about those who don’t have the luxury of sniping at one another online, people who are too busy trying, against all odds, to continue to live.
God forgive us our partisan and myopic spirits and help us to remember where our real citizenship lies.
“as he is concerned what we’re as his people and citizens of his kingdom are doing for and about those who don’t have the luxury of sniping at one another online, people who are too busy trying, against all odds, to continue to live.”
Well, Quiara, I do think God is concerned about how we vote as well as being concerned about all decisions we make. But, as you said from your own snipe above, it is a luxury to be able to be online sniping at one another. At least I am not so myopic as to be unaware I am engaged in sniping. You, on the other hand . . . . .
My concern with the Palin choice is that she is not qualified to be president on a moment’s notice. Period.
To me that is the key thing you want in a VP. People may not like Biden or his politics, but who really thinks he wouldn’t be able to step into that job if something happened to Obama?
It just boggles my mind that McCain picked Palin, what about Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Elizbeth Dole?
And yes, Obama is not as quaified as other presidential candidates in the past, but he has been in the intense media spotlight for about 18 months, and so far 18 million Americans have voted for him, and many millions who voted for Hillary are happy to cast their vote for him now. How many millions of Americans first heard Palin’s name on Friday?
I think you and I will just have to disagree about that.
I would feel a lot better about her if she had been governor for longer than 1 1/2 years.
And Obama also has served in his state Senate, as well as a partial term in the U.S. Senate. My point about the spotlight is that I think we know what we are getting in Obama (now whther we like what we are getting is a different matter), we only have 60 days to find out all we can about Palin before the election, and clearly 18 million plus people feel ok enough with Obama’s level of experience to vote for him for president.
Goodness Amanda, open your eyes! Obama has barely kept a seat warm in the Senate because he has been too busy running for the Presidency. The celebrity craze in all of this is very revealing in that, as Palin said, he is a man who has written two memoirs, but no significant legislation. It strains credulity that you seem to be so attuned to any inexperience on Palin’s part, but are unable to see a greater inexperience on Obama’s part.
Hillary was right. Obama gave a speech four years ago. That’s about it.
I just don’t consider them to be equally unqualified. I consider him to be more qualified, while conceeding that he is not as qualified as past candidats.
Secondly, I have known about him since 1994, and have learned a lot about him in 18 months. I am confident that I know what I’ll be getting. I first heard of Palin on Friday.
Finally, judgment is actually the most important thing that I look for in a president, while the ability to step into office in a moments notice is what I look for in VP. I just don’t think she can do that successfully.
I am fully aware that I, too, am sniping on this issue out of frustration. I’m not impartial — far from it. I’m not so dense as to see that I am in a privileged position sitting at my MacBook, using my high speed wireless connection from the comfort of my air conditioned home to read and make comments that will not change how anyone votes.
That doesn’t make it any less a problem. So I, for one, am done.
“I’m a citizen of a different empire (Phil 1:27; 3:20) and therefore a foreigner in this one (Heb. 11:13; 1 Pet 1:17; 2:11). I’m only here as an ambassador and soldier sent to defend and advance the interests of my own homeland while being careful not to get too involved in civilian affairs (2 Cor 5:20; 2 Tim. 2:4)…”
That said, Sarah Palin is hardly the maverick reformer that the GOP has been painting. In fact, at one point John McCain called her millions of dollars in Federal ear marks to Wasilla “objectionable.”
Before Sarah Palin was against the “Bridge to Nowhere” she was for it. When it became obvious that it was a political liability, she switched sides. She even had a shirt made.
Interesting to see your comparisons on qualifications. However, let’s not forget Obama is running against McCain, who happens to be extremely qualified.
Now, what is it that Obama has accomplished that has earned your trust in his judgment?
Isn’t anyone worried that Obama has had a very close association with an un-repentent terrorist? In spite of him saying it was a casual “living in the neighborhood” thing, they had a very close relationship.
Obama accomplished a 100% rating the last three years from NARAL on his pro-abortion voting record. Not every candidate can claim that.
He was also the only one to vote against the Infant Born Alive Protection Act. I guess we can’t fairly consider that an accomplishment, as the act obviously passed after a nurse’s testimony of pulling a baby out of the trash and rocking it for 45 minutes until it died.
Thanks to Sarah Palin he will be defeated in November.
One of the things that really bothers me about Obama is I can’t figure out what the heck he was doing before he was a state senator. What is a community organizer? It seems he was doing lots of stuff, but I’m not sure what he really was. Can we just say he was a lawyer or was he really practicing law?
McCain’s pick of Palin didn’t really help me either. She seems like in 4-6 years she might make a great candidate but not today. She has been involved in state level or higher politics half as long as Obama. It just smacks of pandering to me and I think that was an awfully big decision to make on behalf of our nation with getting elected being the driving force.
I’ll probably end up voting for McCain because I think he has a better grasp on foreign policy. If you believe that McCain and Obama both represent the best of their respective parties (as I do) then you have to admit that McCain will be less likely to be influenced by the worst parts of his party.
I think this election has been one of the best as far as the candidates communicating their positions. I am glad for that. Just the same, I’ll be glad when it’s over.
Since his election to the Senate in 2005, Senator Obama has Sponsored or Co-Sponsored 639 Bills or Resolutions. Just run a simple query at the Library of Congress Bill Summary website.
And as an aside… Why are the Republicans lauding McCain for being a maverick? Don’t they realize he is mavericking(??) against them?? They hated him for it in 2000, and thus nominated W- but now they love him for it?
Stephen, that is a nice try saying he has sponsored or co-sponsored 639 bills. However, it doesn’t mean anything. How much legislation has he authored? What really significant foreign policy decisions has he made? Well, let’s see, he was against the surge in Iraq and said it was bound to fail. Tonight, he said the surge had “succeeded beyond our wildest dreams,” but yet would not admit he was wrong on the surge.
Palin told the truth about Obama’s tax plan just like Thompson did.
Obama’s willingness to raise the capital gains tax as high as it was under Clinton will hurt anyone who plans for retirement or will ever sell a house.
His willingness to raise taxes on businesses will only hurt those who buy food, clothes, or gas from a business (or any other product for that matter). Or get a paycheck from a business.
Stunned, I am stunned that you would simply say Palin lied about the bridge. Here is the truth from the Economist: “She may have become famous as the governor who finally killed the infamous “bridge to nowhere”—the $220m bridge to the sparsely inhabited island of Gravina, Alaska. But she was in favour of the bridge before she was against it (and told local residents that they weren’t “nowhere to her”).”
So, the fact is that she did kill the bridge to nowhere. It is a bit disingenuous to simply say she LIED.
Sorry if that’s mean. Wait! No, I’m a mean person, so I’m not sorry.
No problem, Jim. I recommend you read John Mark’s post so you’ll completely understand what it is that I think guys like “Stunned” would benefit from hearing.
Oh, I read it this morning. That’s why I was thanking you. However, my guess is that Stunned is a woman; do you know differently? I’m stumped about Stunned. Stunning, isn’t it?
Wow. It’s no wonder kids can’t get the ’sticks-and-stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me’ thing. Grown-ups can’t.
Well, I guess one option for Christians is to run away from this whole ugly political mess. Run away. Isolate. Read the aforementioned blog.
But somehow, I thought being “in it” but not “of it” was the whole point.
And, as a 44 year old, homeschooling, teeball coaching, parttime nurse and very real soccer mom…I admire people who serve. Public service. Remember when that’s what it was called?
I like Sarah Palin. I know people like her.
And I’m voting for her…because I think voting is a right and a responsibility that comes with being IN, but not necessarily OF, this country.
Kyle - Here’s a good post about community organizers, written by a friend of mine whose wife is one here in Boston. He’s peeved that Palin belittled organizing and suggested that serving as mayor of a 9,000 person town in Alaska is more difficult than the work Obama was doing in Chicago. I don’t know which is more difficult, but I know Palin was wrong to criticize organizing.
I’ve counted them up, and every Democratic and Republican talking point (Read: “smear tactic”) about both candidates has been used in these comments. Palin’s experience. Obama’s “ties” to terrorism. Biden’s blow-up to that New Hampshire reporter in the ’70s. And the list goes on.
What we have here is a group of folks who believe (and shamelessly regurgitate as their own idea) everything they hear on cable news, so long as it lines up with their political party.
Classy.
[Note: Did anyone besides Jim watch the Daily Show clip I posted above? A few months ago, Republicans were blasting potential Obama VP nominations for their lack of experience and executive history. Now, when the Dems raise the same questions about Palin, they're stupid and irrelevant. That's politics for ya. Can we really be complicit with this stuff? I mean, really??]
It appears many believe they know the number of days of John McCains life. Do you also now the number of hairs on his head?
Study, read, watch and analyze the candidates. Then pray that God will give you wisdom and discernment in your vote and, ultimately, in their leadership.
Mike had to buy more bandwidth just allow for all the mudslingin’ on a Christian forum. Let’s see - Palin lied, Obama has a terrorist buddy, Bush lacks judgement, but Bill CLinton apparently doesn’t, McCain could die any second of cancer, so let’s have Biden run with McCain.
I’m all for getting involved in our respective political processes, just not at the expense of our identity in Christ.
Have your convictions, vote your conscience — just, y’know, give others the benefit of the doubt that they’re doing the same even when their votes don’t match yours.
Christ divides the world as sheep and goats, not donkeys and elephants.
Steve said, “What we have here is a group of folks who believe (and shamelessly regurgitate as their own idea) everything they hear on cable news, so long as it lines up with their political party.”
Yeah, well Steve, I can certainly tell you’re not guilty of doing that with cable news. You apparently get your news from the Comedy Channel. It is good to be instructed in original thought by you. Thanks.
Hey Steve,
In hopes that I will get a snide comment in my direction by Jim or anyone else, I think the Daily Show is the best (only?) place where you can laugh while being well informed. And to the link of the campaign you can get behind, if Christians can’t get behind that, despite their political leanings, what in the world are we doing all of this for? Great stuff.
I wanted to say something to some of you who are so mortified by the political back and forth that goes on here. First of all, I think I am safe in saying that many of us who engage in this do it because we have a bit of fun with it. For instance, Steve Jr. and I have gone back and forth a few times, but I have a feeling he may chuckle out loud to himself as I do when he reads some of this and posts a response. I know he has a good sense of humor because one who didn’t would have never posted the Jon Stewart clip. While I think most of us are passionate about the things we talk about, we also enjoy testing each other in these little rhetorical romps. I don’t think (at least with me) it is nearly as personal and hateful as some of you may believe. I really try to make many of my posts a bit humorous, but I know that tone and intent do not carry over well in written form. Anyway, just wanted to let everyone here know that I don’t take this back and forth nearly as seriously as some who appear to be more apolitical do.
Are you kidding me, Steve? Of course, I watched the clip. I’ve forwarded it to half the free world! Stewart’s been amazing the past couple of weeks. And John Arnold makes my side hurt.
Good stuff as always, Quiara.
On the other subject, Mike, my friend Eddie White preaches for the South Baton Rouge C of C, and Gustav really nailed that town. That church, as well as many others of all flavors, are working overtime to get people taken care of. New Orleans get a lot of attention (for good reason), but BR and many other towns in that region need our prayers, too.
If you believe abortion is murder and you vote for a democrat it is the same as voting for a candidate who is pro pedophilia. So can one believe abortion is not murder? This is an honest question that I am struggling with. The same argument used against instrumental musical will not hold water.
I’m reminded why I don’t come to this blog as often anymore-comments.
Good thoughts, Steve Jr.
I’m amazed at how much misinformation and complete lies are being spread on here. (And yet, it’s masked as playful banter?) There seems to be a blatant disregard for the fact that Christians have a number of views on the value of life (and other issues) which place them all over the political spectrum.
I read people such as Shane Claiborn, and I know why he takes such an antagonistic approach to Christian involvement in politics. Many of us can’t handle the political discussion. We’re too blinded and biased by our own opinions and we terrorize our own flesh and blood over these worldly matters. If we as Christians can’t have a civil, honest discussion and instead we resort to talking points, party lines, manipulative discussions — THEN WE SHOULD RUN FAR FROM POLITICS.
If we can’t be civil, and we use snarky, condescending tones, assuming that our politheology can be wrapped into cutesy lines and phrases, then we should have no part in worldly politics. How does the world see a bunch of bickering Christians who are terrorizing each other? Instead, there’s a kingdom politics (our lives) — if we can’t do worldly politics right, we need to stick to the politics of the Kingdom of God, which is completely divorced of the U.S. political system.
Are you trying to be funny, Jim? I’m guessing so. But in your humor, you just blew off my entire point.
Congratulations! That’s exactly what I am speaking to. We can’t be open, civil, and honest. We can either blow someone off with humor or blast our misinformed views at each other.
An aside: If this were a private blog and everyone knew each other, I would have less problem with the attitudes and the style of “banter” (if it could even be called that) on here. But, this is a relatively well known blog, and people should be worried about how the passing reader sees this place.
Daniel, you come on here and start calling some of us (one of us?) terrorists because we are arguing politics. So, yeah, it was sort of hard to take you that seriously. And no, that time I was not trying to be funny. I really meant it when I said your post was snarky, condescending, and overblown.
Instead of just chastising everyone for disagreeing, why don’t you inform some of us who you believe are misinformed? Why don’t you point out what “complete lies” are being spread here?
Personally, I don’t think anyone here is spreading lies. I think some of us see the world and the facts in entirely different lights and, because of that, we disagree. And, in politics, do people sometimes selectively choose what facts to present. Absolutely, that’s just sort of the nature of the beast. Everybody tries to make the best case they can. Sometimes, as events shift, they get caught with their own rhetoric coming at them the other way. The video posted from Jon Stewart beautifully illustrated that and, even though it totally skewered some of the points I was trying to make, I could not help but laugh at it and tell Steve well done for posting it. It was extremely effective. Didn’t change my politics, but at least I can appreciate the humor and razor-sharp wit applied to those who argue from my point of view. It was very good.
As far as Shane Claiborne, I really don’t think he is as apolitical as he would have everyone think.
As that last, great Democrat, Harry Truman, once said . . . . .well, you know.
(For those who suffer from wit-deprivation, I would like to issue a disclaimer that Harry Truman was possibly not in actuality the last, great Democrat; there could be others and my last statement in no way reflects the views of the blog author or any others posting on this blog. All biases reserved.)
Cathy - you asked a great question. Maybe I shouldn’t go there. But I always like the idea of Christians listening, disagreeing, and agreeing to be united over the ultimate matters of allegiance. I imagine if Jim and I lived in the same town we’d be buddies — with the kind of friendship that can withstand some differences.
Jim - my response didn’t call out one person for a reason. I’m NOT getting into the political game here, and I sense that is what you’re trying to get me do to. I have my political beliefs, but I choose not to share them here today for the exact reason that this thread, and Mike’s follow-up thread: We’re too focused on one day every four years, that it destroys the work with do the other 1459 days per year.
And second, the fact that you equate the word terrorizing with being a terrorist and pretend to take great offense at it, while grammatically correct, floors me beyond belief. Terrorize, exacerbate, browbeat, bully, coerce, intimidate — you get the idea. You’ve terrorized my word choice. And that makes you a a person who terrorizes, otherwise known in the noun form as a “terrorist.” Would you have preferred I use bully or intimidate, because I will gladly use a different verb if it will help you distance yourself from an idealogical/political understanding of that offensive word? (I sincerely hope you’re trying to be funny and realize how immature it is to split these hairs. But if you’re being funny, I don’t find it funny.)
Daniel- “There seems to be a blatant disregard for the fact that Christians have a number of views on the value of life(and other issues) which place them all over the political spectrum.”
ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?! I don’t know of anyone, within our fellowship, that believes that there is more than ONE view on the value of life. If you know of any, I wish you would name just one. I cannot speak for those outside of our fellowship. This might be a good question to ask before we conform to their ways in the name of unity.
By the way, Palin does not hate community organizers. Though under different names, she has done similar work and she works with those of that ilk daily. Her comments were directed at the irony of the followers of a community organizer attacking her level of duties and achievements.
Troy - I’m referring to WHAT life we value. This issue doesn’t just cover abortion, which is what some feel the “right” has focused on. Many people on the “left” find themselves more concerned valuing life with issues of war, capital punishment, poverty, AIDS, and a whole host of other ideas. My point was, neither side has a monopoly on “the value of life.”
I know Christians on both sides of the aisle who don’t boil their beliefs down to one single issue. There are ways that BOTH parties value life, and there are ways that neither parties value life. Is that clear? If that is not clear, then I cannot continue in this discussion.
“And second, the fact that you equate the word terrorizing with being a terrorist and pretend to take great offense at it, while grammatically correct, floors me beyond belief.”
Pretend is the operative word here, Daniel. I am not offended; but I am amused that you are so worked up. Try not to spit on the keyboard when you type.
Yes, I am “worked up” because you’d rather spout misinformed attacks on people and then resort to smug humor to avoid addressing a reality and a problem. That disillusions me when people in the church do that. What bothers me is your attempt at humor and AMUSEMENT that I take offense, when I’m trying to discuss a serious issue. Is that Christ-like? Well done good and faithful servant.
But I apologize. I was wrong to post on “your” blog. I am sorry that you were the only one to take offense at my words. I did not mean to attack your hegemony here, and I will refrain from clicking the comment button and thinking that I can somehow contribute to a fruitful discussion on here.
Apparently, the world is more black and white than I thought. I am sorry for thinking life is full of gray areas and a need for discussion and compromise.
If you want have a real discussion, feel free to e-mail me at daniel2023[at]yahoo.com. But I’m not taking part in this banter.
Jesus, sure could have used that advice… Man did he get angry once. Flipped over the bunch of tables and threw people’s stuff around. I mean, what did those people ever do?
What does it mean if you co-sponsor a bill? I mean does it just mean your name was added?
I am not trying to be funny, but I would like to really know.
I know it bothered me to learn that a vote of present can be a real thing, yet it doesn’t mean anything other than you didn’t study up on what the vote was for, so that seems irresponsible.
The more I hear the more I question.
Daniel- Obviously you have recognized what an outrageous comment you made. Now instead of Christians, we are talking “right” and “left.” However, you are still a little confused on the facts. If you are honest, I think you’ll find that far less lives have been lost due to policies of the “right,” than those of the “left.” Do you have any idea how many children die of malaria each year thanks to the environmentalists worldwide ban on DDT? Has it ever occurred to you why we don’t have malaria in this country?
You left out assisted suicide on the list of the values of the “left.”
Now for the big question: What policies of the “left” have resulted in a reduction of lives lost? Surely, you can come up with several of these. I’ll settle for one good one.
Given the predominant, ideological demographics around here, qb wanted to avoid pointing to this route…
…but what the heck. Go to Drudge, then scroll down to Peggy Noonan in the center column.
*donning asbestos skivvies*
qb
P. S. No, really: qb wears Birkenstocks, prefers hoppy microbrews, is exclusively and in every way iMac, and is looking to replace his erstwhile Suburban with a Subaru Outback L. L. Bean edition (yes, with a bike rack, natch).
Adam Smith, you won’t get a straight answer. What it comes down to is the premise that somebody besides me will be taxed-somebody who makes more money. Sometimes we cut our noses off to spite our face.
Just like Obama responded on raising capital gains tax even though it would decrease revenue-”In the interest of fairness.”
Gee, I guess if Sarah Palin takes the oath of POTUS, all those male egos in the church could be taken down a notch!
I find it interesting that all those believers who ascribe to Complementarianism are backing her with such spiritual language and political zeal for the office she is aspiring to, with the potential of becoming our CIC. Yet these same believers would deny her a strong position of leadership in would this be a calling that is far greater in God’s kingdom.
When she and her hoard of Secret Service agents decide to descend upon a church for Sunday worship so she can preach that day, what then? Are the elders and deacons and James Dobsons of the world going to barricade the doors?
There’s hope for female bishops yet…
(‘Hot for Teacher’ is way off-base, preacherman … totally puerile and in poor taste.)
Steve Sr. would you mind elaborating? I cannot tell what disgusts you? Is it the idea because one has called a VP candidate “hot,” is it because one has seen hope for female bishops, is it because some have criticized Obama or because some have criticized McCain?
This blog may convert me to Calvinism because of the angry outbursts , scarcasm and unkind expressions. Passion for a view is one thing but to attack each other is another thing. It may take irresistible grace to reconvert some. Just kidding about converting to Calvinism. A way to say , we may need to back off and approach this in a more civil way. Have fun but not at the expense of hurting someone. We can agree and disagree and still be gentlle and kind with each other. As far as Sarah Palin coming to church to preach, no use in barricading the doors. When it comes to leadership in in the worship assemblies , the men should do the preaching. She will have plenty of opportunities to speak on political issues. It was a mark of genius to select her.
Jim and others are right and obviously the most well-informed people on this blog. Obama is clearly a do-nothing. Yep. Way to go, Jim and friends, on being well-informed truth-tellers. Other people are clearly not taking seriously their responsibility to know what’s going on. Just look at how much nothing Obama has done… Absolutely nothing a Christian favoring ethical government, supporting the poor, or looking for justice could get behind:
Obama helped pass the 2007 Ethics Reform Law, which curbed the influence of lobbyists and was described as the “most sweeping since Watergate.” In the first week of the 110th Congress, Obama joined with Senator Feingold to introduce a “Gold Standard” ethics package. Many of the Obama/Feingold bill’s most important provisions were included in the final ethics reform package passed by the Senate in late January: a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists including those paid by the firms that employ lobbyists; an end to subsidized travelon corporate jets; full disclosure of who’s sponsoring earmarks and for what purpose; additional restrictions to close the revolving door between public service and lobbying to ensure that public service isn’t all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job; and requiring lobbyists to disclose the contributions that they “bundle” - that is, collect or arrange - for members of Congress, candidates, and party committees. In January 2007, the Washington Post wrote in an editorial that “…Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package.” In September 2007, the AP reported, “President Bush signed a bill Friday that will require lawmakers to disclose more about their efforts to fund pet projects and raise money from lobbyists, a measure that backers call the biggest ethics reform in decades… Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. who had pushed for the bundling provisions and was one of four lawmakers who participated in a Democratic conference call to reporters said the measure marks “the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.” [S. 230, 110thCongress; S.1, Became Public Law 109-110-81, 9/14/07; AP, 9/15/07;TheWashington Post, Editorial, 1/21/07]
Obama passed the Illinois State Gift Ban Act. In 1998, Obama passed the Illinois Gift Ban that prohibited legislators, state officers and employees, and judges from soliciting or receiving gifts from a person or entity with interests affected by government. The Chicago Tribune wrote, “Gov. Jim Edgar signed into law Wednesday an ethics and campaign finance package heralded as the most sweeping good-government legislation in decades.” The law also required greater campaign finance disclosure and limited the uses for which raised money could be spent. Obama said, “I have seen a general cynicism from taxpayers about government. They believe they have no influence on the process since they don’t have the money of special interest groups. With the gift ban and the ban on Springfield fund-raisers that are contained in this legislation, I think at least some of this confidence will be restored.” [HB672, 3R P 52-4-1, 5/22/98; PA90-0737, 8/12/98; Chicago Tribune, 8/13/98; Chicago Independent Bulletin, 6/4/98]
The Illinois Ethics Bill was also a product of bipartisan work. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote of Obama’s bill, “The ethics restrictions would be the most far-reaching since the Watergate-era campaign financial disclosure law. They are the product of months of negotiations among two lawmakers of each party, other state officials and Mike Lawrence. He is an aide toformer Sen. Paul Simon, a Democrat, and used to be an aide to Edgar, a Republican.” [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 5/24/98]
Obama and Lugar passed a law boosting U.S. efforts to keep WMDs and other dangerous weapons out of the hands of terrorists. In 2006,Obama and Lugar introduced The Cooperative Proliferation DetectionAct, which was passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee unanimously on May 26, 2006 and was eventually incorporated into the Department of State Authorities Act of 2006 and signed into law onJanuary 11, 2007. According to a Senate Foreign Relations Committee report on its legislative activity in the 109th Congress, “The committee passed S. 2566, The Cooperative Proliferation Detection,Interdiction Assistance, and Conventional Threat Reduction Act of 2006 by unanimous consent on May 26, 2006. The legislation authored by Chairman Lugar and Senator Obama enhances: (1) U.S. cooperation with foreign governments to destroy conventional weapons stockpiles aroundthe world; and (2) the United States’ ability to provide assistance to foreign governments aimed at helping them detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction. The legislation, which garnered 26 co-sponsors (including 8 committee members), sought to energize U.S. programs to secure lightweight anti-aircraft missiles… The initiative was modeled after the Nunn-Lugar program that focuses on weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union. The legislation was signed into law on January 11, 2007, as a part of H.R. 6060, the Department of State Authorities Act of 2006.” [P.L. 109-472, 1/11/07;House Report 109-706, 9/3/06; S. 2566, 109th Congress; S.1949, 109th Congress; Senate Report 110-40, 3/29/07]
“Republican Sen. Dick Lugar (IN) today said an Obama campaign ad which features him is ‘accurate.’ The ad makes the point the Obama previously ‘reached out’ to Lugar to ‘help lock down loose nuclear weapons.’ Lugar is widely considered one of the most knowledgeable in the area of nuclear weapons proliferation and the coauthored of the 1991 Nunn-Lugar Act on cooperative threat reduction. ‘He did’ reach out, Lugar said. He explained that in 2005, Obama asked if he could join Lugar on a trip to Russia and other countries to visit sites under the Nunn-Lugar program. ‘After that, we had legislation that we cosponsored together which passed’ dealing with dangerous missiles.‘So I am pleased we had that opportunity to work together,’ Lugar said. ‘I’m pleased we had the association Sen. Obama describes.’ But Lugar made clear up front that while the ad was accurate, and he’s comfortable with the association, ‘There is no chance I will consider running with Barack Obama.’” [MSNBC, 7/15/08]
Obama and Coburn passed a bill creating a “Google-like” database for the public to search details about federal funding awards. In 2006,Obama and Coburn co-authored a bill to create a “Google-like” database of information on federal spending. The bill requires the OMB by January 1, 2008, to make available to the public a searchable, free website that includes the (1) amount; (2) transaction type; (3)funding agency; (4) North American Industry Classification System code or Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number; (5) program source; (6) an award title descriptive of the purpose of each funding action; (7) the name and location of the recipient and the primary location of performance; and (8) a unique identifier of the recipient and any parent entity. The site must allow users to conduct separate searches that distinguish between awards that are grants, sub-grants,loans, cooperative agreements, and other forms of financial assistance and awards that are contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, task orders, and delivery orders. [S. 2590, Passed by Unanimous Consent,9/7/06; Became PL 109-282, 9/26/06]
Obama sponsored a law ensuring that wounded veterans recovering In military hospitals do not have to pay for their meals or phone calls to family members. In 2005, Obama sponsored and passed an amendment to the 2005 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act ensuring that wounded veterans recovering in military hospitals do not have to pay for their own meals or phone calls to family members. The amendment was then passed in each of the following Congresses. Prior to passage of the amendment, service members receiving physical therapy or rehabilitation services in a medical hospital for more than 90 days were required to pay for their meals. Obama’s amendment required the military to provide free meals for service members in military hospitals undergoing recuperation or therapy as a result of wounds sustained in Iraq or Afghanistan. The amendment was retroactive to January 1, 2005 in an effort to provide those injured service members who received bills for their meals with some relief from those costs. The amendment became law. [S. Amdt. 390, Passed by unanimous consent,4/14/05 to H.R.1268, Signed by the President, 5/11/05, Became PublicLaw No: 109-013; Obama Press Release, 5/11/05]
Obama’s proposals providing improvements in health care for recovering soldiers were passed into law, including requirements for post-deployment mental-health screenings and a national study on the needs of Iraq War veterans. H.R. 976, passed by the Senate on August 2, 2007,includes several provisions from bills originally sponsored by Senators Obama and McCaskill. The provisions would improve healthcare services and health care tracking for service members, and would require post-deployment, face-to-face mental health screenings for returning service members within 30 days. The bill also adopts other Obama-McCaskill legislation, the HERO Act, which would launch a major national research endeavor into the readjustment needs of returning service members, veterans and their families. The bill also included measures to improve and reform the disability rating process. [Vote307, H.R. 976, Passed, 68-31, 8/2/07; S. 713, 110th Congress; S. 1271,110th Congress; Obama Press Release, 7/25/07; H.R. 4986, Became PublicLaw No: 110-181, 1/28/08]
Obama worked with Republicans to pass legislation, which became law, improving and increasing services for homeless veterans. In 2006,Congress passed a Veterans Affairs Committee bill which included several provisions originating in Obama’s SAVE Act (S. 1180) and Homes for Heroes Act (S. 3475). “The legislation…includes a number of proposals from legislation Senator Obama had previously introduced (S.1180, the SAVE Act and S.3475 the Homes for Heroes Act) to expand and improve services for homeless veterans. The bill permanently authorizes and increases funding to $130 million per year for a competitive grant program to provide homeless services to veterans. It greatly increases a successful program to provide rental vouchers to homeless veterans. The legislation extends programs to provide treatment for veterans with mental illnesses and other special needs. And it permanently extends the VA’s ability to transfer property it owns to homeless shelters.” Obama worked with VA Committee Republicans Craig and Burr on the committee legislation that eventually became law. [S. 3421/P.L. 109-461; S. 1180, 109th Congress; S. 3475, 109thCongress; Obama Press Release, 6/26/06]
Obama passed bipartisan legislation that expanded healthcare coverage to 154,000 residents, Including 70,000 children. As a state senator, Barack Obama sponsored and helped pass legislation that expanded and made permanent Illinois’ KidCare program by raising eligibility from 185% to 200% of the federal poverty level. The legislation provided coverage for an additional 20,000 children and 65,000 more Illinois adults in the first year, and by 2007 had expanded health care to 70,000 kids and 84,000 adults. In its endorsement for his Senate race, the State Jour
Do we really need any further proof that Sally Quinn understands Martians better than she understands evangelicals?
How ironic that the Democratic Party and their supportive media now have a real problem with fornication amongst teenagers. Where have ya been all these years? Of course, had Bristol Palin been a teenage boy who had announced he was running off to Massachusetts to marry his boyfriend, the left would be holding such a one up as an enlightened, progressive role-model for all kiddos.
The left’s moral dizziness is nauseating.
I read Sally Quinn’s article and was reminded again why I am not a democrat. Jim, excellent point!!!
Jim -
Name one way the Democratic Party has expressed a “real problem” with fornication amongst teenagers in the case of Sarah Palin.
I’m growing weary of how people like Jim and rc don’t understand what many of us are saying. Listen carefully.
We don’t think Gov. Palin is unqualified because her teenage daughter is unmarried and pregnant. Nor do we think she’s unqualified because her youngest of five children is four months old and is mentally handicapped.
We find it incredible to hear the hypocrisy from the right on this. Can you even imagine the attacks coming from James Dobson and others if this was a Democratic candidate?
Can you begin to imagine the outright disgust that would be leveled because she was willing to be vice president or even president with a four month old who had Down Syndrome? Can you imagine the “told you so lectures” about the Democrats who promote teen pregnancy?
She had the baby and didn’t have an abortion. That’s wonderful. So would nearly everyone I know — Republican or Democrat. What sets some Democrats and some Republicans apart on this issue is that they believe families should make the decision — not the government.
We don’t think Palin is unqualified for these reasons, though if you knew your teenage daughter was pregnant out of wedlock, why would you take this job knowing that she would be on the front page of every paper in the world?
But the reason we think she’s unqualified is that she has no experience. (We disagree with similar claims about Obama. But it’s certainly a fair question for others to ask!) She was elected by just over 100,000 to be governor and has served just over a year.
When you’re #2 on a ticket with an elderly man who’s had serious cancer four times, you really need to be able to step into the presidency immediately.
We don’t think she’s qualified to do that — amazing woman though she seems to be.
Perhaps I should add that before this choice my vote was still up for grabs.
I might have voted for John McCain. Not because he’s a great American hero.
“Hero” has to do with how you respond to what unfolds in your life.
Barack Obama is a hero. Despite have so many odds against him, he kept pressing forward with courage. He decided not to cash in his Harvard law degree for the big bucks but chose instead to assist those who are disadvantaged. He’s been a faithful husband and father.
Sarah Palin is a hero. She gave life to this child and has been a good mom and a voice for reform as mayor and for a short while as governor.
Joe Biden is definitely a hero. Rather than let utter tragedy bring him down, he kept going, taking a long trainride home every night to be with his children.
In other words, “great American hero” didn’t draw me to McCain. Heroes are all around me. Most haven’t been in an enemy camp, but most of the “heroes” I know would respond the same way, I’m convinced (judging from the courage and faithfulness I see where they are).
What drew me to him was his experience and his willingness to buck both parties.
So this choice was incredibly important to me. Leiberman? Romney? Both would be defendable.
But I refuse to support a 72-year-old man who’s had serious bouts with cancer who chooses a person who is completely, completely inexperienced to lead this great country.
It’s all about perspective. Fact: Hypocrisy lives on both sides of the aisle. You just have to decide which platform you beliefs fit closest with your beliefs do the best you can with what you are given to work with.
I’m thinking we have a lot of work with now with Palin. Saw one quote of “Reagan in a skirt”.
Funny, we have an election that has broken the back of claims that women and blacks CAN’T succeed. Yet folks still complain. Amazing.
Steve Jr., Democrats and their operatives have suggested if she “can’t manage her own children, how can she manage the country.” Have you had your head buried in the sand the last couple of days. Democratic operatives have been throwing everything at this woman the last couple of days, so don’t even pretend to act like they haven’t suggested, or outright stated, their misgivings about the teenage pregnancy.
Just Wondering, why don’t you try listening carefully to me. If you are so concerned about experience, you really need to check the top of your own ticket. That was laid bare last night. Obama is a celebrity who, as Hillary Clinton said, made a speech four years ago. He hasn’t been a real part of any major legislation, indeed, he has spent his entire Senate career (less than four years) running for President. He apparently has been a community organizer who was somewhat less successful at it than Al Sharpton since no one had ever heard of Obama while he was in that position.
As to the hypocrisy charge, here is the difference: It isn’t that the Republicans think it is great a teenage girl and her boyfriend have found themselves expecting a child. Indeed, Palin referred to it as a problem. Here is the real distinction between the left and the religious right on these matters: The religious right acknowledges sexual sin, but yet also believes in redemption. The left, rather than acknowledge any sexual sin, tries to portray each and every one of them as a virtue — hence the sarcastic remark about a boy running off to Massachusetts to marry is boyfriend. That is the sort of thing that the left-wing finds enlightening and gets them fired up.
You also said, “She had the baby and didn’t have an abortion. That’s wonderful.” I’m curious, why do you think that is wonderful?
“Perhaps I should add that before this choice my vote was still up for grabs.”
“But I refuse to support a 72-year-old man who’s had serious bouts with cancer who chooses a person who is completely, completely inexperienced to lead this great country.”
And yet, you seem to be perfectly willing to vote for a man who is “completely, completely inexperienced to lead this great country.”
No wonder your moniker — you leave me just wondering as well.
Prayers up for LA from SE Texas - we felt very fortunate with Gustav, but also know someone took the brunt.
K - good points. The most disappointing pick in my lifetime for VP was Barack’s choice of an entrenched politician who is best known for being a Plagiarist. McCain’s choice, as is to be expected, is vilified by the extremist Left like Ms. Quinn. I remain an undecided voter who felt: a) Hillary got a raw deal; b) Barack has terrible and egotistical advisors for not picking Hillary; c) This will be a tight race that will reflect a lot of bickering - shocking as that is.
This is politics as usual but one thing that does catch my eye is that she can field dress a moose, fry it up in a pan, and never ever let her husband forget he’s a man.
In praying for Gustav victims, please remember that Haiti and Cuba were NOT spared by this storm. Damage is major in countries that don’t have the resources that we do to rebuild.
Jim -
You just couldn’t be more wrong.
I and everyone I know who is moderate-to-left believe in sexual sin and in redemption. Are there those who don’t? Yes — on both sides of the aisle.
Still trying to imagine the response from the right if Obama had selected someone whose teenage daughter was pregnant and who had a four month old with Down Syndrome.
Why did I say, “That’s wonderful?” Because I’m again abortion. But like most Americans, I don’t want the government to make this call for everyone.
Before we all get too fired up I would suggest that we all read John Mark Hicks blog. Politics from either side is not going to be the answer to the problems of this world.
Sorry, but Sally Quinn is completely off base. She has no idea what she’s talking about.
To quote one of my favorite columnists:
“They claimed Palin was chosen only because she’s a woman. In fact, Palin was chosen because she’s pro-life, pro-gun, pro-drilling and pro-tax cuts. She’s fought both Republicans and Democrats on public corruption and does not have hair plugs like some other vice presidential candidate I could mention. In other words, she’s a “Republican.”
As for experience, well sorry, but Obama just doesn’t measure up. He has spent 143 working days in the Senate. And what did he spend those 143 days doing? Running for President.
Here are a few more quotes:
“Barack Obama has never led anything. Nothing. Nada.” — Rudy Giuliani
“I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities.” — Governor Sarah Palin
Yes, this will be an interesting election…..
One more thing…..
I absolutely Love this quote from Kathleen Parker:
“…what’s perfectly clear is that feminism today is not about advancing women, but only a certain kind of woman.”
Kathleen Parker: ‘Should Palin and McCain prevail come November, feminism can curtsy and treat herself to a hard-earned vacation. The greatest achievement of feminism won’t be that a woman reached the vice presidency, but that a woman no longer needed feminists to get there.
This statement might very well help explain the Democrats’ tizzy - or as my grandmother would have said, ‘having a hissy fit” about Gov. Palin. If they would take a moment to look around, there are many high profile women in the situation of juggling marriage, children and spotlight jobs. Case in point: Rep. Michelle Bachman of MN. She and her husband have been married over 30 years, also have 5 children and have also found the time to foster parent 23 kids badly in need of loving nurturing. All this fuss and bother about a bright, successful politician, wife and mother is so silly.
The “Oh! Whatever will we do if McCain is unable to continue his term, we’d have a totally unprepared substitute?” crowd seems to have no trepidation with the head of their ticket being even more untried and, if elected, will step into the Presidency totally untried. [shaking head in amazement] Yes, he sat in a seat in both the Illinois and Washington Senates, but voted “present” about 90% of the time. Prepared? I would think not.
Sen. Obama himself has declared that we need a shift from Washington rippling out, to outside Washington coming in. Gov. Palin seems to fit his desire to a tee. imho.
I’m enjoying the fresh air of an Alaskan north wind breathing life into this election cycle!
Just Wondering — please tell us why you are against abortion.
Mike, also forgot to include that all the prayer groups I belong to have been praying for the Gulf coast states, now the Atlantic coastal states, and for the Caribbean countries affected by these storms. I, in particular are praying for the tiny Lesser Antilles since my grandson, Scott, is sufficiently recovered from the head injury last August to be in Dominic, in med. school. Prayers are definitely coveted for all these areas and for Scott and fellow students. Bless y’all and TIA.
I are praying??? LOL Should read:
“I, in particular and with these groups, am praying for the tiney Lesser Antilles …”
Nervous grandma, I suppose is the reason for the gaff. 
I give up!! Grrrr
tiney?? NO, tiny Lesser Antilles. Wow!
*swoon*
qb
Mike - Thanks for passing along the prayer invitation regarding those of us in Louisiana!
KentF - Thanks for your prayers and heart of encouragement!
Tim - Thanks for the perspective check regarding Haiti and Cuba. Despite any of our hardships, our lives are always full of blessings and others are always suffering in ways we can’t imagine. I needed that today!
Baron - Thanks for evidence that the right believes in redemption. Way to a reduce a man to his worst moments. Yes, you can google “Biden, plagiarism” and “McCain, adultery” and find out that “mistakes were made.” But let’s not reduce either to their worst moments. Both have served this country well — even if you don’t agree with their political viewpoints.
I want to respectfully disagree with Just Wonderin’ in his or her statement about abortion (because it’s the same argument I’ve heard from many “Pro-Choice” Christians).
The argument is: “I’m against abortion. But like most Americans, I don’t want the government to make this call for everyone.”
That’s EXACTLY the same as saying, “I’m against men having sex with 12-year-olds, but I don’t want the government to make this call for everyone.”
Either abortion is the murder of a human being or it’s not. If it is, then it must be made illegal and stopped. If it’s not, then it must be unlimited and unrestricted.
Remember, back in the 1800s, a lot of people were “Pro-Choice” regarding slavery — they were personally against slavery, but didn’t think the government should make that call for everyone.
Or like Bill Clinton says about abortion — they thought slavery should be safe, legal, and rare.
Politics and Culture — that is exactly why I have asked Just Wonderin’ to tell us why he is against abortion. He cannot have it both ways — he cannot say he is against abortion and thinks it is “wonderful” that Sarah Palin gave birth to a Downs Syndrome baby and then say he wants government to have no role in the protection of human life. It is a silly, self-contradictory position to take.
I’m still waiting for him to tell us why he is against abortion.
I’m supporting John McCain for president just like I did in the 2000 primary. I support him because he seems more committed to the United States than to the Republican party. He’s a moderate - not from either extreme. I like Palin for the same reasons.
I admire Obama for the way he has handled himself with dignity during the campaign. His record indicates that he is more interested in supporting his party than his country though. Look at his VP choice - someone with some major integrity issues.
Those arguments are vacuous. Here’s a response:
1. If the Right really, really wants to do away with abortion, then why didn’t it while Republicans controlled the presidency, both houses, and the Supreme Court? It makes a better “red-meat” issue — along with school prayer, flag, and guns.
2. The overwhelming majority of Americans agree that rape is wrong — statutory or otherwise. But they are all over the map about abortion: all abortion is wrong; abortion is always wrong but sometimes necessary for certain reasons (rape, life of mother, incest, etc.); abortion is a tragedy that should be outlawed; abortion is a tragedy that should be eliminated by addressing poverty, ignorance, and lack of opportunities, etc. And that’s not to even begin to address those who aren’t even sure if abortion is taking a life. The Bible doesn’t address this. Though it speaks clearly about many things, it doesn’t say when life begins. (Having said that, I believe that life begins at conception.) How can a law be passed and enforced with the kind of disagreements there are? Can such a law really be passed when polls show that a very slight majority of Americans think that abortion is always wrong, but a much larger majority are against the reversal of Roe v. Wade?
3. Those who are older tell us that when abortion was illegal, the wealthy girls still had their abortions in safe clinics — just not here. Those who weren’t wealthy had theirs in dangerous back alleys.
I thought that was Tina Fey at the RNC.
OK, you HAVE to watch this “Daily Show” clip from a few days ago. As he often does, Jon Stewart highlights — in an extremely hilarious way — the inconsistencies and hypocrisies that prevail in the political world. In this case, these inconsistencies and political ploys involve the conservatives and Sarah Palin. Please, please give this a look.
Link Here
I especially love Karl Rove’s comments, and then Palin’s own comments at the end. Don’t you think politicians slept better at night before the days of video tape?
My apologies in advance for Stewart’s use of the word “testicles.” =)
Oops, you made a mistake Steve Jr.
You said, “Jon Stewart highlights — in an extremely hilarious way — the inconsistencies and hypocrisies that prevail in the political world.”
That should have read, “Jon Stewart highlights the inconsistencies and hypocrisies that prevail (according to him) in the Conservative political world.”
Oh, and Jon Stewart is a dick. My apologies in advance for my use of the word “dick.” =)
Happy! Are you a liberal elitist?
Steve, I’ve got to tip my hat to you on that clip. Wickedly funny and very revealing. Partisanship can shift the principles of us all if we are not careful. That cut through like a razor as much as I hate to admit it.
Here’s another clip — listen to about the last minute.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8zXi90EVeg&feature=related
There are Christians on the “right” of the divide and Christians on the “left.” There are issues beyond gay marriage and abortion. And I really don’t think flinging mud in the faces of our brothers and sisters due to a difference in balloting is at all God-honoring.
In fact, I really don’t think God is as concerned with who we, as the minority of people in the world (Christians and temporary citizens of the US) vote for so much as he is concerned what we’re as his people and citizens of his kingdom are doing for and about those who don’t have the luxury of sniping at one another online, people who are too busy trying, against all odds, to continue to live.
God forgive us our partisan and myopic spirits and help us to remember where our real citizenship lies.
“as he is concerned what we’re as his people and citizens of his kingdom are doing for and about those who don’t have the luxury of sniping at one another online, people who are too busy trying, against all odds, to continue to live.”
Well, Quiara, I do think God is concerned about how we vote as well as being concerned about all decisions we make. But, as you said from your own snipe above, it is a luxury to be able to be online sniping at one another. At least I am not so myopic as to be unaware I am engaged in sniping. You, on the other hand . . . . .
My concern with the Palin choice is that she is not qualified to be president on a moment’s notice. Period.
To me that is the key thing you want in a VP. People may not like Biden or his politics, but who really thinks he wouldn’t be able to step into that job if something happened to Obama?
It just boggles my mind that McCain picked Palin, what about Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Elizbeth Dole?
And yes, Obama is not as quaified as other presidential candidates in the past, but he has been in the intense media spotlight for about 18 months, and so far 18 million Americans have voted for him, and many millions who voted for Hillary are happy to cast their vote for him now. How many millions of Americans first heard Palin’s name on Friday?
Amanda,
Being in the intense media spotlight and getting millions of people to vote for you does not qualify you to be President.
Leadership experience does.
Governor Palin has leadership experience. Senator Obama does not.
JM
I think you and I will just have to disagree about that.
I would feel a lot better about her if she had been governor for longer than 1 1/2 years.
And Obama also has served in his state Senate, as well as a partial term in the U.S. Senate. My point about the spotlight is that I think we know what we are getting in Obama (now whther we like what we are getting is a different matter), we only have 60 days to find out all we can about Palin before the election, and clearly 18 million plus people feel ok enough with Obama’s level of experience to vote for him for president.
Amanda,
Actually, qualification is the key thing you want in a President. 18 months in the media spotlight is far from qualification.
Clint I’m just an elitist
C-
Actually for me judgement is the number one thing I look for in a presidential candidate, second is if they care about the same things I do.
President Bush certainly had experience as governor, but I never voted for him because I felt he lacked judgment.
Goodness Amanda, open your eyes! Obama has barely kept a seat warm in the Senate because he has been too busy running for the Presidency. The celebrity craze in all of this is very revealing in that, as Palin said, he is a man who has written two memoirs, but no significant legislation. It strains credulity that you seem to be so attuned to any inexperience on Palin’s part, but are unable to see a greater inexperience on Obama’s part.
Hillary was right. Obama gave a speech four years ago. That’s about it.
Jim-
I just don’t consider them to be equally unqualified. I consider him to be more qualified, while conceeding that he is not as qualified as past candidats.
Secondly, I have known about him since 1994, and have learned a lot about him in 18 months. I am confident that I know what I’ll be getting. I first heard of Palin on Friday.
Finally, judgment is actually the most important thing that I look for in a president, while the ability to step into office in a moments notice is what I look for in VP. I just don’t think she can do that successfully.
You have known Obama since 1994? Really? Or is that a typo?
Jim-
Oh Sorry I meant 2004.
Jim,
I am fully aware that I, too, am sniping on this issue out of frustration. I’m not impartial — far from it. I’m not so dense as to see that I am in a privileged position sitting at my MacBook, using my high speed wireless connection from the comfort of my air conditioned home to read and make comments that will not change how anyone votes.
That doesn’t make it any less a problem. So I, for one, am done.
When you start getting decades mixed up, it means you’re getting really old. I started doing that in the eighties, no wait, maybe it was the nineties.
Quiara — well, no wonder you’re snippy. You’re using a Mac.
Jim-
I so did not need to hear that! I am turning 30 in 22 days! I do not need to already be forgetting stuff!
Enough of this political talk, I’m off to cook dinner!
I’d vote for John McCain if he weren’t a Muslim.
And, allow me first to steal from Greg Boyd:
“I’m a citizen of a different empire (Phil 1:27; 3:20) and therefore a foreigner in this one (Heb. 11:13; 1 Pet 1:17; 2:11). I’m only here as an ambassador and soldier sent to defend and advance the interests of my own homeland while being careful not to get too involved in civilian affairs (2 Cor 5:20; 2 Tim. 2:4)…”
That said, Sarah Palin is hardly the maverick reformer that the GOP has been painting. In fact, at one point John McCain called her millions of dollars in Federal ear marks to Wasilla “objectionable.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,6145252.story
Before Sarah Palin was against the “Bridge to Nowhere” she was for it. When it became obvious that it was a political liability, she switched sides. She even had a shirt made.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/managed-images/liar.jpg
The sad truth is (ask Karl Rove) she was purely a political move that has been exposed as a fraud.
Oh, and John McCain is a Muslim.
Amanda,
Interesting to see your comparisons on qualifications. However, let’s not forget Obama is running against McCain, who happens to be extremely qualified.
Now, what is it that Obama has accomplished that has earned your trust in his judgment?
Isn’t anyone worried that Obama has had a very close association with an un-repentent terrorist? In spite of him saying it was a casual “living in the neighborhood” thing, they had a very close relationship.
Obama accomplished a 100% rating the last three years from NARAL on his pro-abortion voting record. Not every candidate can claim that.
He was also the only one to vote against the Infant Born Alive Protection Act. I guess we can’t fairly consider that an accomplishment, as the act obviously passed after a nurse’s testimony of pulling a baby out of the trash and rocking it for 45 minutes until it died.
Thanks to Sarah Palin he will be defeated in November.
I consider myself somewhat undecided right now.
One of the things that really bothers me about Obama is I can’t figure out what the heck he was doing before he was a state senator. What is a community organizer? It seems he was doing lots of stuff, but I’m not sure what he really was. Can we just say he was a lawyer or was he really practicing law?
McCain’s pick of Palin didn’t really help me either. She seems like in 4-6 years she might make a great candidate but not today. She has been involved in state level or higher politics half as long as Obama. It just smacks of pandering to me and I think that was an awfully big decision to make on behalf of our nation with getting elected being the driving force.
I’ll probably end up voting for McCain because I think he has a better grasp on foreign policy. If you believe that McCain and Obama both represent the best of their respective parties (as I do) then you have to admit that McCain will be less likely to be influenced by the worst parts of his party.
I think this election has been one of the best as far as the candidates communicating their positions. I am glad for that. Just the same, I’ll be glad when it’s over.
C,
Since his election to the Senate in 2005, Senator Obama has Sponsored or Co-Sponsored 639 Bills or Resolutions. Just run a simple query at the Library of Congress Bill Summary website.
And as an aside… Why are the Republicans lauding McCain for being a maverick? Don’t they realize he is mavericking(??) against them?? They hated him for it in 2000, and thus nominated W- but now they love him for it?
That is dizzying.
Stephen, that is a nice try saying he has sponsored or co-sponsored 639 bills. However, it doesn’t mean anything. How much legislation has he authored? What really significant foreign policy decisions has he made? Well, let’s see, he was against the surge in Iraq and said it was bound to fail. Tonight, he said the surge had “succeeded beyond our wildest dreams,” but yet would not admit he was wrong on the surge.
That is what is dizzying.
This is really nasty.
Jim - Are you really just a mean person?
For the record, no one has mentioned that Sarah Palin LIED in her speech about both the Alaska bridge and Obama’s tax plan.
Palin told the truth about Obama’s tax plan just like Thompson did.
Obama’s willingness to raise the capital gains tax as high as it was under Clinton will hurt anyone who plans for retirement or will ever sell a house.
His willingness to raise taxes on businesses will only hurt those who buy food, clothes, or gas from a business (or any other product for that matter). Or get a paycheck from a business.
Yes, Stunned, I am just a mean person. Probably the focus of evil in the modern world.
Sheesh!
Stunned, I am stunned that you would simply say Palin lied about the bridge. Here is the truth from the Economist: “She may have become famous as the governor who finally killed the infamous “bridge to nowhere”—the $220m bridge to the sparsely inhabited island of Gravina, Alaska. But she was in favour of the bridge before she was against it (and told local residents that they weren’t “nowhere to her”).”
So, the fact is that she did kill the bridge to nowhere. It is a bit disingenuous to simply say she LIED.
Sorry if that’s mean. Wait! No, I’m a mean person, so I’m not sorry.
Lord, have mercy.
Thought I’d echo Richard Corum and pass along the much-needed URL for John Mark Hicks’ recent blog post:
http://johnmarkhicks.wordpress.com/2008/09/04/obama-palin-and-the-2008-election/
Matt, thanks for posting this. I too was greatly offended, as you obviously were, by Stunned calling me mean. Thank you for defending me.
No problem, Jim. I recommend you read John Mark’s post so you’ll completely understand what it is that I think guys like “Stunned” would benefit from hearing.
Oh, I read it this morning. That’s why I was thanking you. However, my guess is that Stunned is a woman; do you know differently? I’m stumped about Stunned. Stunning, isn’t it?
Wow. It’s no wonder kids can’t get the ’sticks-and-stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me’ thing. Grown-ups can’t.
Well, I guess one option for Christians is to run away from this whole ugly political mess. Run away. Isolate. Read the aforementioned blog.
But somehow, I thought being “in it” but not “of it” was the whole point.
And, as a 44 year old, homeschooling, teeball coaching, parttime nurse and very real soccer mom…I admire people who serve. Public service. Remember when that’s what it was called?
I like Sarah Palin. I know people like her.
And I’m voting for her…because I think voting is a right and a responsibility that comes with being IN, but not necessarily OF, this country.
CJ
As long as you don’t call “public servants” community organizers you’re okay. Sarah Palin HATES community organizers.
Love,
A Community Organizer
Ooops, I mean ….
Love,
A Public Servant
Kyle - Here’s a good post about community organizers, written by a friend of mine whose wife is one here in Boston. He’s peeved that Palin belittled organizing and suggested that serving as mayor of a 9,000 person town in Alaska is more difficult than the work Obama was doing in Chicago. I don’t know which is more difficult, but I know Palin was wrong to criticize organizing.
Link.
I’ve counted them up, and every Democratic and Republican talking point (Read: “smear tactic”) about both candidates has been used in these comments. Palin’s experience. Obama’s “ties” to terrorism. Biden’s blow-up to that New Hampshire reporter in the ’70s. And the list goes on.
What we have here is a group of folks who believe (and shamelessly regurgitate as their own idea) everything they hear on cable news, so long as it lines up with their political party.
Classy.
[Note: Did anyone besides Jim watch the Daily Show clip I posted above? A few months ago, Republicans were blasting potential Obama VP nominations for their lack of experience and executive history. Now, when the Dems raise the same questions about Palin, they're stupid and irrelevant. That's politics for ya. Can we really be complicit with this stuff? I mean, really??]
End Rant.
Mike,
Why do you post what is bound to become so ugly?
It appears many believe they know the number of days of John McCains life. Do you also now the number of hairs on his head?
Study, read, watch and analyze the candidates. Then pray that God will give you wisdom and discernment in your vote and, ultimately, in their leadership.
Mike had to buy more bandwidth just allow for all the mudslingin’ on a Christian forum. Let’s see - Palin lied, Obama has a terrorist buddy, Bush lacks judgement, but Bill CLinton apparently doesn’t, McCain could die any second of cancer, so let’s have Biden run with McCain.
Please continue with the hilarity.
Here’s a campaign I can get behind.
Sorry: Link.
I’m all for getting involved in our respective political processes, just not at the expense of our identity in Christ.
Have your convictions, vote your conscience — just, y’know, give others the benefit of the doubt that they’re doing the same even when their votes don’t match yours.
Christ divides the world as sheep and goats, not donkeys and elephants.
Steve said, “What we have here is a group of folks who believe (and shamelessly regurgitate as their own idea) everything they hear on cable news, so long as it lines up with their political party.”
Yeah, well Steve, I can certainly tell you’re not guilty of doing that with cable news. You apparently get your news from the Comedy Channel. It is good to be instructed in original thought by you. Thanks.
Hey Steve,
In hopes that I will get a snide comment in my direction by Jim or anyone else, I think the Daily Show is the best (only?) place where you can laugh while being well informed. And to the link of the campaign you can get behind, if Christians can’t get behind that, despite their political leanings, what in the world are we doing all of this for? Great stuff.
I wanted to say something to some of you who are so mortified by the political back and forth that goes on here. First of all, I think I am safe in saying that many of us who engage in this do it because we have a bit of fun with it. For instance, Steve Jr. and I have gone back and forth a few times, but I have a feeling he may chuckle out loud to himself as I do when he reads some of this and posts a response. I know he has a good sense of humor because one who didn’t would have never posted the Jon Stewart clip. While I think most of us are passionate about the things we talk about, we also enjoy testing each other in these little rhetorical romps. I don’t think (at least with me) it is nearly as personal and hateful as some of you may believe. I really try to make many of my posts a bit humorous, but I know that tone and intent do not carry over well in written form. Anyway, just wanted to let everyone here know that I don’t take this back and forth nearly as seriously as some who appear to be more apolitical do.
Are you kidding me, Steve? Of course, I watched the clip. I’ve forwarded it to half the free world! Stewart’s been amazing the past couple of weeks. And John Arnold makes my side hurt.
Good stuff as always, Quiara.
On the other subject, Mike, my friend Eddie White preaches for the South Baton Rouge C of C, and Gustav really nailed that town. That church, as well as many others of all flavors, are working overtime to get people taken care of. New Orleans get a lot of attention (for good reason), but BR and many other towns in that region need our prayers, too.
Matt, what about me? Good stuff too?
Sniff.
*cough*
If you believe abortion is murder and you vote for a democrat it is the same as voting for a candidate who is pro pedophilia. So can one believe abortion is not murder? This is an honest question that I am struggling with. The same argument used against instrumental musical will not hold water.
I’m reminded why I don’t come to this blog as often anymore-comments.
Good thoughts, Steve Jr.
I’m amazed at how much misinformation and complete lies are being spread on here. (And yet, it’s masked as playful banter?) There seems to be a blatant disregard for the fact that Christians have a number of views on the value of life (and other issues) which place them all over the political spectrum.
I read people such as Shane Claiborn, and I know why he takes such an antagonistic approach to Christian involvement in politics. Many of us can’t handle the political discussion. We’re too blinded and biased by our own opinions and we terrorize our own flesh and blood over these worldly matters. If we as Christians can’t have a civil, honest discussion and instead we resort to talking points, party lines, manipulative discussions — THEN WE SHOULD RUN FAR FROM POLITICS.
If we can’t be civil, and we use snarky, condescending tones, assuming that our politheology can be wrapped into cutesy lines and phrases, then we should have no part in worldly politics. How does the world see a bunch of bickering Christians who are terrorizing each other? Instead, there’s a kingdom politics (our lives) — if we can’t do worldly politics right, we need to stick to the politics of the Kingdom of God, which is completely divorced of the U.S. political system.
“How does the world see a bunch of bickering Christians who are terrorizing each other?”
Pretty snarky, condescending, and terribly overblown. Not very civil either. You’re the first one on here to accuse others of terrorism.
Are you trying to be funny, Jim? I’m guessing so. But in your humor, you just blew off my entire point.
Congratulations! That’s exactly what I am speaking to. We can’t be open, civil, and honest. We can either blow someone off with humor or blast our misinformed views at each other.
Well done!
An aside: If this were a private blog and everyone knew each other, I would have less problem with the attitudes and the style of “banter” (if it could even be called that) on here. But, this is a relatively well known blog, and people should be worried about how the passing reader sees this place.
Daniel, you come on here and start calling some of us (one of us?) terrorists because we are arguing politics. So, yeah, it was sort of hard to take you that seriously. And no, that time I was not trying to be funny. I really meant it when I said your post was snarky, condescending, and overblown.
Instead of just chastising everyone for disagreeing, why don’t you inform some of us who you believe are misinformed? Why don’t you point out what “complete lies” are being spread here?
Personally, I don’t think anyone here is spreading lies. I think some of us see the world and the facts in entirely different lights and, because of that, we disagree. And, in politics, do people sometimes selectively choose what facts to present. Absolutely, that’s just sort of the nature of the beast. Everybody tries to make the best case they can. Sometimes, as events shift, they get caught with their own rhetoric coming at them the other way. The video posted from Jon Stewart beautifully illustrated that and, even though it totally skewered some of the points I was trying to make, I could not help but laugh at it and tell Steve well done for posting it. It was extremely effective. Didn’t change my politics, but at least I can appreciate the humor and razor-sharp wit applied to those who argue from my point of view. It was very good.
As far as Shane Claiborne, I really don’t think he is as apolitical as he would have everyone think.
As that last, great Democrat, Harry Truman, once said . . . . .well, you know.
(For those who suffer from wit-deprivation, I would like to issue a disclaimer that Harry Truman was possibly not in actuality the last, great Democrat; there could be others and my last statement in no way reflects the views of the blog author or any others posting on this blog. All biases reserved.)
Thanks for the support and prayers, Matt! Yeah, it’s a crazy world down here, my friend.
Cathy - you asked a great question. Maybe I shouldn’t go there. But I always like the idea of Christians listening, disagreeing, and agreeing to be united over the ultimate matters of allegiance. I imagine if Jim and I lived in the same town we’d be buddies — with the kind of friendship that can withstand some differences.
Jim - my response didn’t call out one person for a reason. I’m NOT getting into the political game here, and I sense that is what you’re trying to get me do to. I have my political beliefs, but I choose not to share them here today for the exact reason that this thread, and Mike’s follow-up thread: We’re too focused on one day every four years, that it destroys the work with do the other 1459 days per year.
And second, the fact that you equate the word terrorizing with being a terrorist and pretend to take great offense at it, while grammatically correct, floors me beyond belief. Terrorize, exacerbate, browbeat, bully, coerce, intimidate — you get the idea. You’ve terrorized my word choice. And that makes you a a person who terrorizes, otherwise known in the noun form as a “terrorist.” Would you have preferred I use bully or intimidate, because I will gladly use a different verb if it will help you distance yourself from an idealogical/political understanding of that offensive word? (I sincerely hope you’re trying to be funny and realize how immature it is to split these hairs. But if you’re being funny, I don’t find it funny.)
Daniel- “There seems to be a blatant disregard for the fact that Christians have a number of views on the value of life(and other issues) which place them all over the political spectrum.”
ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?! I don’t know of anyone, within our fellowship, that believes that there is more than ONE view on the value of life. If you know of any, I wish you would name just one. I cannot speak for those outside of our fellowship. This might be a good question to ask before we conform to their ways in the name of unity.
By the way, Palin does not hate community organizers. Though under different names, she has done similar work and she works with those of that ilk daily. Her comments were directed at the irony of the followers of a community organizer attacking her level of duties and achievements.
Troy - I’m referring to WHAT life we value. This issue doesn’t just cover abortion, which is what some feel the “right” has focused on. Many people on the “left” find themselves more concerned valuing life with issues of war, capital punishment, poverty, AIDS, and a whole host of other ideas. My point was, neither side has a monopoly on “the value of life.”
I know Christians on both sides of the aisle who don’t boil their beliefs down to one single issue. There are ways that BOTH parties value life, and there are ways that neither parties value life. Is that clear? If that is not clear, then I cannot continue in this discussion.
“And second, the fact that you equate the word terrorizing with being a terrorist and pretend to take great offense at it, while grammatically correct, floors me beyond belief.”
Pretend is the operative word here, Daniel. I am not offended; but I am amused that you are so worked up. Try not to spit on the keyboard when you type.
Yes, I am “worked up” because you’d rather spout misinformed attacks on people and then resort to smug humor to avoid addressing a reality and a problem. That disillusions me when people in the church do that. What bothers me is your attempt at humor and AMUSEMENT that I take offense, when I’m trying to discuss a serious issue. Is that Christ-like? Well done good and faithful servant.
But I apologize. I was wrong to post on “your” blog. I am sorry that you were the only one to take offense at my words. I did not mean to attack your hegemony here, and I will refrain from clicking the comment button and thinking that I can somehow contribute to a fruitful discussion on here.
Apparently, the world is more black and white than I thought. I am sorry for thinking life is full of gray areas and a need for discussion and compromise.
If you want have a real discussion, feel free to e-mail me at daniel2023[at]yahoo.com. But I’m not taking part in this banter.
http://www.apa.org/topics/controlanger.html
Jesus, sure could have used that advice… Man did he get angry once. Flipped over the bunch of tables and threw people’s stuff around. I mean, what did those people ever do?
“in your anger, do not sin.”
Thanks to this blog’s comments, I have now made a decision (and laughed alot also). Who needs the debates on TV?
What does it mean if you co-sponsor a bill? I mean does it just mean your name was added?
I am not trying to be funny, but I would like to really know.
I know it bothered me to learn that a vote of present can be a real thing, yet it doesn’t mean anything other than you didn’t study up on what the vote was for, so that seems irresponsible.
The more I hear the more I question.
A better view of Sarah Palin from a columnist-ette: See Peggy Noonan’s piece at WSJ.com.
Quinn (kwin) adj. 1. Snarky. 2. See #1. 3. qb loves this newly trendy word, “snarky.”
qb
AlGuy - QB - Couldn’t find it at WSJ. I googled “Peggy Noonan Palin” and got this site: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/09/2-republican-talking-heads-cau-1.html. It’s a YouTube clip of Noonan, thinking she was off the air, saying that McCain’s selection of Palin was “political bullxxxt.”
Is that what you’re talking about?
Daniel- Obviously you have recognized what an outrageous comment you made. Now instead of Christians, we are talking “right” and “left.” However, you are still a little confused on the facts. If you are honest, I think you’ll find that far less lives have been lost due to policies of the “right,” than those of the “left.” Do you have any idea how many children die of malaria each year thanks to the environmentalists worldwide ban on DDT? Has it ever occurred to you why we don’t have malaria in this country?
You left out assisted suicide on the list of the values of the “left.”
Now for the big question: What policies of the “left” have resulted in a reduction of lives lost? Surely, you can come up with several of these. I’ll settle for one good one.
AlGuy -
Given the predominant, ideological demographics around here, qb wanted to avoid pointing to this route…
…but what the heck. Go to Drudge, then scroll down to Peggy Noonan in the center column.
*donning asbestos skivvies*
qb
P. S. No, really: qb wears Birkenstocks, prefers hoppy microbrews, is exclusively and in every way iMac, and is looking to replace his erstwhile Suburban with a Subaru Outback L. L. Bean edition (yes, with a bike rack, natch).
Obama today was speaking of how awful the unemployment rate is and how 600,000 jobs have been lost. He also plans to raise taxes on business.
Can anyone on this blog tell me how raising taxes on businesses will create more jobs? Please be specific.
Whoah, troy… where you been the last 8 years? Ever heard of Iraq? Talk about wasteful government and total disrespect for human life…
To those who seem to find it hard to believe people can disagree immensely about politics and not remain human or Christian, you need to read this:
http://www.creators.com/opinion/robert-novak.html
Adam Smith, you won’t get a straight answer. What it comes down to is the premise that somebody besides me will be taxed-somebody who makes more money. Sometimes we cut our noses off to spite our face.
Just like Obama responded on raising capital gains tax even though it would decrease revenue-”In the interest of fairness.”
Doesn’t Sarah Palin look like the teacher in Van Halen’s “Hot for Teacher” video?
Gee, I guess if Sarah Palin takes the oath of POTUS, all those male egos in the church could be taken down a notch!
I find it interesting that all those believers who ascribe to Complementarianism are backing her with such spiritual language and political zeal for the office she is aspiring to, with the potential of becoming our CIC. Yet these same believers would deny her a strong position of leadership in would this be a calling that is far greater in God’s kingdom.
When she and her hoard of Secret Service agents decide to descend upon a church for Sunday worship so she can preach that day, what then? Are the elders and deacons and James Dobsons of the world going to barricade the doors?
There’s hope for female bishops yet…
(‘Hot for Teacher’ is way off-base, preacherman … totally puerile and in poor taste.)
I must say that this has been (is) the most outrageous and sad comments sections I’ve ever read.
Steve Sr. would you mind elaborating? I cannot tell what disgusts you? Is it the idea because one has called a VP candidate “hot,” is it because one has seen hope for female bishops, is it because some have criticized Obama or because some have criticized McCain?
This blog may convert me to Calvinism because of the angry outbursts , scarcasm and unkind expressions. Passion for a view is one thing but to attack each other is another thing. It may take irresistible grace to reconvert some. Just kidding about converting to Calvinism. A way to say , we may need to back off and approach this in a more civil way. Have fun but not at the expense of hurting someone. We can agree and disagree and still be gentlle and kind with each other. As far as Sarah Palin coming to church to preach, no use in barricading the doors. When it comes to leadership in in the worship assemblies , the men should do the preaching. She will have plenty of opportunities to speak on political issues. It was a mark of genius to select her.
Jim and others are right and obviously the most well-informed people on this blog. Obama is clearly a do-nothing. Yep. Way to go, Jim and friends, on being well-informed truth-tellers. Other people are clearly not taking seriously their responsibility to know what’s going on. Just look at how much nothing Obama has done… Absolutely nothing a Christian favoring ethical government, supporting the poor, or looking for justice could get behind:
Obama helped pass the 2007 Ethics Reform Law, which curbed the influence of lobbyists and was described as the “most sweeping since Watergate.” In the first week of the 110th Congress, Obama joined with Senator Feingold to introduce a “Gold Standard” ethics package. Many of the Obama/Feingold bill’s most important provisions were included in the final ethics reform package passed by the Senate in late January: a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists including those paid by the firms that employ lobbyists; an end to subsidized travelon corporate jets; full disclosure of who’s sponsoring earmarks and for what purpose; additional restrictions to close the revolving door between public service and lobbying to ensure that public service isn’t all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job; and requiring lobbyists to disclose the contributions that they “bundle” - that is, collect or arrange - for members of Congress, candidates, and party committees. In January 2007, the Washington Post wrote in an editorial that “…Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package.” In September 2007, the AP reported, “President Bush signed a bill Friday that will require lawmakers to disclose more about their efforts to fund pet projects and raise money from lobbyists, a measure that backers call the biggest ethics reform in decades… Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. who had pushed for the bundling provisions and was one of four lawmakers who participated in a Democratic conference call to reporters said the measure marks “the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.” [S. 230, 110thCongress; S.1, Became Public Law 109-110-81, 9/14/07; AP, 9/15/07;TheWashington Post, Editorial, 1/21/07]
Obama passed the Illinois State Gift Ban Act. In 1998, Obama passed the Illinois Gift Ban that prohibited legislators, state officers and employees, and judges from soliciting or receiving gifts from a person or entity with interests affected by government. The Chicago Tribune wrote, “Gov. Jim Edgar signed into law Wednesday an ethics and campaign finance package heralded as the most sweeping good-government legislation in decades.” The law also required greater campaign finance disclosure and limited the uses for which raised money could be spent. Obama said, “I have seen a general cynicism from taxpayers about government. They believe they have no influence on the process since they don’t have the money of special interest groups. With the gift ban and the ban on Springfield fund-raisers that are contained in this legislation, I think at least some of this confidence will be restored.” [HB672, 3R P 52-4-1, 5/22/98; PA90-0737, 8/12/98; Chicago Tribune, 8/13/98; Chicago Independent Bulletin, 6/4/98]
The Illinois Ethics Bill was also a product of bipartisan work. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote of Obama’s bill, “The ethics restrictions would be the most far-reaching since the Watergate-era campaign financial disclosure law. They are the product of months of negotiations among two lawmakers of each party, other state officials and Mike Lawrence. He is an aide toformer Sen. Paul Simon, a Democrat, and used to be an aide to Edgar, a Republican.” [St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 5/24/98]
Obama and Lugar passed a law boosting U.S. efforts to keep WMDs and other dangerous weapons out of the hands of terrorists. In 2006,Obama and Lugar introduced The Cooperative Proliferation DetectionAct, which was passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee unanimously on May 26, 2006 and was eventually incorporated into the Department of State Authorities Act of 2006 and signed into law onJanuary 11, 2007. According to a Senate Foreign Relations Committee report on its legislative activity in the 109th Congress, “The committee passed S. 2566, The Cooperative Proliferation Detection,Interdiction Assistance, and Conventional Threat Reduction Act of 2006 by unanimous consent on May 26, 2006. The legislation authored by Chairman Lugar and Senator Obama enhances: (1) U.S. cooperation with foreign governments to destroy conventional weapons stockpiles aroundthe world; and (2) the United States’ ability to provide assistance to foreign governments aimed at helping them detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction. The legislation, which garnered 26 co-sponsors (including 8 committee members), sought to energize U.S. programs to secure lightweight anti-aircraft missiles… The initiative was modeled after the Nunn-Lugar program that focuses on weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union. The legislation was signed into law on January 11, 2007, as a part of H.R. 6060, the Department of State Authorities Act of 2006.” [P.L. 109-472, 1/11/07;House Report 109-706, 9/3/06; S. 2566, 109th Congress; S.1949, 109th Congress; Senate Report 110-40, 3/29/07]
“Republican Sen. Dick Lugar (IN) today said an Obama campaign ad which features him is ‘accurate.’ The ad makes the point the Obama previously ‘reached out’ to Lugar to ‘help lock down loose nuclear weapons.’ Lugar is widely considered one of the most knowledgeable in the area of nuclear weapons proliferation and the coauthored of the 1991 Nunn-Lugar Act on cooperative threat reduction. ‘He did’ reach out, Lugar said. He explained that in 2005, Obama asked if he could join Lugar on a trip to Russia and other countries to visit sites under the Nunn-Lugar program. ‘After that, we had legislation that we cosponsored together which passed’ dealing with dangerous missiles.‘So I am pleased we had that opportunity to work together,’ Lugar said. ‘I’m pleased we had the association Sen. Obama describes.’ But Lugar made clear up front that while the ad was accurate, and he’s comfortable with the association, ‘There is no chance I will consider running with Barack Obama.’” [MSNBC, 7/15/08]
Obama and Coburn passed a bill creating a “Google-like” database for the public to search details about federal funding awards. In 2006,Obama and Coburn co-authored a bill to create a “Google-like” database of information on federal spending. The bill requires the OMB by January 1, 2008, to make available to the public a searchable, free website that includes the (1) amount; (2) transaction type; (3)funding agency; (4) North American Industry Classification System code or Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number; (5) program source; (6) an award title descriptive of the purpose of each funding action; (7) the name and location of the recipient and the primary location of performance; and (8) a unique identifier of the recipient and any parent entity. The site must allow users to conduct separate searches that distinguish between awards that are grants, sub-grants,loans, cooperative agreements, and other forms of financial assistance and awards that are contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, task orders, and delivery orders. [S. 2590, Passed by Unanimous Consent,9/7/06; Became PL 109-282, 9/26/06]
Obama sponsored a law ensuring that wounded veterans recovering In military hospitals do not have to pay for their meals or phone calls to family members. In 2005, Obama sponsored and passed an amendment to the 2005 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act ensuring that wounded veterans recovering in military hospitals do not have to pay for their own meals or phone calls to family members. The amendment was then passed in each of the following Congresses. Prior to passage of the amendment, service members receiving physical therapy or rehabilitation services in a medical hospital for more than 90 days were required to pay for their meals. Obama’s amendment required the military to provide free meals for service members in military hospitals undergoing recuperation or therapy as a result of wounds sustained in Iraq or Afghanistan. The amendment was retroactive to January 1, 2005 in an effort to provide those injured service members who received bills for their meals with some relief from those costs. The amendment became law. [S. Amdt. 390, Passed by unanimous consent,4/14/05 to H.R.1268, Signed by the President, 5/11/05, Became PublicLaw No: 109-013; Obama Press Release, 5/11/05]
Obama’s proposals providing improvements in health care for recovering soldiers were passed into law, including requirements for post-deployment mental-health screenings and a national study on the needs of Iraq War veterans. H.R. 976, passed by the Senate on August 2, 2007,includes several provisions from bills originally sponsored by Senators Obama and McCaskill. The provisions would improve healthcare services and health care tracking for service members, and would require post-deployment, face-to-face mental health screenings for returning service members within 30 days. The bill also adopts other Obama-McCaskill legislation, the HERO Act, which would launch a major national research endeavor into the readjustment needs of returning service members, veterans and their families. The bill also included measures to improve and reform the disability rating process. [Vote307, H.R. 976, Passed, 68-31, 8/2/07; S. 713, 110th Congress; S. 1271,110th Congress; Obama Press Release, 7/25/07; H.R. 4986, Became PublicLaw No: 110-181, 1/28/08]
Obama worked with Republicans to pass legislation, which became law, improving and increasing services for homeless veterans. In 2006,Congress passed a Veterans Affairs Committee bill which included several provisions originating in Obama’s SAVE Act (S. 1180) and Homes for Heroes Act (S. 3475). “The legislation…includes a number of proposals from legislation Senator Obama had previously introduced (S.1180, the SAVE Act and S.3475 the Homes for Heroes Act) to expand and improve services for homeless veterans. The bill permanently authorizes and increases funding to $130 million per year for a competitive grant program to provide homeless services to veterans. It greatly increases a successful program to provide rental vouchers to homeless veterans. The legislation extends programs to provide treatment for veterans with mental illnesses and other special needs. And it permanently extends the VA’s ability to transfer property it owns to homeless shelters.” Obama worked with VA Committee Republicans Craig and Burr on the committee legislation that eventually became law. [S. 3421/P.L. 109-461; S. 1180, 109th Congress; S. 3475, 109thCongress; Obama Press Release, 6/26/06]
Obama passed bipartisan legislation that expanded healthcare coverage to 154,000 residents, Including 70,000 children. As a state senator, Barack Obama sponsored and helped pass legislation that expanded and made permanent Illinois’ KidCare program by raising eligibility from 185% to 200% of the federal poverty level. The legislation provided coverage for an additional 20,000 children and 65,000 more Illinois adults in the first year, and by 2007 had expanded health care to 70,000 kids and 84,000 adults. In its endorsement for his Senate race, the State Jour